Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12521; 12 Sep 92 15:09 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06726 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:09:43 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06784 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:09:33 -0500 Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:09:33 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209121809.AA06784@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #701 TELECOM Digest Sat, 12 Sep 92 13:09:33 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 701 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Working Assets Long Distance (John Higdon) Re: Working Assets Long Distance (Steve Forrette) Re: Working Assets Long Distance (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Andrew C. Green) Re: New "Call Completion" from Cinci Bell (Mickey Ferguson) Re: AT&T 'Buying Back' Customers (Ken Levitt) Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (Pat Turner) Why 'Die Hard II' Used Pac*Bell Pay Phones (Paul Robinson) Re: Radios in Die Hard (Ehud Gavron) Re: Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex (Kevin W. Williams) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 02:04 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance Rob Woiccak writes: > They advertise their long distance rates as "guaranteed to be lower > than AT&T, MCI and Sprint." Don't you believe it. It is surprising how few people, including those that hang out on this forum, realize that if one digs deep enough, he can find much cheaper arrangements from the major carriers than those advertised to the masses. None of these arrangements are available through resellers such as Working Assets. > There is a mention of up to 15% off on volume discounts and a 20% > discount on calls to other Working Assets subscribers. These are chump-change discounts. Unless a carrier is talking 40-50% off "normal" rates, it is wasting my time. > - 100% fiber-optic sound > - Convienent "dial 1" calling Who does not offer this? > - Low, competitive rates What does that mean? > - Volume discounts > - 24-hour operators > - Free calling cards > - Direct international dialing > - Friendly customer service Well, I have certainly never heard of these things before! These are supposed to be unusual features? Or is it trying to sound "real"? > On the surface, it doesn't *look* like a bad deal and the idea of > having 1% of your phone bill going to a good cause (they contribute to > Planned Parenthood, Greenpeace, Rainforest Action Network, Oxfam > America, Amnesty Inter- national, National Coalition for the Homeless, > and Fund for a Free South Africa among others) is a nice one. Au contrare. The best statement you can make is with your pocketbook. This is precisely why I keep my charitable, artistic, business, and personal transactions separate and distinct. When I contribute to charity, PACs, and artistic organizations, they know who is contributing the money. My contribution is a statement of my support. Granted, it may be conscience-soothing for someone who normally does not make these contributions to think about that 1% of the phone bill going to "good causes". But if I am doing business with a long distance company, I want to reserve the right to deal directly with the actual entity providing the service. Is Working Assets in the telephone business or in the Politically Correct business? If you have highly technical problems is someone at WA going to be able to discuss them with you? And on the other side of the coin, if you have a problem with a facet of Planned Parenthood, do you think you can convince WA to take up your problem with that organization -- up to and including the withholding of funds? (I use Planned Parenthood as an example because I do contribute directly to the organization.) > wonder how much the rates are raised to defray the operating costs > after the contributions are made. I'd be interested in hearing from > any other subcribers as well. Does it matter? If you go with this operation you are doing one-stop shopping: telephone service and political action conscience-relief with one easy payment. My advice is this: if you want telephone service, do business with a company that provides telephone service. If you feel the need to express yourself through contribution, then pick and choose among the hundreds and hundreds of lobbying and political action organizations and hand over your money directly. This usually entitles you to also express yourself to other members and you are pinpointing the focus of your donation. > Environmentalists will be happy to know that WALD says they use 100% > recycled paper and soy-based inks (when possible) for their bills and > that they plant 17 trees for every ton of paper used. I think if I hear much more about the selling of the environment in the form of "environmentally correct" use of resources, I will puke. If you really believe that the world will be a better place because WA uses soy-based inks (when possible, of course), or that those reps will weigh all the bills going out the door and when the scale tips one ton, go out and plant seventeen trees -- then by all means go out and save the world and use WA for long distance. As for me and my house, we will use AT&T, MCI, and Sprint. And with the real money saved we will make contributions to those causes we really believe in. And answer this: I can talk to technicians at AT&T; can you do the same at Working Assets? Do you think there will never be problems? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 09:25:58 GMT It is my understanding that Working Assets Long Distance is run by Sprint on the technical end i.e. calls are handled on the regular Sprint network. Since WALD doesn't appear to have their own 10XXX code, I'd bet that it is just Sprint's standard 10333 with the billing handled specially. I spoke with a friend that has had Working Assets Long Distance for some time, and he said that he's been really satisfied with the quality of the service. The calls are indeed carried by US Sprint, and by checking the 1-700-555-4141 number from his line, it says "Welcome to Sprint's long distance services", so the PIC is just Sprint's standard 10333. His calling card access number is different from the regular Sprint FONCard access number, though. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:51:15 GMT In article , Rob Woiccak writes: > I received a mailing from Working Assets the other day advertising > their services. Working Assets Long Distance underwrites some programming on our local NPR affiliate, WBUR. This "non-commercial" has got to be the silliest attempt at using 800 numbers, though. They ask you to call them at: 1-800-CITIZEN-WITH-AN-X ! Never mind that there's no Z on the dial, and that's 14 digits instead of seven. It's just silly. (And after a few weeks, it dawned on me what their real 800 number might be, but it wasn't immediately obvious, and I'm not going to dial it. On principle.) Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com k1io or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 11:39:12 CDT From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Anthony Clifton (aescherm@iastate.edu) writes: > 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. I did! I've been holding off on posting this until I got the bill, in order to see what sort of detail is included. I was returning to Chicago on American Airlines on a gorgeous August late afternoon. I noticed as we passed over the city that our approach would take us over the northwest suburbs. I had been staring at the AirFone in the seatback in front of me for the whole trip, and finally, fortified by a beer, I popped out the phone with my AmEx card and dialed our local Domino's. Call quality was very good, sounding pretty much like a standard land-line. As the conversation proceeded, I could see heads turning in my direction. When they asked my address, I said, "Do you hear a plane overhead?" :-) Scattered laughter heard on board. At that point I wimped out and directed them to our house, where my wife took the delivery. Oh, well, it was good for a laugh. The AmEx bill arrived yesterday. The billing party was GTE AirFone in Oak Brook, IL; the only detail in the charge was the called number and "FROM AMERICAN ... FOR INQUIRY 800", which looks like some sort of truncated toll-free customer service number. Including a $2 "setup" charge, the total was "003 MINS $08.24". Extra sauce was free. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 11:48:51 PDT From: mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: New "Call Completion" from Cinci Bell Organization: Rolm In TELECOM Digest V12 No. 696 (item 9) Alec Isaacson writes: > I was listening to the radio last night and I heard a commercial from > Cincinnati Bell offering a service called "Call Completion". The > commercial went on to say that if you call 555-1212 (rather than 411) > for directory assistance you can hit a touch tone 1 after the number > is looked up and be connected to that number. (Then it went on to > rave about how you will never need to fumble for pen and paper again :) > The verbal "fine print" said this service cost $0.35 a pop, fee waived > for busy numbers, not available in certain areas or on rotary phones. One question about this service, though. What is the cost for calling information? Around here in Pac Bell land, I think the service costs $0.50 per call to information. Is the $0.35 an ADDITIONAL fee? If not, sounds like you may not have the initial charge for info like we do. Mickey Ferguson -- Rolm -- FergusoM at scrvm2 -- mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 06:40:41 EDT From: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying Back' Customers leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) writes: > Strangely enough, this was a real check for $40 made out to me, marked > 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance' or something like that. Anyway, > I guess the deal is that if you cash the check, you agree to switch over > to AT&T. Joe Trott writes: > Are you sure this is a bona-fide _check_, and not a voucher? AT&T was > offering a number of switch-back programs, but so far the only ones > I've heard about involved them "paying" in _future_ long distance > service discounts; not actual cash. I have a business line which has what New England Tel calls "Remote Call Forwarding". This means that my business number is permenantly and forever forwarded to another number. That phone number only appears in the CO. Since there can never be a phone connected to it, it would be impossible to ever make an outgoing call on it. When I established service, NET insisted that I pick a long distance providor. I tried explaining to them that this was not necessary, but in the end, I gave up and picked Sprint. A few months back I received one of the AT&T chechs in the mail that I could cash if I was willing to switch this line to them. I cashed the check and allowed them to switch this line to AT&T. A few weeks later, I received a letter from AT&T thanking me for switching. I guess if I ever made a LD call and charged it to that number, it would be billed through AT&T, but I am not likely to do that. Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390 UUCP: zorro9!levitt INTERNET: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org or levitt%zorro9.uucp@talcott.harvard.edu ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 07:58 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? > While I have no idea what method was used to splice each > pair of wires... Usually Scotchlock UR's are used around here. Contel used to use UY's, but now SCB, old Contel, and GTE all use URs. Scotchlocks are petroleum jelly filled plastic connectors that will splice several wires to together, three in the case of UR's. Two connectors are used per pair. AT&T and others, including 3M, make connectors that will splice the whole pair, but they don't see much use in the SE US. I have seen Scotchlocks in Rat Shack's catalog if you want to buy a few at some exorbitant price. Digi-Key carries them as well. While a special tool is nice for crimping them, slip-joint plires or Channel Locks work quite well. Buried and aeral splices are sealed in an enclosure. Ground level splices are just left in the ped, as the jelly protects them from moisture. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 04:07:45 EDT Subject: Why 'Die Hard II' Used Pac*Bell Pay Phones In earlier messages, people were talking about the errors in {Die Hard II} and one in particular -- I noticed it myself -- was the {Pacific Bell} pay phones at "Washington Dulles Airport." I think they would have had to use Pacific Bell phones or nobody would have believed the film at all. Dulles Airport is not located within Washington DC, it is located 40 miles away in Dulles Virginia, at the edge of Fairfax County. It is within the local calling area for Washington DC and vicinity, the local carrier is not the one for the rest of the area, C&P Telephone Company (of VA/DC/MD) but Continental Telephone Company of Virginia. I am not sure, but I think part of this organization was sold to GTE. Would anyone believe that someone could actually {use} phone service provided by GTE? In which case people would *know* the whole movie was a fake! :) Opinions not necessarily those of the owner of this account. Paul Robinson, TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM [Moderator's Note: What a low blow! What a rude thing to say! :) When the movie first came out I asked someone what it was about and they told me it was about a guy who had a heart attack and died during sex. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: gavron@spades.aces.com (Ehud Gavron 602-570-2000 x. 2546) Subject: Re: Radios in Die Hard Date: 12 Sep 92 16:16:00 GMT Reply-To: gavron@ACES.COM Organization: ACES Consulting Inc. In article , johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) writes: > My favorites from the Die Hard movies were: > In the first movie where the portable two-way radios talk to the bad > guys inside the building, but when taken to the roof talk to the > police on the same frequency. (These are those fancy full-duplex > two-way radios). Not a very good choice of frequencies by the bad > guys, or very wise placement of voting receivers by the police. The radios in mention are Kenwood TH45AT 70cm (400MHz band) transceiv- ers, which most amateur radio operators (hamsters) are familiar with. Police bands exist in the 70cm band and also in the 2m band (150MHz) as well as others. I searched through my frequency directory and cannot locate which bands the FCC allocates for Bad Guys (tm). Therefore using Bad Guys Logic (tm) I assume they can use any band as it becomes convenient. Never forget though -- the police accused our hero of being on CB Channel 9. No respectable ham radio does CB*, and it is no crime to blabber on channel 9 yelling for help. Ehud Gavron (EG76) gavron@vesta.sunquest.com ------------------------------ From: williamsk@gtephx.UUCP (Kevin W. Williams) Subject: Re: Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex Organization: gte Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 15:32:09 GMT In article , Joseph.Bergstein@p501. f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) writes: > Would like to know if anyone has any information on a GTD-5 Centrex > Central office switch? Believe manufactured by G.T.E.? In particular > need information on processing S.M.D.R. data from such a switch. If > anyone has information or knows where to obtain it, please respond. Luckily, the manufacturer is on the Internet. Unfortunately, for historical reasons (the great Higdon/Williams/Baker Flame War of 1992), I would rather not take up discussion of the GTD-5 on the telecom bulletin board, and the reply address has been mangled by the Digest. Send me email with an address, and I'll reply privately. Kevin Wayne Williams UUCP : ...!ames!ncar!noao!enuucp!gtephx!williamsk ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #701 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20960; 12 Sep 92 19:59 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16897 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 12 Sep 1992 18:00:05 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17230 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 12 Sep 1992 17:59:57 -0500 Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 17:59:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209122259.AA17230@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #702 TELECOM Digest Sat, 12 Sep 92 18:00:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 702 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Kauai Communications Out (John Higdon) Re: First ESS Was Not in Morris (David Farber) Re: First ESS Was in New Jersey (was Illinois Bell Now Allows) (Jack Adams) Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Lyle D. Kipp) Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Jack Winslade) Re: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? (Tim Russell) Re: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? (Don Ford) Re: Here We Go Again :-( (Jack Adams) US West Offers Minitel-Style Directory Assistance (Charlie Mingo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 11:05 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Kauai Communications Out After being hit by hurricane Iniki (admittedly comparable to Andrew), the Hawaiian island of Kauai has been cut off from the outside world because of damage to a GTE microwave tower. Redundancy? Hah! So I wonder how the residents of Kauai will be able to contact Thousand Oaks to get repair service :-) And I wonder how many tickets will be "cleared" before someone checks it out :-) :-) Seriously, we may find that the devastation on the Garden Island will, ounce for ounce, exceed that in Florida or Louisiana for several reasons. First, there is little else there other than "beachfront" property. That is the nature of a small island. Second, key components of Hawaii's hurricane tracking system were never repaired or replaced after failing some time ago. In other words, the storm was somewhat of a surprise. And third, hurricanes generally go to the south of the islands, so the people do not prepare for them in any way. The last one was ten years ago and was classified "category 1". It did major damage. This one was a category 4 (same as Andrew). When we finally get reports out of the area (probably no thanks to GTE), we will undoubtedly find that things are not well. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: John, I *really* don't think GTE is quite as bad as you make them out to be; and certainly the events in Hawaii during the past day would be a severe challenge for any telco -- Bell, GTE or any others. Here's hoping we get some accurate information from readers in Hawaii who are close enough to get first hand accounts. PAT] ------------------------------ From: farber@linc.cis.upenn.edu (David Farber) Subject: Re: First ESS Was Not in Morris Date: 12 Sep 92 08:10:18 GMT Organization: University of Pennsylvania The Morris machine was in many ways more of an ESS than the production ESS. It was indeed gas tubes and was an end marked network that also required new telephones with tone ringers rather than bells. The memory in the software controlled computer that ran the morris system was barrier grid tubes and flying spot program stores. It was an experimental machine that was started in the early 50's. I joined the systems group in 56 and it was still getting defined. The rapid advance of storage technologies as well as the extreme costs of replacing phones led to the development of the next generation machine that was trailed in Succasunna NJ. Point of info, there was a thought of trialing it in NYC in the exchange that serviced Macy*s. It was planned to start trial in Nov. The thought of having a trial near xmas changed the site. David Farber; Prof. of CIS and EE, U of Penn, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6389 Tele: 215-898-9508(off); 215-274-8292 (home); FAX: 215-274-8293; Cellular: 302-740- 1198 "The fundamental principle of science, the definition almost, is this: the sole test of the validity of any idea is experiment." -- R. P. Feynman ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: First ESS Was in New Jersey (was Illinois Bell Now Allows) Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 11:59:03 GMT In article , deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) writes: > In article the TELECOM Moderator > writes: >> [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive >> and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back >> in the 1960's ... > Sorry, wrong answer ... "The first application of electronic local > switching in the Bell System occurred in May 1965 with the cutover of > the first 1ESS switch in Succasunna, New Jersey." [EOBS, P413] > Well, to get nit picky, You are both correct! The Morris switch that Pat refers to was a "trial" application. The Succasunna (Perhaps the better known and later instance) switch was the first "commercial" instance. Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-???? {No dial tone yet}| jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: kipp@s45.csrd.uiuc.edu (Lyle D. Kipp) Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 11:43:49 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Multi-line phones were first in use in New York > City in the middle 1920's. Does anyone remember the old three line > phones with six buttons? There was a hold button for each line. I > think they were manufactured by Automatic Electric in the 1940-50 > period. GTE used them for multi-line business customers back then. PAT] Normally a lurker, I just couldn't let this one go by ... I remember the three line/six button phones, and I wasn't even born until 1964. In 1972, my parents opened a department store in my home town in southern Illinois. Our service was indeed from GTE, and the phones were manufactured by Automatic Electric. The store had two phone lines and used the third button for an intercom. The phones were still in use in 1990 when my parents leased out the building. I think the phones were returned to GTE at that time. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 11:13:06 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision Reply-To: jack.winslade%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha In a message dated 07-SEP-92, writes: > leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: >> 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"... >> 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. > What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds > redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop > current. Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision? I'm sitting here looking at an AT&T 2500 series desk set with a similar admonition to use only on 'business' systems. I just unplugged the modular connector on the back of the set and noticed that it only has TWO contacts, thus precluding any A-lead control. I suspect it's primarily to discourage the growing of legs. ;-) Speaking of these new 'lightweight' sets, when we got them a few years ago, nobody seemed to like them. First of all, they are very light and can easily be pulled from a desk by the tension on the handset cord. Some of our people added weight using various items. Another thing was the chirper-style ringer. In the lab area with the old bells, there was a good sense of directionality to the bells, but with the chirpers it seems like they all sound the same, and it's difficult to tell whose line is ringing. Some of us acquired some of the old brass-gong bells and reinstalled them (with the appropriate capacitor, of course) in the new sets. A couple of people have gotten a bit creative in customizing the ringer sound so that they can identify their own line. One guy bought an add-on chirper that makes the MOST OBNOXIOUS sound I have ever heard. Another has a bell with no gong that makes kind of a woodpecker sound. Good day. JSW Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1an (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ From: trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 14:18:15 GMT aburt@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (Andrew Burt) writes: > Today I just read in the {Rocky Mt. News} that it will be $15/month + > $.15/minute for -- are you ready -- nothing more than an on-line > phonebook. (You get software, or for $300 flat or $12/month more, a > simple terminal.) Supposedly just unveiled for Minneapolis. > Excuse me, but have we entered the 1970's yet? Obviously US West hasn't ... $.15/min was pretty much a standard rate for a lot of things on CommunityLink here in Omaha as well, and it bombed bigtime, rightfully so. When US West first brought in CommunityLink, they gave our ACM chapter a demonstration of the features. We were impressed -- finally something to get telecommunications and useful computers into the hands of the masses! We envisioned the French Minitel thing all over again, here. Then US West priced the whole damn thing completely out of range of all but the richest users, and anyone that rich also has a good change of being PC-literate and will see the system for what it is, the computer version of 1-900 or 976. The /lowest/ fees on the system were $.05/minute, and that was charged for services like the Joslyn Art Museum's calendar, which I could read at the building for free or call a telephone touchtone system and get for free. More standard were rates like $.10 or $.15/min. As if this weren't bad enough, we were expected to do this while reducing our SVGA displays to the equivalent of a Timex-Sinclair ZX81. Or worse yet, pay money for a Minitel terminal which wasn't even able to call other systems decently. Looks like they're at it again! Tim Russell Omaha, NE trussell@unomaha.edu ------------------------------ From: dwford@uswnvg.com (Don Ford) Subject: Re: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? Date: 12 Sep 92 15:46:36 GMT Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc. The service being offered in Minneapolis is "Community Link Service"(R). This is a MiniTel look alike, well somewhat anyway and is certainly more than just "online directory assistance", although it may start out that way. I don't know anything about pricing, but I do know that this service has been very popular where it has been offered. It seems to be tailored for the computer non-literate. The subsidiary that markets it is "Information Provider/CLM Associates." CLM Associates is a joint venture with France Telecom. Their main number is (303) 896-9336 if anyone wants truly accurate info. :) Don Ford U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc (206) 450-8585 ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: Here We Go Again :-( Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 13:31:57 GMT In article , Jack.Winslade@ivgate. omahug.org (Jack Winslade) writes: > Well, gang, it's HWGA time. Will U.S West EVER Learn ?? > Tonight, one of the stories on TV news (KETV, ABC affilliate) was US > West starting Yet Another electronic yellow pages service (with other > information services coming Real Soon Now) in Minneapolis. Yes, they > are using that Minitel 'High-tech French method'. About three career moves ago, I worked for a very large firm who was determined to introduce Videotex services in the US (Much to the consternation of the American Newspaper Publisher's Association ANPA). Fortunately, we cut our losses and left what some people still call an "industry" (Videotex). During our period of financial hemoraging, one of our really top officers (Name witheld to prevent a personal vendetta against me) returned from a trip to Paris and promptly requested a full blown inquisition into why the French are successful with this and we were not. I'll spare you the 40 some viewgraphs of meaningless market data and get to the punch line(s). The impetus of the French minitel and its supporting system was the completely horrid state of the French directory services in the sixties. Paper directories were hopelessly inaccurate (when you were privileged to have one). Information operator services were severly under traffic engineered (Might have something to do with the state of the directories ;-). Thus arose a system where individual subscribers could (with a FREE Minitel by the way) access the same database that information operators used and viola: Videotex became a household word in France. Over time, Information Providers (specifically those that deal in material which would never fly in the Bible belt) found a ready market for "blue" information. Can you say "French Postcards"? Moreover, the French telecom offered a 50/50 split on the revenue THEY obtained from these subscribers accessing such services with the service providers. Not a bad deal, eh? By the way, in case someone feels that I am completely naive, the FREE minitel terminal cost was adequately recovered in their equivalent of a tariff. Among the "softer" market factors was the French propensity for prose and the like. Much like netnews, many people simply enjoyed sharing their written thoughts with others. I must conclude that we had one hell of a time convincing our fearless leader that "Videotex won't play in Paduca". To his credit, he managed to disengage our involve- ment with Videotex shortly thereafter. The bad news (As Jack and Dave point out) is that this idea keeps popping up every so often. I guess whenever the latest bunch of MBA's get off the boat, a few of them try to beat this dead horse all over again. Oh well, those who fail to learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them. Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} | (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:32:13 -0500 Subject: US West Offers Minitel-Style Directory Assistance aburt@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (Andrew Burt) writes: > Today I just read in the {Rocky Mt. News} that it will be $15/month + > $.15/minute for -- are you ready -- nothing more than an on-line > phonebook. (You get software, or for $300 flat or $12/month more, a > simple terminal.) Supposedly just unveiled for Minneapolis. I agree with you that the pricing is odd. The following three objections are all part of the same idea: > Reason #3: Videotex. Blech! I think MS-windows and X have proven > that even non-computer-geeks can read decently small size fonts on > screens; we don't need to regress to the middle-ages here with 40 > character wide screens (which the picture showed; or is it 32?). (As > for the "transmission speed" argument, I'd rather it be just a > straight ASCII text interface; either that, or use it as grounds to > justify ISDN for homes.) > Reason #4: Another Propietary Program. Presumably we won't be able to > dial in with Procomm, or telnet in via the internet. Bag it right > there. It'll be too limited for real use (as they always are), buggy, > clunky ... > Reason #5: Limited access. How are folks in LA going to look up my > phone number in Denver? They can telnet or dial into our public > library card catalog for free, mind you. [telnet pac.carl.org] > My recommendations are: > 2) Use modern methods of connection, such as telnet or a simple > dialup; or use X. If you want to offer videotex, offer the others > first. Why not use X? Well, X requires at least a 14400 connection, and really needs 56000. Not too many users have that. X is also an high-end communications format, found mainly on expensive workstations. Getting X running on your average PC would cost users $100-200 (plus the cost of whatever communications link you use). I've never seen a freely distributable X program for a personal computer. Why not have telnet access? Well, about 0.1% of the general population has telnet access. (PSI charges me $39/month for 2400 telnet access. 14400 access would cost much more) It would cost a lot to establish telnet access, and almost no one could use it. Why are you so confident that LA users won't be able to check Colo. phone numbers? Right now, I can use Minitel to check French phone numbers (at $.17/minute) from the US, so I presume US West can have the same kind of connectivity. I'm amused when you describe the minitel foramt as "Another Propietary Program." In fact, the protocol is publicly available. In fact, there are freely-distributable minitel programs floating around (check the telecom archives). In fact, many Mac terminal programs provide Minitel emulation as a standard mode (eg, Smartcom). The advantages of videotex are: - there are free videotex programs for most personal computers. - it works well with 1200 or 2400 modems (which is all the vast majority of the public have) - it works with a dial-up phone line, and does not require a special connection to Internet, found only in universities and a few companies. - The videotex format is easier to read than a straight text format. (Have you actually used Minitel?) Most BBS's use ANSI-PC emulation in preference to straight vt100 (ANSI-PC provides color and the use of IBM graphics characters). I think the BBS experience is a good referendum on whether most users "prefer" straight text or graphics. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #702 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22968; 12 Sep 92 21:03 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21655 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:03:15 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20896 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:03:06 -0500 Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:03:06 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209130003.AA20896@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #703 TELECOM Digest Sat, 12 Sep 92 19:03:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 703 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Phone Number in "Sneakers" (Bob Izenberg) 911 For Everything (was 911 on Jerry Springer Show) (Michael Schuh) Telephone Pioneers Accepting New Members (Bob Blackshaw) Automatic Fax/Modem Switches (Jeff Cooper) Why Non-Authorized Cellular 911 Works. Maybe. (Paul Robinson) Query re AV Telecom Standards (Jesse Chisholm) Looking For a "Cordless Ringer" (Steve Gaarder) Re: Information Calls Direct to Desired Party (capek@watson.ibm.com) OK What Exactly Does IRC Stand For? (H. Shrikumar) Wanted: Info on Bell Atlantic AIN Trials (Bryan J. Petty) New Mailing List For Telecom Engineers (Jon Solomon) Shedding the Past (Jim Haynes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg) Subject: Phone Number in "Sneakers" Organization: The Fortress of Ultimate Dorkiness Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 12:27:18 GMT A few friends and I saw the movie "Sneakers" recently ... Toward the end, River Phoenix's character asks for the phone number of a female NSA agent. One of our group remembered her number, and saw fit to hit us all up for the two and a half dollars or so that the call cost. Alas, there was no seductive gun-toting NSA agent to be yanked away from the dinner table. The film industry's normal flawless attention to telecom detail :-) failed it here: (415) 273-4196 is now in area code (510). I don't know what would have been said (at least on the side of the call in our town!) had someone answered, but the matter is academic. The number has not been assigned in that area code. At least, as far as we know. Would we have been rattled if the phone rang right back when we hung up? Maybe just a little. I can't say what would make a herd of movie-goers zoom in on this one particular item, unless it's the insatiable lust for film trivia. In any case, it is not for me to question, because, when all our change was returned, I was thirty-five cents ahead. :-) Bob WORK: bobi@vswr.sps.mot.com HOME: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us ------------------------------ From: schuh@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Schuh) Subject: 911 For Everything (was 911 on Jerry Springer Show) Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 20:34:28 GMT In article , kaufman@xenon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) writes: > In article heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron > Heiby) writes: >> We have been told, through the town newsletter, that we >> should use 911 *any* time we want fire/police/ambulance dispatch. >> [Moderator's Note: Continue arguing that 911 is *only* for dire >> emergencies when immediate police intervention is required. PAT] > 911 is for whatever the local agency says its for. > [Moderator's Note: You are incorrect in saying '911 is for whatever > the local agency says it is for ...' In Illinois at least, the state > legislature passed the '911 Enabling Act' many years ago which > directed local municipalities to install 911 as promptly as possible > in cooperation with the local telco using available technology. The > Act went on to define the purpose of 911 as a method of communicating > EMERGENCY circumstances to the appropriate EMERGENCY RESPONSE agency > or agencies within the community. A stolen car or a home which was > burglarized several hours previous to being discovered are not what I > would term emergencies. PAT] Did the Illinois act *limit* 911 traffic to "emergencies"? In Seattle, the fire and police departments have specifically stated that 911 is to be used for any intitial call to them. I was once directed to call 911 as part of a burglary followup, being told to tell the operator that I was following up on a burglary report. When I did, I was immediately transferred (in what seemed like a routine manner) to someone else. The 911 system serves as a first point of contact for just about anything that is "abnormal" in our urban environment. In Seattle, this includes oil spills (which get forwarded to both the Seattle fire department and their small fleet as well as to the Coast Guard and EPA), downed traffic signs (which go to the engineering department *and* to the police if a traffic problem is created), hackers intruding into local UNIX sites, and just about anything else. Give the public *one* number to call and then train the operators to sort out the calls. This is probably more efficient than scattering trouble calls across several phone numbers (with some number of calls going to the wrong number) and a multitude of agencies. (And remember that one person's mild complaint is another person's emergency. If the various calls are brought together, then similar calls from an area can be correlated with each other, giving a better picture of the situation.) At any rate, it seems to work rather well. Mike Schuh schuh@mdd.comm.mot.com Motorola Mobile Data (I think that's what we're called this week...) [Moderator's Note: I do not think it said that *only* emergencies could be called in to 911, but based on how our police authorities in Chicago are always saying that 911 is overloaded with calls causing delays in answering real emergencies at times, it would seem the intent is to limit it in that way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cos!bob1@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Blackshaw) Subject: Telephone Pioneers Accepting New Members Organization: Corporation for Open Systems Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:45:43 GMT This is an enquiry that I received following my post on Pioneer auto tags. A young man contacted me regarding the chance for people in telecom related companies for joining the Telephone Pioneers. It sounded reasonable that since the divestiture that membership should be opened up somewhat. I am a life member through 33 years service with Bell Canada, but am not active here in the U.S. In any case, I wrote to the President of the Pioneers and posed that young man's question. The answer is that the Pioneers are open to any company whose telecom business is "at least 50% of their revenues are derived from two-way switched telecommunications service." The company must be prepared to provide some financial support, manpower support, floor space, computer support, etc. In 1988 they changed the Pioneer constitution to allow employees actively involved in Pioneering to be considered for regular membership. He did not state which employees, but I guess this means employees of companies supporting the Pioneer movement. Oh yes, the service requirement was reduced from 21 to 15 years in 1989. The COO of TPA is: William M. Germain, Jr. P.O.Box 13888 Denver, CO 80201-3888 Bob Blackshaw [bob1@cos.com] ------------------------------ From: plains!cooper@uunet.UU.NET (Jeff Cooper) Subject: Automatic Fax/Modem Switches Date: 12 Sep 92 16:09:37 GMT Reply-To: plains!midkemia!cooper@uunet.UU.NET Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network I'm looking to buy one of those fax/modem switches that can be used on a single phone line to switch the incomming call to the apporiate device. The setup I'm trying to get it working on is this: I have an answering machine and a modem on a single line, I would like to be able to take incoming modem calls without giving up the use of the answering machine (i.e. if it's a voice call it should end up ringing the phone and eventually on the answering machine, but if it's a data call it should go to the modem), but the modem must be able to make outgoing calls at any time (for my UUCP feed). Is this even possible? I've tried two switches sofar, the one Radio Shack sells and one made by a company called ACCO. The one by ACCO works (part of the time, every other call seems to get in) Does anyone else have any other recommendations of other types/makes of switches? Thanks for any help! Jeff Cooper cooper@plains.nodak.edu NeXTMail: cooper%midkemia@plains.nodak.edu (701) 298-0893 ------------------------------ Reply-To: tdarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 23:15:17 EDT Subject: Why Non-Authorized Cellular 911 Works. Maybe. In all the discussions over Cellular Phones being connected on calls to 911 even if the phone is not authorized for service with that carrier, I think I know why. Every telephone in every state (every one that gets a bill, that is! :) ) is being assessed a surcharge ranging from 2c to 25c a month for 911 or Enhanced 911. This money is collected as a tax on all telephone lines. This tax goes to the state or the local emergency service area for the purpose of providing 911 service for an area, depending on how the laws are set up in that state. (And I wouln't be surprised if the amounts spent on 911 service and equipment, and the amounts collected, especially in some cash-starved states, do not match, and we can guess which of the two amounts are smaller.) My guess is that since the tax is (1) used to pay for the 911 equipment and (2) to pay for the incoming trunks and ANI service, that most likely whoever carries a cellular 911 call gets the airtime fee from the emergency service center. Which is probably why they even let non-authorized callers make calls on 911 because it's acting as a 'caller pays all charges number' and 911 is probably also paying for the airtime too. Anyone know anything different? It's the only thing that makes any sense for a service provider to allow a cellular phone to make *any* call without them being a paying subscriber; I figure *someone* has to be paying for the service, and it's probably the 911 system. (Which, to encourage calls to 911, is what it should be.) Paul Robinson ------------------------------ From: jesse@gumby.Altos.COM (Jesse Chisholm) Subject: Query re AV Telecom Standards Date: 12 Sep 92 18:39:41 GMT Organization: Altos Computer Systems, San Jose, CA I am looking for any and all information on ISO H221, which I think is supposed to be a standard on video teleconferencing. Thank you. Jesse Chisholm | Disclaimer: My opinions are rarely understood, let | tel: 1-408-432-6200 | alone held, by this company. jesse@gumby.altos.com | fax: 1-408-434-0273 |----------------------------- ======== This company has officially disavowed all knowledge of my opinions. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 13:43:35 EDT From: gaarder%actech.uucp@theory.TC.CORNELL.EDU (Steve Gaarder) Subject: Looking For a "Cordless Ringer" We are looking for a wireless device that can be set up to beep whenever the phone rings. A cordless phone would do the job, but it is too bulky and doens't quite have the range needed in our building. What I want is something the receptionist can put in her pocket and carry around with her so she can tell when the phones ring when she's not at her desk. I suppose a short-range beeper system could be used if it could be triggered by a ring signal. Any ideas? Steven Gaarder Network and Systems Administrator gaarder@actech.com A C Technology, Ithaca, N.Y., USA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 00:39:37 EDT From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: Re: Information Calls Direct to Desired Party Alec Isaacson writes: > I was listening to the radio last night and I heard a commercial from > Cincinnati Bell offering a service called "Call Completion". The > commercial went on to say that if you call 555-1212 (rather than 411) > for directory assistance you can hit a touch tone 1 after the number > is looked up and be connected to that number. (Then it went on to > rave about how you will never need to fumble for pen and paper again :) > The verbal "fine print" said this service cost $0.35 a pop, fee waived > for busy numbers, not available in certain areas or on rotary phones. And as a side-effect, by not fumbling, you've neglected to write down the number, so can pay 35 cents the next time, as well ... ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 01:13:28 -0400 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar{shri@ncst.in}) Subject: OK What Exactly Does IRC Stand For? Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst In article is written: > TRT = Tropical Radio Telegraph, one of the oldest International Record > Carriers (i.e. telex companies). Question: Is an IRC "equivalent" to a telex company ? I've come to know and understand the term "Internationaal Record Carrier" by rote, to be almost synonymous with "long distance" carrier you could make peer-peer networking arrangements with. Whats the formal definition? shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu) ------------------------------ From: bjpst5+@pitt.edu (Bryan J Petty) Subject: Wanted: Info on Bell Atlantic AIN Trials Date: 12 Sep 92 06:06:53 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh I'm looking for any references, info, etc on Bell Atlantic's Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) field trials . I will post a summary if I receive enough responses. Thanks in advance. Bryan Petty University of Pittsburgh st5@lis.pitt.edu Telecommunication's Department Compuserve: 73210,1150 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 18:20:48 EDT From: python@cs.rutgers.edu Subject: New Mailing List For Telecom Engineers I have just created telecom-engineers, a list devoted to just the engineering point of view of telecommunications. If you want to be added, send mail to telecom-engineers-request@cs.rutgers.edu. If you want to send material, send it to telecom-engineers@cs.rutgers.edu. If something fails, send mail to me. The list is a digest, and sends out automatically when there is enough data in the inbox. I won't be doing much screening unless there is a problem. The idea is that if you want to discuss between developers of hardware and software, you can do it ideally on this list. Discussion of how the phone works, differences between carriers of a technical nature, and also, differences between switches (pbx, etc) and differences in dialing instructions overseas and nationally can be discussed here. Political and social implications should be discussed on the regular telecom list moderated by Patrick Townson of Chicago. In any event, I hope that the new list will offload the telecom list and that should mean different and more effective traffic there. Feel free to post things to both lists, but try to keep the technical material down on telecom. jsol (python@cs.rutgers.edu) [Moderator's Note: Long time readers know that Jon Solomon was the founder of TELECOM Digest back in 1981, and after a hiatus is active once again on the net. As Jon points out, his list should be reserved for the more technical stuff, although it is still welcome here also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: Shedding the Past Date: 13 Sep 1992 00:38:40 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz This appeared in a posting at MIT: > [0679] pshuang@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Amusing_Thoughts 09/07/92 14:48 (20 lines) > Subject: Finally, shedding the past ... > Newsgroups: misc.consumers > From: packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer) > Subject: News from the "Press 1 now" front > News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1 > Nntp-Posting-Host: amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov > Organization: Dept. of Independence > Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:13:00 GMT An item appeared in the "Metropolitan Diary" column of the {NY Times} a couple of weeks ago reporting that when you call Casio's hot line at 800-762-1241 the recorded voice says (and I confirmed it), "...if you are calling from a touch tone phone, press "1" now. If you are calling from a rotary-dial telephone, please call back on a touch-tone telephone." And then a little later ... [0684] eichin@CYGNUS.COM Amusing_Thoughts 09/08/92 14:36 (4 lines) Subject: Re: Finally, shedding the past... Well, now it gives you a 201 number to call (9am-5pm EST, even though we're in EDT now :-) if you're on a rotary dial phone. (They've probably gotten *so* many calls since that hit the NYT -- my *mother* heard of it :-) haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #703 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17795; 13 Sep 92 12:07 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06898 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 09:47:37 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26529 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 09:47:27 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 09:47:27 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209131447.AA26529@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #704 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Sep 92 09:47:24 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 704 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (NAB/CFA Press Release via N. Allen) INTEROP Volunteers Wanted (Ole J. Jacobsen) Octel Purchases Tigon From Ameritech (shaun@octel.com) How do YOU use "Break" Signals? (Toby Nixon) US Phone System in 1971 (as Portrayed by Hollywood) (David E.A. Wilson) Cellular/Government NPAs in Washington DC (Paul Robinson) USA to Ten Digits (Andrew Klossner) ISDN Newsgroup (Timothy R. Wilhite) VOICE and BUSY Detection (Was V.25bis, or: Are CCITT) (Charlie Mingo) Book on S.W.Asian Telecom Systems; Experts Needed (Imran Anwar) MCI Telemarketing (Dave Niebuhr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subject: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 18:40:58 EDT Here is a press release from the National Association of Broadcasters and the Consumer Federation of America. NAB, Consumer Federation of America Comment on Final Congressional Action on Cable TV Bill Contact: Eddie Fritts, president, National Association of Broadcasters, 202-429-5350, or Gene Kimmelman, legislative director, Consumer Federation of America, 202-387-6121 WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 -- The following was released today by the National Association of Broadcasters and the Consumer Federation of America: House and Senate conferees reached agreement on a final cable TV bill Wednesday night. The bill, which has been debated for more than three years, should come before the House and Senate for final passage the week of Sept. 14. Once Congress approves it -- which is expected -- the bill will be sent to President Bush. The president has threatened a veto, but both the House and Senate passed their original cable bills by veto-proof margins earlier this year. The Bill: The bill combines consumer protection features -- including regulation to curb rates that have risen three times faster than inflation, customer service standards, prohibitions on unfair sales practices and more -- with reforms to promote competition. The latter includes one provision that will enable over-the-air television stations to compete more fairly with cable systems, and a second that will allow home satellite and other alternative delivery systems to offer cable programming at competitive prices. (See attachment 1). Cable's Distortion Campaign: The conference committee's quick work is yet another sign of the overwhelming bipartisan support in both houses for cable legislation. Two weeks ago the cable industry launched an unprecedented multi-million dollar advertising and grassroots campaign against the bill. Their campaign, which has been widely criticized by the press and members of Congress for its numerous distortions, has failed to slow momentum for the bill's enactment. (See attachment 2). The cable bill is supported by a broad coalition of consumers, senior citizens, labor, rural and local government organizations, as well as by cable's competitors. The only opponents of the bill are cable companies and cable associations. For more information about the cable bill contact Eddie Fritts at 202-429-5350, or Gene Kimmelman at 202-387-6121. KEY PRO-CONSUMER/PRO-COMPETITION ELEMENTS OF THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO S. 12: THE CABLE TV CONSUMER COMPETITION AND PROTECTION ACT OF 1992 Rate Regulation -- The FCC and franchising authorities are authorized to ensure that rates for basic service are "reasonable" where cable systems do not face effective competition. -- The bill allows citizens, local government and other public organizations to file petitions to the FCC challenging rates for all other tiers of service. Equipment Prices -- Allows the FCC to ensure that prices for installation, remote control, converter boxes and other equipment used to provide basic service shall be "reasonable." Customer Service -- The bill requires the FCC to establish enforceable customer service standards addressing concerns such as outages and service calls, system office hours and telephone availability, and information on billing and refunds. -- The bill allows local governments to establish additional standards. Encouragement of Multiple, Competitive Cable Franchises -- Franchising authorities may not award exclusive cable franchises, and may not unreasonably refuse to award additional competitive franchises. Municipal Operation of Cable Franchises -- Municipalities are explicitly authorized to operate cable systems. Prohibition on "Buy Through" Requirements -- After a ten-year transition period to allow cable operators to upgrade their systems, operators will be prohibited from requiring subscribers to purchase expanded service tiers to be able to buy pay services such as HBO and Showtime. Additional waivers are available to avoid hardship to cable systems. Customer Privacy -- Customer privacy laws are strengthened to restrict access to cable systems' information about their customers. Prohibition on Negative Option Billing -- Cable systems are prohibited from charging subscribers for services or equipment that they have not explicitly requested. Consumer Equipment Compatibility -- The FCC is directed to adopt regulations to ensure that subscribers' investments in cable-ready televisions, VCRs, remote controls, and other capabilities are not made obsolete by incompatible cable system technologies. Program Access -- Cable programming services in which cable operators have a financial interest will be restricted in their ability to deny these programming services to cable's competitors. Limitations on exclusive contracts expire in 10 years. Retransmission Consent Option -- Local television stations may opt for must-carry protections, or may elect to negotiate with local cable operators over the terms and conditions of carriage on cable systems. Leased Access Channels -- The FCC is directed to set maximum rates for channels set aside for leasing by competitive programming services, and to set standards for local systems' access terms, conditions and billing for these channels. Cable Integration Limitations -- The FCC is directed to establish reasonable limits on the maximum number of cable subscribers a single company can control, and reasonable limits on the number of channels on a system that can be programmed with services in which the system operator has a financial interest. THE CABLE TV INDUSTRY'S DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN The Cable Industry's Tactics Include the Following: -- Thirty-seven million bill-stuffers in subscribers' monthly statements. -- Television ads on cable networks and systems across the country, radio ads, and full-page print ads in newspapers nationwide. -- An "800" telephone number. Advertisements instruct consumers to call the 800 number and have messages sent for free to their members of Congress. At least two consumer front organizations -- including one each in Pennsylvania and Georgia -- called "Consumers Opposed to S. 12." These organizations sent consumers telegrams claiming that S. 12 will force cable rates up and asking them to actively oppose the bill. Most of the people representing these so-called consumer organizations have proven ties to the cable industry. They include an executive producer of a cable-owned sports network, a publisher of a newspaper with a financial interest in a cable company, and an owner/operator of a 24-hour cable channel. The Cable Industry's Message is Distorted The Cable Industry Claims: The bill will make rates go up, not down. Cable further claims that the U.S. Commerce Department concluded that the bill "could mean increased costs of $23 to $51 per year for each cable customer." The Truth is: The cable bill is a pro-consumer bill that will regulate cable rates and help hold them down. The so-called Commerce Department figures actually came from reports given to the Commerce Department by the cable industry. {The Washington Post}, {The Wall Street Journal}, and {The Charleston (S.C.) Post & Courier} all have criticized these reports and said they made faulty assumptions or measured costs that would not necessarily be passed on to consumers. Cable Industry: Newspapers, including {The New York Times}, and {The Cincinnati Post} oppose cable legislation. Truth: NCTA published advertisements quoting these newspapers out of context. {The New York Times} -- in the very editorial quoted by NCTA -- said "a 'yes' vote in the House would successfully conclude an uphill, three-year battle." {The Cincinnati Post} -- also in the editorial quoted by NCTA -- said, "... Cable operators in most communities found themselves with virtual monopolies. After the 1984 deregulation stripped local governments of their right to control rates, the industry jacked up prices by an average of 60 percent. Along the way, many cable operators earned a reputation for frequent breakdowns and poor service ... As long as cable companies maintain effective monopolies in their services [sic] areas then, yes, they should be regulated." Cable Industry: The cable bill could force cable companies to pay broadcast TV stations as much as $1 billion per year. It will also make cable viewers pay for their network programming. Truth: At issue is a retransmission consent provision that gives local stations control of their signals and the right to negotiate with cable stations who want to retransmit those signals. The provision does not require cable operators to pay broadcasters, nor does it mandate a tax/surcharge to cable consumers. It specifies only local station, not network involvement. It also directs the Federal Communications Commission to take retransmission consent into account to ensure that it does not adversely affect rates. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 16:10:31 PDT From: Ole J. Jacobsen Subject: INTEROP Volunteers Wanted Call for Volunteers: The INTEROP Conference Assessment Team (CAT) Interop Company is seeking student volunteers to serve as quality control monitors for INTEROP 92 Fall, to be held in San Francisco, California, October 28-30, 1992. This is a unique opportunity for students to attend the industry's premier networking conference and tradeshow, while helping us improve the quality and consistency of the conference. As a CAT member you will receive: * Complimentary conference registration for all three conference days; * Complimentary conference notes (for your assigned conference, there are actually four conferences within a conference this year); * Complimentary lunch all three days; * Special INTEROP CAT T-shirts; As a CAT member you will be asked to: * Monitor preassigned conference sessions on one of the three conference days, by submitting written reports and acting as the "eyes and ears" of the conference organizers. We will provide you with a basic evaluation form to aid the preparation of the reports. (You will be free to attend any conference session and the INTEROP exhibition on your "days off.") * Provide an accurate count of the number of people attending the sessions you are assigned to. ("Clickers" will be provided!) Successful CAT candidates will be students currently enrolled in a computer science or electrical engineering course at graduate or post-graduate level. Applicants should have some understanding of (and interest in) computer networking issues. All applications must be received by October 1, 1992. To apply, send e-mail to: ole@interop.com with a brief biography and relevant contact information. Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions--The Interoperability Report Interop Company, 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040, Phone: (415) 962-2515 FAX: (415) 949-1779 Email: ole@csli.stanford.edu ------------------------------ From: shaun@octelc.octel.com Subject: Octel Purchases Tigon From Ameritech Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 10:25:44 BST Excerpts from an announcement to all employees, released 11 Sept 1992 -- my comments in square brackets: "Octel has signed a definitive agreement to acquire Tigon Corporation of Dallas, Texas from Ameritech. This acquisition is subject to regulatory approval and is expected to close in mid-October. Tigon is the leading independent provider of voice processing services [by number of mailboxes] in the United States. The company was founded in 1983, was purchased by Ameritech in 1988, and now has over 200 employees and a network of systems covering selected major markets in the US, with co-marketing partnerships in Canada, the UK, Australia, Taiwan and Japan. It is important to note that we are not purchasing Tigon to compete with our distributors and VIS customers in their service provider business. Less than 20% of Tigon's business is in the traditional telephone answering service bureau area, and less than 5% of Tigon's customers are Centrex-based. In the future, these segments are more likely to be served by RBOCs, distributors and Compass [a small company also purchased very recently] products. Like Compass, Tigon will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Octel and will operate as a separate unit ..." There is also a press release which I can submit to the Digest if anyone is interested. Shaun shaun@octel.com ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: How do YOU Use "Break" Signals? Date: 12 Sep 92 17:17:18 EDT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA I am researching the current applications for the "break" (continuous spacing) condition in start/stop (async) communications. Specifically, I am trying to determine the importance of supporting break (and preserving the length of the break) in various protocols that carry async data across different environments. Do you use break? What for? How important is it to you? Do you know how long a break needs to be in your application for it to be recognized? Are there any alternatives to using break, such that if breaks were intercepted or not transferred, you could still make efficient use of the application? If you would like to respond, please do so by mail directly to tnixon@hayes.com. If anyone is interested in a summary of the responses, please let me know by mail. Thanks very much in advance! 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: David E A Wilson Subject: US Phone System in 1971 (as Portrayed by Hollywood) Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 00:23:53 GMT Last night I saw a repeat of the first ever Columbo telemovie, dated 1971. It's plot revolved around the use of the phone system (to give himself an alibi, the murderer tricked the victim into phoning his wife and telling her he was working late at the office [at which point he was killed]). The murderer and victim were actually in San Diago in the murderer's cabin. The telecom questions it raised in my mind were: 1) Did a station to station call differ in any way from an operator assisted call? 2) The murderer had to stop the victim from using the operator to make the call to Los Angeles, instead telling him to direct dial it using the 213 area code. Was direct dial that new and unusual back in 1971? 3) Would any record of a direct-dial call be kept so that the police could check the source of the victim's final call (knowing only the destination) or could they have got it later on when they suspected the murderer (and thus had a good idea of the source)? David Wilson (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 04:19:37 EDT Subject: Cellular/Government NPAs in Wash. DC (Paul Robinson) According to the C&P Telephone White Pages (and some investigating), the following exchanges in the Washington, DC LATA are of interest: -Maryland- (all numbers are "Cellular System"): Silver Spring: 301-502, 301-509, 301-518, 301-520, 301-580, 301-807, 301-980 Bethesda: 301-919 The following are government centrex operated by GSA: Federal WITS: 301-504 -District of Columbia- 202-288, 202-316, 202-374, 202-494, ("Cellular System") 202-679, 202-714, 202-716, 202-812, 202-957 The exchange 202-665 is listed as "Mobile Telephone Special charges apply." Federal WITS: 202-205, 202-208, 202-219, 202-260, 202-401, 202-501, 202-619, 202-690, 202-708, 202-720 White House uses: 202-456 but some private numbers also have this exchange House/Senate: 202-224 -Virginia- Alexandria/Arlington: 703-407, 703-408, 703-517, 703-609, ("Cellular System") 703-795, 703-819, 703-850 Department of Defense: 703-692, 703-693, 703-695, 703-696, 703-697 Paul Robinson ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: USA to Ten Digits Date: 12 Sep 92 20:15:37 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon > Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future > for the NANP: dialling ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of > whether they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other > Digest readers think this would be acceptable?" Absolutely not. But I didn't think switching from five to seven digits for intra-exchange calls was acceptable either ... Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) [Moderator's Note: The options would seem to be seven digits for local (probably the majority of the) calls one makes and eleven digits for all others or ten digits for everything since if an area code is always required then the leading digit '1' could be dropped. I personally prefer the current arrangement even if I do have to dial 1-708 for many of my local calls. PAT] ------------------------------ From: twilhite@nyx.cs.du.edu (Timothy R. Wilhite) Subject: Looking For ISDN Newsgroup Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 13:09:28 GMT I know that recently a newsgroup for ISDN was established. What is the name of the newsgroup? Thanks in advance. -timothy r. wilhite [Moderator's Note: Please email responses to Mr. Wilhite. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 17:40:48 -0500 Subject: VOICE and BUSY Detection (Was V.25bis, or: Are CCITT) leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) > Actually, there's another problem. Take USR modem. Put X5 in the > Initialize string. Now call a Telebit that puts the PEP tomes first. > Result? The USR reports a result code of VOICE almost immediately and > hangs up! > This was true of a USR dual standard bought a couple of years ago. I > don't know if it is still true. That sounds like a problem more with putting PEP tones first than with the USR, which has a pretty average VOICE recognition. I just tried it with my USR d/s (Oct 90 - round LED), with VOICE recognition activated, calling a Trailblazer+ (non-v.32) and got a 2400 connect. > So even if a modem answer, it has to answer in a way that the > *calling* modem recognizes. > Then you get into situations like the one I saw mentioned recently. > Supposedly, US modems think that Australian ring signals are busy > signals! (Anyone know the truth about this?) It's certainly true that (West) German and Italian ringing tones can fool a US modem into mistaking them as BUSY. Of course, those ringing tones often fool human callers from the US too! (They sound like "Barrrrp Barrrrp.") The real problem is the lack of standardized ringing/busy tones. (Also, the phone system in Rhein/Main Germany often starts to give you a ringing signal, then switches to busy - the BUSY signal sounds like a British police siren.) The easy solution to this is just to use feature set X1 when calling exotic locales (or modems!). ------------------------------ From: ia4@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Imran Anwar) Subject: Book on S.W.Asian Telecom Systems, any experts on Kuwait,Iraq,Jordan, and BanglaDesh who can contribute chapters on these coutries? Organization: Columbia University Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 14:42:36 GMT Major part of a book on Telecommunications in South & South West Asia is complete but some countries' systems are missing. We are looking for any people with experience or knowledge of systems, current state of the art, policy etc in Bangladesh, Iraq [pre-war or post-war, possibly both] Kuwait [ditto], and Jordan [ditto]. Please email if you think you can contribute a chapter on one of these countries. Regards, Imran Anwar ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 17:24:14 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: MCI Telemarketing I had two calls from MCI this morning and and the person on the other end wanted wanted me to switch to them via their Friends and Family plan. First of all, I hung up on the first person and then thinking about it contacted my Telco (NYTel) to put a lock on my numbers (2) due to fears about slamming. The second call came in and after a few questions, determined that the call was due to my number being on a list of numbers to call to get switching of LD carriers. I questioned that by asking how my number appeared on their list and was told that there was a computer printout in front of her and that was what she was using; no names/phone numbers givven to indicate that I might be interested. What is going to be interesting is if I receive the same call in the future using my dedicated line that has a phone attaced to the modem but is not advertised. It seems that MCI is no better than a telemarketer. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note; You *were* talking to a telemarketer for MCI, not the company itself. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #704 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11812; 13 Sep 92 23:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21466 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:26:25 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03674 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:26:15 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:26:15 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209140226.AA03674@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #705 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Sep 92 21:26:15 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 705 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia (David E.A. Wilson) Re: Question About PBX Phone (Tony Harminc) Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Robert Aaron Book) Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls (John Wheeler) Re: Bad Connection to MCI (John M. Sullivan) Re: What Number am I Calling From? (Wayne D. Mullen) Re: Volume of Telecom Question (Paul Valin) Re: Strange MCI Problem (Alan L. Varney) Re: New Phone Number Intercept (Steve Forrette) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Steve Forrette) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Andrew G. Minter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David E A Wilson Subject: Re: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 23:35:04 GMT fcw@telecom.ti.com (Fred Wedemeier) writes: > Interesting statistics. .. Can you give us some typical fees, e.g. > monthly service, roaming fees, per-minute cost? Certainly. Here are the current Telecom rates (someone else can get the Optus rates and post them). As we only had one mobile system up until this year, I have never seen "roaming fees" mentioned. This may or may not change with the introduction of Optus. Flexi-Plan Std 130 80 20 (3) 10 (4) -------------------------------------------------------------- Access Fee per month $40 $130 $80 $20 $10 Peak Call charges <=165km 1st 30 sec $0.29 (1) (2) $0.58 $0.87 subs 30 sec $0.19 (1) (2) $0.38 $0.57 >165km 1st 30 sec $0.40 (1) (2) $0.80 $1.20 subs 30 sec $0.30 (1) (2) $0.60 $0.90 Off Peak Call charges <=165km 1st 30 sec $0.145 (1) (2) $0.29 $0.145 subs 30 sec $0.095 (1) (2) $0.19 $0.095 >165km 1st 30 sec $0.20 (1) (2) $0.40 $0.20 subs 30 sec $0.15 (1) (2) $0.30 $0.15 Notes: (1) First $120 of calls are included in access fee. Any unused portion is forfeit. Any excess charged at Std rates. (2) First $52 of calls are included in access fee. Any unused portion is forfeit. Any excess charged at Std rates. (3) Flexi-Plan 20 user is also charged at Flexi-Plan Std rates when receiving calls. Caller is charged at standard rate. (4) Flexi-Plan 10 user is also charged at twice Flexi-Plan Std rates when receiving calls during peak period. No receiving charge during off-peak. Caller is charged at standard rate. Other charges: Initial connection $45 Retention of number following disconnection $2/month ($6 minimum) Reconnection after non payment of bill $30 Calls to IDD, 008, 005 and operator assisted calls 10c/30 sec surcharge Diverted calls within Australia 5c/30 sec Calls to mobile phones peak <= 165km 25c/38.5 sec > 165km 25c/77 sec off peak <= 165km 25c/24.6 sec > 165km 25c/49.2 sec David Wilson (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 20:02:59 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone William.Degnan@mdf.FidoNet.Org (William Degnan) wrote: > On UUCP (Tony Harminc ) writes to > All: >> 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. > But red/black? Wouldn't yellow/black achieve the same purpose but > allow the set to be used? You forgot the smilie. Here - I'll put it in for you :-) Just in case anyone misses it: yellow/black are of course the wire colours for line two (or the unfortunate AC supply for the dial light). I plead finger check. Tony H. ------------------------------ From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) Subject: Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder Organization: Rice University Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 02:01:01 GMT In article hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > In article Alan TC Penn > writes: >> I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The >> function of this device is to route the incoming phone message >> directly to either an answering machine or a modem. > Seems that the telecom device companies (modem manufacturers, > fax machine manufacturers, phone manufacturers, etc.) ought to put the > distinctive ringing decoder inside their machines. It should "be just > software". Are there standards for distinctive ringing (standard > cadence, etc.). I guess we could handle some of it in software by > watching the RI line on modems. There is a $20 shareware program called WhatLine which purports to do precisely this. It has some limitations, but it may work. I dopwnloaded it a few days ago, but I have not yet tried it, so I can't promise anything. Your mileage may vary. The program is available by anonymous ftp to wuarchive.wustl.edu, in the directory mirrors/msdos/modem, Filename: whatl275.zip. If you do not have access to ftp, there are ways to access ftp by e-mail. At the request of the Moderator (only), I will post the uuencoded zip file to this newsgroup. If the software doesn't work for you, there is something called a "LYNX line switch." It is available in two-number and four-number versions. You plug the phone line in on one end, and two (four) phone cords into the other. Route one cord to your answering machine and the other to your modem/fax/whatever. It costs US$89, but may be available cheaper in stores. There is an address in the software documentation telling you where to get it if you cannot find it locally. The address is: Advance Systems 215 W Amosland Rd. Norwood, PA 19074-1502 The two-number version is $89 and the four-line version is $149 US. Robert Book rbook@rice.edu [Moderator's Note: It would be better if you simply sent it out to people asking for it rather than posting it here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Wheeler Subject: Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls Organization: Group One Ltd.; San Francisco, CA Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:01:24 GMT capek@watson.ibm.com writes: > I tried to use the AT&T Alliance Conferencing service, whose number is > 700-456-1000. I dialed and got a "cannot be completed as dialed" > message. I tried 700-555-4141 to confirm that AT&T was still my > default carrier, and it was. It turned out that for the Alliance > number, one must dial 0 + 700 ... even though the 0 is not necessary > for 700-555-4141 call. What's going on here? Well, I haven't heard AT&T's new EasyReach 700 service mentioned here, though I haven't been watching real closely ... I'm now a subscriber to ER700, with a fantastic number (my name!) ... 0 + 700 is ALWAYS needed for ER700. I assumed that was because each LD carrier can apparently can market/divide 700 services as they see fit ... does this mean that different carriers can re-use the 700's? BTW: is 555-4141 still working? I thought it had been discontinued. John Wheeler |Informix-4GL / SQL * Unix * Broadcast Audio Production Group One Ltd.|WTBS Emmy award winner * Global Broadcast Events San Francisco [Moderator's Note: You are correct that each carrier can use the 700 number space as it sees fit. There can be (and are) duplication of numbers there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sullivan@warschawski.geom.umn.edu (John M. Sullivan) Subject: Re: Bad Connection to MCI Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 19:52:38 GMT Thanks to all who responded to my question about trouble establishing MCI service. In fact the most useful response was not posted, but came as e-mail from an MCI supervisor in North Carolina, who confirmed that "2ED" is the tag for MCI's switch in Minneapolis (Minnesota junction 1), and apologized for their entry-level customer service rep not recognizing this. When I gave him the phone number in question, he was able to remove the "block" on the line promptly. It had evidently been placed so long ago that the reason was no longer in the computer, but probably another customer had unpaid bills. I am still surprised that this was not found by MCI when my friend first called to tell them about her new number, or when we called later to report the problem. It seems that if MCI regularly blocks access from certain numbers they'd know to check this possibility. I'm not sure exactly whether this block is what ATT's Al Varney called a Selective Carrier Denial; he seemed to imply that the SCD was something placed by the local telco, but this block was by MCI. (And I don't know what he meant by "FG-D access".) Varney quotes me and responds: >> (If I dial 10-xxx-1-700-555-4141 for a random choice of "xxx", I hear >> a very long pause with some touchtones in the background, and finally >> "doo-wee-dee Your call failed. Please try again".) > This is not consistent with your claim that 10288 and 10333 would > complete ten-digit calls. Nor is the announcement consistent with the > selection of an invalid XXX value. Maybe you picked XXX values for > ICs that don't support "700-555-1212" identification. Maybe my use of "random" was confusing. I did get service with 10288 and 10333, and got MCI's "vacant code" with 10222. I tried 10999, not remembering that it would reach Metromedia. So I just tried one more code, that I chose randomly. It may have been 10764, but I didn't try to remember it, if that would reach anyone. I'll try again when I get home, since my experience didn't seem to be typical. And this time I'll have a copy of the TELECOM Digest list of codes. By the way, that night when I had the MCI problem, I was trying to call a local number that had an invalid exchange, just to hear if USWest's message would have a tag like "2ED". Not having a phone book, I tried 999-9999. I got a message "the number you have dialed, 341-9999, ...". What happened there? John Sullivan ------------------------------ From: viswayne@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (WAYNE D. MULLEN) Subject: Re: What Number am I Calling From? Organization: University at Buffalo Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 03:49:00 GMT In article , CUNYVM!LYNCC.BITNET@mitvma. mit.edu (Jahangir Momin) writes: > I had a similar problem once, but then I wasn't in a 'hurry' to find > out the number, and as I planned to use'that'phone 'frequently', I > decided to place a call from that phone using my calling card. The > next phone bill dsiplayed 'that' number. I missed the beginning of the thread, but here in Buffalo, dialing 990 will give you the number of the phone you're on. Wayne D. Mullen, President Internet: VISWAYNE@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Erie County Color Computer Club (716) 649-1368 8-N-1 300/1200/2400 Buffalo, New York ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 14:14:00 From: Paul (P.A.) Valin Subject: Re: Volume of Telecom Question In article Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton wrote: > For a paper I'm writing on export controls and information, I'd like > to present a quick summary of the growth of telecommunications over > the past several decades. I've seen some overview articles (there was > a two-pager in the {Whole Earth Review} a few issues back), but could > someone from this most august forum provide some referenced figures > (or pointers to where I could find them) on: > - Growth in number of domestic calls completed (US); > - Growth in number of international calls (either with the US and > rest of the world, or total internationally, or both); > - Growth in bandwidth or calls completed to interesting places like > Moscow, or Cuba, or Iran, etc. A couple of good references that are likely available at your local library: Statistics of Communications Common Carriers, FCC - published each year by the Federal Communincations Commission - will give numbers of domestic (US) calls and calls between US and rest-of-the-world (listed by country) - statistics are given for previous year (you'll have to get back issues to see any growth figures) Yearbook of Common Carrier Telecommunication Statistics, ITU - published by International Telecommunications Union (Geneva) - more international in scope but less detailed than FCC book Good luck. Paul Valin Tel: + 1 613 763 7394 Bell-Northern Research Ltd. Email: pavalin@bnr.ca P.O. Box 3511, Station C Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1Y 4H7 'only my opinions' ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 01:04:41 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Strange MCI Problem Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) writes: > In article , wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill > Huttig) writes: >> I had a strange thing happen to me tonight. I called my aunt and >> after dialing heard nothing; no ringing or noise at all, so I tried >> several more times. At first I thought it might be that the speed >> dial lost the end of the number so I dialed it (well actually pushed) >> the number manually ... still no luck >> Is this what can happen with a SS7 problem? The ringing through but no >> voice path getting opened? > Not according to what I've read. Call set up protocol with SS7 (By > the way, I strongly doubt you were SS7 connected) currently utilizes > "distant end" ring back which is a strong indication that all went > well with YOUR LEC and MCI, but the ball was dropped by the distant > LEC, when your aunt answered. The good news is that since "cut > through" did not occur, a billing record was never completed either ... > whew! Jack, there's another SS7-related failure mode that can yield these symptoms. Since no MF tones or winks occur on an SS7 circuit, it's possible to signal the called party, have them answer and trip billing, without a working voice circuit. The protocol provides for what's called a Voice Path Assurance (VPA) test on some percentage of the calls (0-100%). Usually a facility failure ("backhoe fade", etc.) triggers a Carrier Alarm, blocking the circuits from future calls until cleared. But if that mechanism was broken, and the VPA test wasn't run on your particular call, or any of your re-attempts, ... well, just check your bill. I can't comment on SS7 to ICs. Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: New Phone Number Intercept Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 08:56:54 GMT In article John Higdon writes: > It was AT&T that (exclusively?) participated in this practice, and it > began some years ago. It was put in place to prevent the practice of > "black boxing" and also to protect itself from itself. It seems that > many of the AT&T PBXes sold and installed by none other than AT&T had > misprogrammed DID circuits that never supervised. Any call made to > such lines was a "free" call. > To my knowledge, the OCCs never bothered with this practice. And I > believe AT&T is still doing it. This has been my experience as well. The case where this really hurt was in cellular roamer ports. It used to be that many of them would not return answer supervision unless the call was actually answered by the desired cellular subscriber. This way, if you called the roam port as a toll call (or from another cellular), you wouldn't get billed for unanswered calls. The cellular carriers had to make the roamer ports supervise immediately when AT&T made this change in order to allow AT&T long distance customers to use the roamer ports. Although it is certainly not high on AT&T's priority list, it would be nice if they would return to the old way for cellular prefixes. I would think that they could be reasonably assured that a cellular carrier is not going to engage in any large-scale phraud scheme, and they would know that regular DIDs won't be on the cellular prefixes. Then the "proper" operation of the roamer ports could be restored. As an aside, cellular subscribers who roam into areas where they must bill long distance to calling cards might want to use a Sprint FONcard for these calls. The Sprint 800 access number won't return supervision unless the call completes, so you aren't billed the outrageous roam airtime for unanswered long distance calls. If you just 0+ the call, chances are it will default to AT&T, which returns supervision at the "bong." Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 09:03:28 GMT In article 70465.203@compuserve.com writes: > Then you get into situations like the one I saw mentioned recently. > Supposedly, US modems think that Australian ring signals are busy > signals! (Anyone know the truth about this?) Sometimes modems can be too smart for their own good when they try to interpret things like this and do it poorly. The modem at my parents' house interprets the "Thank you for using AT&T" message after entry of the calling card PIN to be a BUSY, and drops the call immediately. I finally figured out a way around this: append some commas at the end of the dialing string so the modem doesn't start "listening" until after the undesired sound is finished. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: A.G.Minter@bnr.co.uk (Andrew G. Minter) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: BNR Europe Limited, Harlow, GB Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 09:42:08 GMT Just to confuse things even more: The UK English voice on our wonderful NT Meridian VoiceMail system refers to `#' as "square sign". Andrew G. Minter | Email: A.G.Minter@bnr.co.uk Principal Research Engineer | Phone: +44 279 403165 BNR Europe Limited | Fax: +44 279 451866 London Road, Harlow | ESN: 742-3165 Essex CM17 9NA | Telex: 81151 BNR HW G ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #705 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12971; 14 Sep 92 0:04 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03912 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:02:29 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06666 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:02:19 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:02:19 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209140302.AA06666@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #706 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Sep 92 22:02:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 706 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Gordon Hlavenka) Re: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation (John R. Levine) Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (John R. Levine) Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses (Jon Sreekanth) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Julian Macassey) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Joseph Malcolm) Re: Bell Science Series on Video (Martin McCormick) Re: Loading Auth Codes Into CO Switch (Vance Shipley) Re: Standardized Exchange Names (George L. Sicherman) Re: New Phone Number Intercept (Andy Jacobsen) Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses (morpheus@entropy.mcds.com) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Steven P. Mazurek) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (H. Shrikumar) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us (gordon hlavenka) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Vpnet Public Access Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:51:53 GMT > The only reason to be able to do uplink calls would be to call someone > back after leaving a message or something similar. Simply have the > phone number of the Airfone change, and have that number be current > only for that flight. Phones from which calls are not made are > totally inaccesable. Several digit extensions would probably be > needed to prevent someone from randomly dialing Airfone extensions and > stumbling across an active line. Not secure enough. I suppose you could go to seven-digit "extensions" (like a pager PIN) but for a _temporary_ use this would be easy for the uplink caller to forget. (We're talking Least Common Denominator here -- not everyone takes notes and doesn't lose them!) Also, with several thousand (not an unreasonable number) passengers registered to receive calls it would be pretty easy to pick a number at random and connect to _somebody_. And that's precisely the situation we need to prevent. (BTW "Airfone" is a TM or some such. Since I work for a different ATG phone company, let's use a generic term like "Airplane Telephone." Having people think of "Airfone" as a generic term -- like Jello -- is _exactly_ what GTE wants to happen.) Gordon S. Hlavenka cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 10 Sep 92 17:50:28 EDT (Thu) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > Enter Hurricane Andrew on the scene. Andrew toppled AT&T's microwave > tower at Goulds, FL, between Miami and Florida City, shutting down > microwave connectivity to both the Florida City tropo station and the > Florida Keys, ... Florida City, which is next to Homestead, was right in the path of the hurricane. I'd be astonished if the tropo station itself weren't badly damaged. I saw a wire-service article in the papers last week about the rerouting calls to Cuba via Europe, but it didn't say anything about the shenanigans that gave Cuba a direct link to Italy. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 13 Sep 92 17:42:14 EDT From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > I do not know whether all carriers allow 911 even from a phone marked > as bad. I would suspect so, because of liability issues, and it's not > likely that someone calling 911 is trying to engage in phone fraud. And the Moderator Notes: > [Moderator's Note: I don't see how there could be any liability issues > in a total denial of service to a delinquent or non-existent account. There could be plenty of liability issues if a telco refused a 911 call from a phone whose ESN was marked bad by mistake. Given that we seem to be moving toward a national ESN data base updated by all umpteen hundred cellular carriers, it's almost certain that some of the data will be bad. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: If the ESN is marked bad by mistake, then a problem might exist if a call to 911 were denied. If the ESN is correctly marked, then no liability would exist. The same situation could occur with landline service. If a phone is turned off in error, there could be a question of liability, but if the phone is denied service due to a credit problem or some previous misuse or abuse of the network then telco has no liability. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) Subject: Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses Organization: The World Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 15:14:22 GMT In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > retry the connection, you get a busy signal. It would be nice to have > the modem immediately reset when it sees the CPC indicating that the > caller has gone away. I've never seen this in any modem (not that > I've looked very hard), and wonder why it is not a standard feature. > It would seem to me that detecting loss of loop current would not be > an expensive feature to engineer. And if a line doesn't give CPC, > then the modem would act as it does now anyway. The Brooktrout multichannel fax/modem/voice cards (TR112, TR114) do sense loop current, to the best of my recollection. On the other hand, they pay lots of attention to their DAA design since they make various country versions, and have DID front end versions. An $80 PC modem probably cuts out the loop current sense opto for cost saving. On this topic, if a modem actually did loop current detection, how would it report it using the "Hayes" (AT) command set ? Would the manufacturer pick a status code at random, like "DC ON", or is there some organization that co-ordinates extensions to the AT command set ? Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems, Inc. Fax and PC products 5 Walden St #3, Cambridge, MA 02140 (617) 876-8019 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Date: 13 Sep 92 14:41:52 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article 0005075968@mcimail.com (Jeff Garber) writes: > julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) writes: >> The big question is "Why are people still doing installations >> with quad wire?" > Among other reasons previously cited, quad usually can be easily > obtained in a beige jacket. Quad is usually supplied in cream (white), I have seen dark brown/purple jacketed quad, but cream is the usual colour. Twisted pair is commonly supplied in beige This is actually "artificial limb pink", but the telco calls it beige. The telco calls beige almond. The rarer colour -- usually only obtainable from AT&T -- is grey. I prefer grey cable, it is often hard to find at distributors. Graybar usually has it. So yes, I will concede, to match the light decor of many residences, quad does the job. Yet another case of fashion holding back technology. Maybe some enlightened cable manufacturer will start supplying twisted pair in almond. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@WA6FWI.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: jmalcolm@sura.net (Joseph Malcolm) Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Organization: SURAnet, College Park, MD Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 20:03:30 GMT In article Tom Coradeschi writes: > YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET writes: >> I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not >> been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. For >> 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 > I'm not sure that this is such a great idea. The propagation delay > thru Usenet (due to the nature of the beast) is such that news tends > to travel rather slowly. Sure some very well connected sites (anyone > hanging off UUNET, for example) will get news quickly, but many of the > rest of us are in veritable backwaters. Not really the greatest way to > get out timely or critical information. That depends on what software you are running. With INN or a hacked C News, propagation delays are typically less than two or three seconds. News propagates through the de facto "backbone" quite quickly. I'd estimate that news passing through darwin.sura.net probably hits a hundred machines in at least a dozen states and and a couple of foreign countries within a minute, and I suspect I am underestimating things considerably. It is true that those people a few hops off the fast propagation path (or using uucp) will have delays on the order of hours or days, but for quite a few sites that is no longer so. Joseph Malcolm jmalcolm@sura.net SURAnet Operations +1 301 982 4600 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Bell Science Series on Video Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 15:29:14 -0500 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu When I was an electronics technician for O.S.U.'s Audio Visual Department, We had a huge pile of 16-millimeter test films which got their test status by having been chewed, burnt, or otherwise mutilated by sick or poorly operated projectors. Several of those films were from the Bell Science series. In one segment of the film about the development of language, there is a brief shot of an experiment in which the phrase "Never kill a snake with your bare hands," is spectrally analyzed. The spectrogram was placed on a piece of clear plastic and run through another machine which produced a fairly good playback of the sentence. This little segment always caught my interest because I happened to have read about that very experiment while doing some research in graduate school in 1977. According to Bell Labs "Benchmark Papers in Acoustics," the scientists were studying the very nature of speech production and understanding. In 1951, they built a sort of reverse spectrograph which took spectrograms and converted them back to audio. The system was elegantly simple, for its purpose, but worked quite well. It had a light source on one side of a rotating disk with a row of photo-cells on the other side. There were bands of holes drilled in the disk so that they interrupted the light beams at a rate corresponding to the desired frequency. When the disk was spun at the right speed, each photo-cell could produce a tone whose frequency was harmonically related to all the other tones which could be produced. By blocking the light to groups of photo-cells, one produced many tones of different harmonic composition. The hardware was physically built so that the bands of holes corresponded to the center frequencies of the channels of the spectrum analyzer. When running a spectrogram through the system, those parts of the film which corresponded3to sound were clear while the quiet parts were opaque. All one had to do to get sound was to run the spectrogram between the light source and the photo-cells at the same speed at which it was originally recorded. The researchers wrote that it was possible to obtain good speech quality from this system if the spectrogram was automatically produced by a spectrum analyzer, but that attempts to create speech by manually painting certain parts of a film produced very poor results. It seems that the human brain is not very good at interpreting a visual representation of a sound. The "Bench Mark Papers on Acoustics" are just full of interesting experiments like the one just described and show that Bell Labs was trying to do new things with telephony right from the start. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Loading Auth Codes Into CO Switch Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 23:16:19 GMT In article mmgall@hubcap.clemson.edu (Morris Galloway Jr.) writes: > We have 700 to 1000 authorization codes to turn down each spring, then > new codes to be turned up in the fall when students arrive. > Since these codes are in an on-campus computer, I do _not_ want to > print them out and have our local telco key them back in. Nor do I > want to key them in to the telco's system myself. I think you should tell telco that you DO want to key them in yourself. When they have given you access use a scripting language to send them up. Or hire me and I'll do it :). Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 21:56:07 EDT From: gls@windmill.att.com (George L Sicherman) Subject: Re: Standardized Exchange Names Organization: Save the Dodoes Foundation By request, here are the old exchange names from the Buffalo area. The explanations are fallible ... 22 BAiley Bailey Avenue 23 BEdford Bedford Avenue 24 CIrcle generic 25 CLeveland president from Buffalo 26 AMherst Amherst Street 27 BRidge Grand Island Bridge 28 ATwater generic 29 CYpress generic 32 FAirview generic 33 DElaware Delaware Avenue 34 FIllmore Fillmore Avenue 35 ELmwood Elmwood Avenue 37 FRanklin Franklin Street 38 EVergreen generic 39 EXport generic 42 GArfield generic 43 IDlewood generic 46 HObart generic 47 GRant Grant Street 48 HUmboldt Humboldt Park 52 JAckson generic 53 KEystone generic 54 LIncoln generic 58 LUdlow generic 62 MAdison generic 64 NIagara Niagara Street 66 MOhawk Mohawk Street 69 OXford generic 72 PArkside Parkside Avenue 73 REgent generic 74 RIverside Riverside Park 75 PLaza generic 76 SOuth South Park 77 SPring generic 78 SUmmer generic 82 TAylor generic 84 VIctoria generic 86 UNiversity University of Buffalo 87 TRiangle generic 92 WAshington Washington Street 94 WIndsor generic 96 WOodlawn Woodlawn Avenue Col. G. L. Sicherman gls@windmill.att.COM ------------------------------ Date: 13 Sep 92 20:23:00 PST From: Jacobson, Andy Subject: Re: New Phone Number Intercept I believe ye olde Bell System did have a specific message for numbers-to-be. It went something like (This was before the tri-tone era): The number you have reached, NNX-XXXX, has not yet been connected. Please try your call again later. IBT used to have that recording on between order and due dates. Now that was service. A. Jacobson ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses From: morpheus@entropy.mcds.com (morpheus) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 05:50:02 EDT stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > Here's a question of my own: Are there any modems that detect the CPC > signal? A common problem with our Hayes Ultra 9600's that we have for > dialup are that if the 9600 bps negotiation fails for some reason such > that "NO CARRIER" is returned instead of a fallback to 2400, the modem > at the host end is apparently still trying to negotiate, and remains > offhook for another 30-45 seconds. This means that if you immediately > retry the connection, you get a busy signal. It would be nice to have > the modem immediately reset when it sees the CPC indicating that the > caller has gone away. I've never seen this in any modem (not that > I've looked very hard), and wonder why it is not a standard feature. > It would seem to me that detecting loss of loop current would not be > an expensive feature to engineer. And if a line doesn't give CPC, > then the modem would act as it does now anyway. I *believe* US Robotics modems do this. My Dual Standard (sup v 3.0) seems to. If I call the modem and wait until it picks up before hanging up the telephone, the modem instantly reports "NO CARRIER". All in all, I must say I have found the US Robotics modems to be of very high quality. Things like touch-tone decoding and MI/MIC appeal to the hacker in me ;-) (now just if it did A/A1 closure!). No, I don't work for 'em. morpheus@entropy.mcds.com /\/\/\/ morpheus@f208.n2606.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: smazu@ameris.ameritech.com (Steven P. Mazurek) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: Ameritech, Hoffman Estates, IL Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 12:46:08 GMT In article , rjhawkin@mothra.syr.edu (The Virtual Kid) writes: > In article disk!tony@uunet.UU.NET > (tony) writes: > Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word > -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:". In at least on document I've seen it referred to as an "octothorpe", but I've never found a dictionary with this word. Steven P. Mazurek | Email : {...,uunet,bcr,ohumc}!ameris!smazu Ameritech Services | smazu@ameris.center.il.ameritech.com Hoffman Estates, IL USA 60196 | Phone : (708) 248-5075 [Moderator's Note: An octothorpe is the term you see used here in the Digest frequently. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 15:42:22 -0400 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H. Shrikumar) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst In article is written: >>> The # sign? The POUND sign! > > quite popular. It is called the "pound sign" because it has been used > for centuries as a symbol for pounds avoirdupois (as opposed to pounds > sterling). You can probably find it marking the weight of many large > shipping boxes. My DEC keyboard has the symbols # and the Pound Sterling on the shift-3 key. That, and also I have heard so too, that in the UK they use the same ASCII code space as the # for the pound-sterling is probably a reason why its called the pound sign. Sometiome back, (was it?) IEEE spectrum has a box on this controversy, and concluded that "hash" is the best alternative, since it needs least literacy, and is easiest to guess if you did not know already, not only among the keys of the impoversished Keypad, but also a QWERTY (or AZERTY :-) keyborad. Amen! shrikumar (shri@legaot.cs.umass.edu) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #706 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14035; 14 Sep 92 0:39 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06637 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:31:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09002 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:30:56 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:30:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209140330.AA09002@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #707 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Sep 92 22:31:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 707 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes? (Alan L. Varney) Re: Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes? (Ron Dippold) Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? (John R. Levine) Re: Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere? (Mark D. Wuest) Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Justin Leavens) Re: Vermont Payphones (John R. Levine) Re: Vermont Payphones (David G. Lewis) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes? Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 00:00 GMT In article sequent!islabs!fasttech! zeke@uunet.UU.NET (Bohdan Tashchuk) writes: > Several recent messages have mentioned there will soon be a change > from three-digit to four-digit long distance carrier identification > codes. Why is this change necessary? > I've only ever had a use for three different codes: 10222, 10288, and > 10333. I'm sure that sophisticated users need many more than this, > but are four digits really necessary? Is there a reluctance to re-use > old codes freed up because of mergers, bankruptcy, etc? Well, I only use a hand full of NPAs, but that doesn't mean we aren't running out of them :-) The change is needed for the obvious reason: Most XXX codes are already assigned, and (unlike electromagnetic spectrum) the FCC doesn't want to limit the number of competitors in "telecom" by limiting a resource (the XXX codes). Prior to divestiture, the original Carrier Interconnect requirements specified provisions for 100 ICs (00 to 99) -- no one really thought there would be more companies than this actually running cable/fiber and buying switches, etc. Late in the requirements phase, the Carrier Access Code went to three digits. There was an explicit binding of 950-WXXX and 10XXX numbers to the same carrier. So what happened? Are we lousy planners? Well, maybe. Several factors have emerged to change the "IC" marketplace, and "use up" the XXX codes -- (I'm sure Bellcore (as the NANP Administrator) could give you even more reasons!): 1) An IC doesn't have to own switches or networks or anything other than an XXX code, some billing system and (maybe) some trunks -- they can get an XXX code, contract with a "real" IC for service, and hope to profit from the IC's "bulk" rates or other discount arrangements. While this was mentioned as a possibility in discussions, I (and others) didn't believe there would ever be enough economic leverage to make this a "common" practice. 2) It was imagined that regional carriers could exist and that XXX codes could be assigned on a regional basis -- 10999 could be New England Oil and Telephone Co. in one area and Southern Beer and Telco in another. The reality was that no carrier would ever want to restrict itself to one region -- what if it were wildly successful (wants to grow) or not (junk bond candidate for non-regional takeover). No one wants to share what might be a valuable asset (an XXX code). 3) The "interim-only" access via 950-WXXX was tariffed in a way that attracted non-ICs (other Service Providers, etc.). This used up a lot of XXX values. Those XXX values couldn't be shared with a 10XXX-only carrier, because the 950 customer didn't want to share either. 4) Several ICs have requested multiple XXX codes, to allow service identification based on the code. This was partly the result of a failure to develop another means of service identification and the means to assign "generic" service codes and simultaneously allow carriers to invent new services without negotiating service codes in a public arena (and thus divulging the service to the competition early). Bellcore's position is that neither NPAs nor XXXs should be used for identification of services or facilities -- but the alternative mechanisms appear to be either inadequate or inconvenient. 5) Mergers/buy-outs don't result in freeing up of XXX codes -- the customer base doesn't want to change their dialing habits or PICs, the rates might vary by XXX code (even though a single IC carries the traffic), and again -- why give up an asset? Use it or LOSE it! > How soon will this change occur? Will it be in an upward-compatible > fashion? Will I still be able to dial 10ATT when I need to avoid AOS > scum? Short answers: 1995, of course, sure -- but maybe not forever. If you're really interested in the details (as in willing to part with $35), Bellcore's TR-NWT-001050 has specifics on the transition capabilities to be supported by switches. The Carrier Liason Committee and it's sub-committees (NOF, ICCF, etc.) have planned a mid-1995 deadline for deployment of the expanded "capability" in RBOC/GTE switches. That's early enough to meet the worst-case needs for accessing the first XXXX carrier. When customers will actually be able to "dial" that carrier will depend on the actual need. The TR supports a phased approach in XXXX assignment that allows for growth to 2970 XXXX codes, and later (if needed) to 10,000 codes. Note that prior to this capability, TR-TSY-000698 had already been updated to allow FG-B signaling and 950-access to support 10,000 FG-B-only carriers -- that is, 950-XXXX was supported with only the original 950-0XXX and 950-1XXX ranges having a "transition to FG-D signaling" capability. This was in place around mid-1991. Briefly, for FG-D signaling and 10XXX access, the phases are: 1) Deploy switches, databases, operations systems, billing systems, etc. the support XXXX codes in all the internal communication paths (switch output messages, AMA records, SMDR, SCPs, etc.) 2) Convert inter-switch trunks (EO to AT, EO/AT to IC for International) to signal four-digit XXXX codes where-ever three was used before. 3) Enter the "permissive" dialing phase, where 10XXX still works for XXX values other than 1XX. For other codes, 101XXXX becomes the Carrier Access Code. This period may last for a LONG time (my opinion). 1010XXX also works to reach the old three-digit carriers. 4) Enter the "post-permissive" dialing phase, where 101XXXX must be used to access all FG-D carriers. Carriers with old XXX codes will automatically receive 0XXX codes. Only at this point will Bohdan and others be required to dial "1010288" in place of "10288". Al Varney -- this is my opinion today -- I might change it tomorrow! ------------------------------ From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) Subject: Re: Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes? Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 08:49:23 GMT sequent!islabs!fasttech!zeke@uunet.UU.NET (Bohdan Tashchuk) writes: > Several recent messages have mentioned there will soon be a change > from three-digit to four-digit long distance carrier identification > codes. Why is this change necessary? Here's a list of some of the codes -- not all are available from all locations, most require an account to use. This is the most complete table I've found, but it's not complete. It's getting crowded! The list is long, but interesting. No guarantees of accuracy implied, etc. 001 MidAmerican LD (Republic Telecom) 002 AmeriCall LDC 003 RCI Corporation 007 Tel America 011 Metromedia Long Distance 012 Charter Corporation (Tri-J) 013 Access Services 021 Mercury 022 MCI Telecommunications 023 Texnet 024 Petricca Communications Systems 028 Texnet 030 Valu-Line of Wichita Falls 031 Teltec Saving Communications 033 US Sprint 036 Long Distance Savers 039 Electronic Office Centers of America (EO/Tech) 042 First Phone 044 Allnet Communication Services (LDX, Lexitel) 053 American Network (Starnet) 056 American Satellite 057 Long Distance Satellite 059 COMNET 060 Valu-Line of West Texas 063 COMNET 069 V/COM 070 National Telephone Exchange 080 AMTEL Systems 084 Long Distance Service (LDS) 085 WesTel 088 Satellite Business Systems (MCI) 089 Telephone Systems 090 WesTel 093 Rainbow Communications 095 Southwest Communications 099 AmeriCall 122 RCA Global Communications 137 All America Cables and Radio (ITT) 142 First Phone 146 ARGO Communications 188 Satellite Business Systems 201 PhoneNet 202 ExecuLines 203 Cypress Telecommunications (Cytel) 204 United Telephone Long Distance 206 United Telephone Long Distance 211 RCI 212 Call US 213 Long Distance Telephone Savers 214 Tyler Telecom 215 Star Tel of Abilene 217 Call US 219 Call USA 220 Western Union Telegraph 222 MCI Telecommunications (SBS) 223 Cable & Wireless Communication (TDX) 224 American Communications 227 ATH Communications (Call America) 229 Bay Communications 232 Superior Telecom 233 Delta Communications 234 AC Teleconnect (Alternative Communication) 237 Inter-Comm Telephone 239 Woof Communications (ACT) 241 American Long Lines 242 Choice Information Systems 244 Automated Communications 245 Taconic Long Distance Service 250 Dial-Net 252 Long Distance/USA 253 Litel Telecommunications 255 All-State Communications 256 American Sharecom 260 Advanced Communications Systems 263 Com Systems (Sun Dial Communications) 268 Compute-A-Call 276 CP National (American Network, Starnet) 284 American Telenet 286 Clark Telecommunications 287 ATS Communications 288 AT&T Communications 298 Thriftline 302 Austin Bestline 303 MidAmerican LD (Republic Telecom) 311 SaveNet (American Network, Starnet) 318 Long Distance Savers 321 Southland Systems 322 American Sharecom 324 First Communication 331 Texustel 333 US Sprint 336 Florida Digital Network 338 Midco Communications 339 Communication Cable Laying 343 Communication Cable Laying 345 AC Teleconnect (Alternative Communication) 350 Dial-Net 355 US Link 357 Manitowoc Long Distance Service 362 Electronic Office Centers of America (EO/Tech) 363 Tel-Toll (Econ-O-Dial of Bishop) 369 American Satellite 373 Econo-Line Waco 375 Wertern Union Telegraph 385 The Switchboard 393 Execulines Florida 400 American Sharecom 404 MidAmerican LD (Republic Telecom) 412 Penn Telecom 428 Inter-Comm Telephone 432 Lightcall 435 Call-USA 436 Indiana Switch 440 Tex-Net 441 Escondido Telephone 442 First Phone 444 Allnet Communication Services (LDX, Lexitel) 455 Telecom Long Distance 456 ARGO Communications 462 American Network Services 464 Houston Network 465 Intelco 466 International Office Networks 469 GMW 472 Hal-Rad Communications 480 Chico Telecom (Call America) 488 United States Transmission Systems (ITT) 505 San Marcos Long Distance 515 Burlington Telephone 529 Southern Oregon Long Distance 532 Long Distance America 533 Long Distance Discount 536 Long Distance Management 550 Valu-Line of Alexandria 551 Pittsburg Communication Systems 552 First Phone 555 TeleSphere Networks 566 Cable & Wireless Communication (TDX) 567 Advanced Marketing Services (Dial Anywhere) 579 LintelSystem (Lincoln Telephone LD) 590 Wisconsin Telecommunications Tech 599 Texas Long Distance Conroe 601 Discount Communications Services 606 Biz Tel Long Distance Telephone 622 Metro America Communications 634 Econo-Line Midland 646 Contact America 654 Cincinnati Bell Long Distance 655 Ken-Tel Service 660 Tex-Net 666 Southwest Communications 675 Network Services 680 Midwest Telephone Service 682 Ashland Call America 684 Nacogdoches Telecommunications 687 NTS Communications 700 Tel-America 704 Inter-Exchange Communications 707 Telvue 709 Tel-America 717 Pass Word 726 Procom 727 Conroe-Comtel 735 Marinette-Menominee Lds 737 National Telecommunications 741 ClayDesta 742 Phone America of Carolina 743 Peninsula Long Distance Service 747 Standard Informations Services 755 Sears Communication 757 Pace Long Distance Service 759 Telenet Communication (US Sprint) 760 American Satellite 766 Yavapai Telephone Exchange 771 Telesystems 777 US Sprint 785 Olympia Telecom 786 Shared Use Network Service 787 Star Tel of Abilene 788 ASCI's Telepone Express Network 789 Microtel 792 Southwest Communications 800 Satelco 801 MidAmerican LD (Republic) 827 TCS Network Services 833 Business Telecom 839 Cable & Wireless Communication (TDX) 847 VIP Connections 850 TK Communications 852 Telecommunicatons Systems 859 Valu-Line of Longview 872 Telecommunications Services 874 Tri-Tel Communications 879 Thriftycall (Lintel Systems) 881 Coastal Telephone 882 Tuck Data Communications 883 TTI Midland-Odessa 884 TTI Midland-Odessa 885 The CommuniGroup 888 Satellite Business Systems (MCI) 895 Texas on Line 897 Leslie Hammond (Phone America) 898 Satellite Business Systems (MCI) 910 Montgomery Telamarketing Communication 915 Tele Tech 933 North American Communications 936 Rainbow Commuinications 937 Access Long Distance 938 Access Long Distance 951 Transamerica Telecommunications 955 United Communications 960 Access Plus 963 Tenex Communications 969 Dial-Net 985 America Calling 986 MCI Telecommunications (SBS) 987 ClayDesta Communications 988 Western Union Telegraph 991 Access Long Distance ------------------------------ Subject: Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 13 Sep 92 18:06:31 EDT From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future for the > NANP: dialling ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of whether > they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other Digest readers > think this would be acceptable? I expect we'll end up with two choices for dialing: NXX-XXXX for numbers within the same NPA, and 1-NXX-NXX-XXXX for numbers anywhere in the NANP. Here in New Jersey this is already the rule -- I can dial local calls with 1-609 and they complete normally. There has never been any "dial 1 for toll" here. They went directly from never requiring a 1 for any call to having it indicate that an area code follows. New Jersey still avoids duplicating prefixes near NPA boundaries, so all local calls can still be dialed with seven digits, even when they're into a neighboring NPA (except, for some reason, from pay phones.) Along with the fact that 609 is two LATAs, this means that from a phone in Princeton or in Barnegat, a seven digit call can be local intra-LATA, local inter-LATA, toll intra-LATA, or toll inter-LATA. Particularly with the increasing number of cellular phones and the advent of "overlay" area codes like 917 in New York, it's practically mandatory to allow people to dial the area code, since often it'll be difficult to tell the NPA of the calling phone. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: mdw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (mark.d.wuest) Subject: Re: Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere? Organization: AT&T Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 12:14:44 GMT In article simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov) writes: > I'm looking for a service; someone who can receive my fax and route it > to me by e-mail as a TIFF file or after running a character > recognition program. I'm not sure what they'd charge, but a fax/modem for my NeXT is under $500 (PeeCee stuff is actually a tad cheaper) and the software does just this -- provides a TIFF. It also makes for an inexpensive scanner (only 150 dpi, tho). Mark Wuest *MY* opinions, not AT&T's!! mark.wuest@att.com mdw@cheshire.att.com (NeXT Mail) ------------------------------ From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers Date: 13 Sep 1992 08:33:44 -0700 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA > In article I wrote: >> 'You may already have won'). Strangely enough, this was a real check >> for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance' In article GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ru\derman) writes: > I got one for only $20 earlier in the summer. Since I did not switch, > you are the beneficiary of them increasing the amount. No if you > hadn't switched the next check would have been for $80 and then if ... Several c.d.t. readers have informed me that checks up to $100 have been issued in this promotion, the amount of the check depending on your long-distance usage patterns. I guess I finally have something to thank my old roommates for. Justin Leavens University of Southern California ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Vermont Payphones Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 13 Sep 92 16:07:41 EDT From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > 1) I didn't see a single COCOT. Are they illegal in the state? > 2) A very high proportion of NETel payphones had rotary dials. Tone > service was clearly available to residence and business customers, > but I didn't see a single payphone with keypad in Stowe or surrounds. Stowe had a four-digit SxS until a few years ago, so there wouldn't have been much point in putting in tone phones. In places where they've had modern exchanges longer, e.g. Burlington or Woodstock, most of the pay phones are touch. The old Stowe exchange wasn't equal access, either, making it harder to install COCOTs. I've seen COCOTs in Vermont, albeit not as many as in more urban states. > 3) The NETel payphones seem to have several different default LD > carriers. I would have thought the LEC would sign up with a single > carrier for all its phones. Sometimes the default was AT&T for both > 1+ and 0+ calls; in other cases it was AT&T for 1+ and (say) USSprint > for 0+. Every telco pay phone in the US sends 1+ calls to AT&T, because they're the only ones set up to handle inter-LATA coin paid calls. It is my understanding that the 0+ carrier is chosen by the owner of the premises where the phone is placed, or the town for phones on the sidewalk. > So who was right? Should my Bell card number work with Sprint? > Do US LEC cards work with Sprint? It should have worked, and US LEC cards do work for Sprint calls. But the US and Canadian data bases seem to be separate with a gateway (e.g., when I used my NET card in Nova Scotia a live operator cut in and said to wait a minute for the validation) and I can easily believe that Sprint has trouble going through the gateway. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Vermont Payphones Organization: AT&T Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 13:06:21 GMT In article Tony Harminc writes: > 3) The NETel payphones seem to have several different default LD > carriers. I would have thought the LEC would sign up with a single > carrier for all its phones. LECs were obligated (by, I believe, the FCC) to presubscribe 0+ long distance from payphones to IXCs in a ratio that was comparable to the presubscription ratios for their (residential or residential+business) customers. Since only AT&T has the capability to handle coin-sent-paid traffic, AT&T is the presubscribed IXC for 1+ traffic. [Long story about difficulty using calling card from a phone PIC'd to Sprint deleted.] > I dialed 10288, told AT&T all about it, and was connected in a few > seconds. If I were a marketing type, I'd say something clever like "it's just not worth it ...", but I'm just a techie, so I'll leave well enough alone ;-) David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #707 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17004; 14 Sep 92 1:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13882 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 23:44:58 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07065 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 13 Sep 1992 23:44:47 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 23:44:47 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209140444.AA07065@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #708 TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Sep 92 23:44:39 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 708 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: GTE Community Involvment (John Higdon) Re: GTE Community Involvment (Laird P. Broadfield) Re: How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages (Robert L. McMillin) Re: How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages (David Horvath) Re: The Emperor's New Figleaf (root@sanger.chem.nd.edu) Re: AT&T 'Buying Back' Customers (Marc T. Kaufman) Re: Vermont Payphones (Andy Sherman) Re: Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex (John Higdon) Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers (Robert L. Ullmann) Re: Cellular Frequencies (Randy Gellens) Re: Cellular Frequencies (B. J. Guillot) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 00:30 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: GTE Community Involvment steven@alchemy.uucp writes: > Well Mr. Higdon you failed to check your facts on that one. I beg your pardon. What facts are you talking about? GTE does not even have a business presence in this community. How in the hell is it supposed to do community involvement? It is a mystery company that hides out at the end of an 800 number. > For years GTE has supplied its people to work with the LA Raiders on > its Food Day game. Each year well over 500 GTE people are at the GTE > sponsered GTE West Golf Classic which is used to support a shelter for > battered wives. Not around here it doesn't. Oh, I forgot. Northern California does not count, even though there are a number of communities here that are "served" by GTE. > It sponsers Public TV programs and many other local community events > in its service areas. If you were to contact your area public affairs > office they could tell you more. What do you call a "service area"? Do Morgan Hill, Los Gatos, and Novato not qualify as "service areas"? You cannot even pay your bill in person in those towns at a GTE office because there are none. > We were also involved with over 1000 volunteers in the 1984 Olympics > in LA. We were at the Super Bowl in Pasadena and will be there again > for public service. 'GTE People' is not very well known. And what will happen when GTE up and moves its puny presence, such as it is, out of southern California? Where are these volunteers going to come from? Florida? North Carolina? Texas? That IS dedication. It is also ridiculous. > Maybe we should blow our horns more often, but we are more > interested in just doing our community service and not caring if > anyone really knows about it since we do and that is all that really > counts. What a cheap shot. Pac*Bell does not "blow its horn". I am aware of its involvment because I, myself, am involved in community service and I happen to bump elbows with Pac*Bell people. I have yet to bump any elbows with GTE people. The last time I even saw anyone who worked for GTE is when I made a service appointment a week in advance. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: It so happens that GTE has been a benefactor of the Lyric Opera here in Chicago in the past; in the Illinois communities where they operate they have been involved with school educational programs; and Automatic Electric did a number of community-oriented things in the northwest suburban area here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: GTE Community Involvment Date: 13 Sep 92 18:13:07 GMT In steven@alchemy.uucp writes: > Well Mr. Higdon you failed to check your facts on that one. > For years GTE has supplied its people to work with the LA Raiders on > its Food Day game. Each year well over 500 GTE people are at the GTE > sponsered GTE West Golf Classic which is used to support a shelter for > battered wives. It sponsers Public TV programs and many other local > community events in its service areas. If you were to contact your > area public affairs office they could tell you more. These poor GTE guys, they can't win for trying. :-) Steven, I don't know what John would agree with me, but I'm not particularly interested in whether or not GTE (or PB) support the Great Horned Wombat Extinction Drive, or whatever other silly causes they're spending revenue dollars thay got from *me* on. What's significant is that PB can provide quality service and support, 24 hours, seven days, midnight on Christmas Eve if you like, and *still* perform "good works." First, provide a quality product; *then* be a "good citizen." Perhaps if those 500 people (and oodles of dollars) were spent in support of *customers*, you'd hear fewer quality complaints. Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 12:50:04 -0700 From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages Paul Robinson writes: > For persons wishing to make their Internet address public, you may > register it with the "Internet White Pages" which are maintained by > the Network Information Center (NIC), the same people who register and > assign Internet domains. [details omitted] > The address to E-Mail requests to be listed in the NIC "Internet White > Pages" is: HOSTMASTER@NIC.DDN.MIL The people at that address said that they only register the names of people who are network points of contact; they wouldn't register me! What gives? Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@indigo2.hac.com ------------------------------ Date: 13 Sep 92 11:06:36 EST From: David Horvath Subject: Re: How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages There have been some posts that suggest that the NIC will register general Internet users in a "White Pages" directory. According to the following, that just isn't so: *** Forwarding note from SMTP --PENNSAS 09/11/92 10:27 *** Subject: Re: Internet white pages To: DHORVATH@PENNSAS.UPENN.EDU (David Horvath) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 10:27:15 EDT Cc: confirm@nic.ddn.mil (Confirm Role) > Please send me information on adding this address to the white > pages. I'd also like information on accessing the white pages > through e-mail or FTP. Hello, It has been the NIC's policy to only register Internet users who are points of contacts for domains, networks, hosts, and gateways. We appreciate your patience and look forward to assisting you with your networking needs in the future. Sincerely yours, Network Information Center ------------------------------ From: Doctor Math Subject: Re: The Emperor's New Figleaf Organization: University of Notre Dame Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 05:10:00 GMT In article ANTENNA@CSEARN.BITNET (Robert Horvitz) writes: > Adrienne Voorhis recently asked readers of the TELECOM Digest: >> Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow >> you to legally monitor [mobile radio] broadcasts but can stop you >> from disclosing what was heard? > The Communications Act of 1934 allows you to receive any radio signal > that comes to you. But when you aren't "authorized" to receive it, > you cannot tell others what you heard or exploit the content for > "gain" (courts usually interpret "gain" as "financial gain"). Entirely hypothetical: Suppose I'm hearing something really interesting on my (illegally) modified scanner. The cellphone is in a parked car, so I can remain "locked in" on the frequency that has been assigned it for this cell. 1. Someone else is in the room with me. Do I tell them not to listen? 2. I call my friend who lives around the corner (within range of the transmissions) and tell him to listen to XXX MHz. 3. Noticing that the conversation is between my friend's boss and the CEO of the company, I call my friend and tell him to listen to XXX MHz. In each of these scenarios, I did not actually disclose the nature of the communications. In two and three, I inform someone else that the communications are in progress and tell them where they might listen to them. In three, there is some possibility of "gain" (my friend can perhaps advance his career with some "inside information"; logically this translates into a raise, so the "gain" could be considered financial). Did I break the law? ------------------------------ From: kaufman@xenon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying Back' Customers Reply-To: kaufman@cs.stanford.edu Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA Date: 13 Sep 92 20:06:47 GMT levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) writes: > I have a business line which has what New England Tel calls "Remote > Call Forwarding". This means that my business number is permenantly > and forever forwarded to another number. That phone number only > appears in the CO. Since there can never be a phone connected to it, > it would be impossible to ever make an outgoing call on it. > A few months back I received one of the AT&T chechs in the mail that I > could cash if I was willing to switch this line to them. I cashed the > check and allowed them to switch this line to AT&T. A few weeks > later, I received a letter from AT&T thanking me for switching. > I guess if I ever made a LD call and charged it to that number, it > would be billed through AT&T, but I am not likely to do that. I have such a line, and a calling card attached to the number. Whenever I use the calling card, AT&T calls me a few nights later and asks me if I want to switch. I always say yes, and get my $20 in vouchers, or whatever. What makes this so much fun, is that the originating CO (in my case) does not keep a record of a 1+ carrier for the forwarding entry, so every time AT&T checks they discover that the 1+ carrier is NOT AT&T. So they call me again and offer to give me $20 to switch. I think I currently have a net credit on long distance charges. Attempts to explain the situation to the marketing droids are not successful. So I figure I have done my due dilligence and cash the voucher. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@CS.Stanford.EDU) ------------------------------ From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Re: Vermont Payphones Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 16:21:24 EDT On 11 Sep 92 00:30:10 GMT, TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA (Tony Harminc) said: > I spent a few very pleasant days of vacation in Vermont, and noticed a > couple of curious things making calls from payphones: > 3) The NETel payphones seem to have several different default LD > carriers. I would have thought the LEC would sign up with a single > carrier for all its phones. Sometimes the default was AT&T for both > 1+ and 0+ calls; in other cases it was AT&T for 1+ and (say) USSprint > for 0+. As I recall, payphone equal access was part of the orderly process of dismantling the Bell System. The LECs were required to spread the 0+ business for the LEC-owned payphones around among the carriers, approximately in proportion to their share of PICs at the time of the conversion. Thus, even in as small a state as Vermont (no slur intended) the LEC could not cut a package deal with a single 0+ carrier. 1+ is a different animal entirely. As you noticed, only one carrier, AT&T, had the 1+ business. That's because only one carrier, AT&T, offers the service of collecting coins in payment for an interexchange call. I assume there's not enough profit in it for the other carriers. In the past, I've made that statement in this forum and been severely flamed by a couple folks from the anti-AT&T crowd. Their argument was that the rules are stacked in AT&T's favor, making it impossible for anybody else to enter the coin-paid market. My counter argument is simple: the OCC's, especially MCI, have never been reluctant to go to court for the right to offer a service providing huge profits. If there was oodles of money to be made in coin calls (as opposed to bits of money and a tradition of full service to uphold), you can bet that big bad Ma would be having her drawers sued off over coin calls. On a related note, anybody know whatever happened to the attempt by some carriers to get the FCC to ban AT&T's CIID calling cards? 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: Sun, 13 Sep 92 13:26 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex williamsk@gtephx.UUCP (Kevin W. Williams) writes: > Luckily, the manufacturer is on the Internet. Unfortunately, for > historical reasons (the great Higdon/Williams/Baker Flame War of > 1992), I would rather not take up discussion of the GTD-5 on the > telecom bulletin board, I will have you know that I have stopped bad-mouthing the GTD-5. I find a much more effective way to respond to inquiries about that equipment. I simply point out that Los Gatos is service by GTD-5 switches, then I invite the person to contact ANYONE in that town and ask him or her for an opinion of the telephone service. All the venom I could spew could not do a more effective job of getting the message across! The GTD-5 is its own best (worst?) advertisement. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: ariel@world.std.com (Robert L Ullmann) Subject: Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers Organization: The World in Boston Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 02:53:05 GMT Richard Cox writes: > Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future for the > NANP: dialling ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of whether > they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other Digest readers > think this would be acceptable? Actually, the dial plan I want is just the full number. International number. I dial 11 digits most of the time anyway -- 1 + NPA + 7 -- to get from NPA 617 (where I live, +1 617 247 7959) to NPA 508 (where I work, and my parents live.) If I could pick up the phone and dial the full number, with none of this "you must dial 1/you must _not_ dial 1" bull manure, that would suit me just fine. Overall, it would mean _fewer_ keypresses. (never hitting 011, no 9-1 or 9-011 from PBXs. Ever forgot you were at home and dialed 9-1-something with a double bounce on the '1'? Embarrassing.) Think about traveling in foreign countries and being able to pick up any phone and just dial the same number you use from anywhere else? (The Phone Company discovers FQDNs ... :-) Now _that_ is _real_ international standardization. Robert Ullmann Ariel@World.STD.COM +1 508 879 6994 x226 ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 14 SEP 92 04:33 GMT Subject: Re: Cellular Frequencies Pat, our Moderator, notes: > One 'problem' (smirk!) reported by people who illegally monitor cellular > conversations via their scanner is that one never gets to hear the *entire* > conversation from start to finish. The scanner will be cycling -- searching > for something -- and lock in on a conversation in progress. As one listener > put it, " ... about the time the conversation started to get juicy -- really > interesting to listen to -- the vehicle moved out of range and the tower > dropped the call, giving it to another tower somewhere. I tried stepping > quickly around the band manually, but never could find it. " Pat, I don't imagine this would be too big a problem if one were to live in an area with frequent traffic congestion, say near a California highway or resort town. In such a case, it would be far more likely for the vehicle to stay put, while the occupant carries on a nice long chat. 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 [Moderator's Note: Well the same situation exists here in Chicago during the past few years; traffic during the day and early evening moves at a snail's pace on the main roads and highways ... but some people tend to stay on the cell phone a long time, I guess, especially if someone else is footing the bill for them, i.e. local politicians with cell phones here who charge it off to government paid expense accounts. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cellular Frequencies From: unkaphaed!bguillot@uunet.UU.NET (B.J. Guillot) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 15:11:27 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy > Ahhh -- too bad! It is illegal to listen to cellular calls, period. It > is also quite easy to do the mods required on most scanners with 800 > megs capability to bring those frequencies in. Some Radio Shack > dealers sell the PRO-34 scanner (my model) with a straight look on > their face then on your way out the door hand you a crudely photocopied > sheet of paper with pictures of the circuit board telling you to pull > diode D-3 and D-4 to recover the full band ... but only to be done > when the scanner is being exported outside the USA, of course ... of > course! PAT] Ah, ... but what might have to be done, if say, I wanted to take my PRO-37 scanner from Radio Shack out of the country to pick up that band uninterrupted? I looked in the new 93 and the older 92 catalog and couldn't find any reference to PRO-34. bguillot@unkaphaed.UUCP (B.J. Guillot) Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, (713) 943-2728 in Houston, Texas 1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis [Moderator's Note: I dunno about the PRO-37. I've not seen it in operation or looked at the innards. You might *carefully* pull D-4 and see what happens. Be prepared to reinsert it if necessary. Did I mention that on the PRO-34 at least, pulling those two diodes also causes you to *lose* 30-50 megs, but who cares about that territory anyway. In return, in addition to full 800 coverage, the scanner acquires a new range from 68 to 88 megs, apparently a territory used in Europe. Around Chicago, there is very little in 30-50. Almost everyone in the metro area has migrated to VHF, UHF and T-Band. One very interesting thing about the 68-70 megs area is that you can sometimes get your neighbor's cordless phones and baby monitors there by using a technique in scanning called the 'magic number': take the intermediate frequency of the unit (the 'IF'), double it precisely and add that value to the desired frequency, then tune to the new number. For example using approximate numbers, if a cordless phone is on 49.1 megs and your scanner's IF is 10 megs, you add (10*2 = 20) to 49.1 and tune the scanner to 69.1 (assuming the mods were done, etc). You won't hear as well as actually at 49.1, but you will hear stuff if you have anyone close by using a cordless phone on that frequency. And some of the Regency direct entry scanners are a gas: due to a programming error in the ROM, if you enter the decimal point *first*, you can get them to scan in all sorts of otherwise inaccessible areas. Does anyone remember the old *tunable* (tuning knob and hairline guage) VHF receivers? I built one from a Heathkit about 35 years ago and listened to all the exciting stuff on VHF in those days. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #708 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18839; 14 Sep 92 2:54 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13323 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:18:38 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10866 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:18:24 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:18:24 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209140518.AA10866@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #709 TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Sep 92 00:18:18 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 709 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Here We Go Again :-( (Roy M. Silvernail) Re: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? (John R. Levine) Re: Voice Message Service (Dave Levenson) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Alan L. Varney) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Lauren Weinstein) Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" (Adam M Gaffin) Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" (Laurence Chiu) Re: Kauai Communications Out (John Higdon) Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Mark W. Schumann) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Mark W. Schumann) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Rich Mintz) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Donald B. Burton) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Here We Go Again :-( From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 23:45:36 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) writes: > Here's the good part. There's a $.15 per minute charge to use the > service. IMAO, I can't see why anyone would pay a per-minute charge > to look up info on a system when they can simply flip through the good > (??) old-fashioned tree-wasting, bicep-building, landfill-clogging > yellow pages, now available in two competing editions. Oh, it gets better ... I got to talk to a USWest droid at the State Fair a couple of weeks ago: The software is a Minitel emulation, but it's proprietary. You can't use a generic Minitel package to access it. The software is $15 to $25. They rarely give it away free. Your calling card is your Account ID, and all charges are billed to it. I count 29 offerings in the user guide. The prices range from free (for pay-your-bills-online) to $0.62/min for "over 500 business-oriented French services". There are several Minitel services available, as though everyone in Minneapolis needs to look up phone numbers for Nice. Oh, and here's a nice one ... Service ID: EXP Information services for the hearing-impaired. $0.15/min. "Express provides fast, powerful and economical communications. Chat, E-mail, conferencing and bulletin boards." Not bad for ... $9/hour? Bwa-ha-ha-ha! Even CompuServe is a better deal than that! And you're not stuck with that rotten Minitel interface. > I sure wish Ma Bell would cure herself of this case of anal-cranial > inversion and realize that it would be MORE PROFITABLE in the long run > to offer the service to consumers for free and save the > money/trees/effort it takes to print and distribute directories. I told the droid that they should give the software away if they expect it to catch on. I got the most amazingly vacant stare. > For some reason, I can't imagine people are gonna beat down the doors > of US West in anxious attempts to use this service. Let's just say I didn't take up the offer of an introductory software package for $14.95. Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 14 Sep 92 00:10:56 EDT From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > The /lowest/ fees on the system were $.05/minute, and that was > charged for services like the Joslyn Art Museum's calendar, which I > could read at the building for free or call a telephone touchtone > system and get for free. More standard were rates like $.10 or > $.15/min. This sounds very much like the gateway service that New England Tel tried a year or two ago. The price was very high and nearly everything was available elsewhere cheaper, often for free. People who tried it tell me that no matter how fast your modem was, data arrived at 1200 bps. When they discontinued it NET whined that it was because they weren't allowed to provide content. Now they have a Minitel-based directory service but they haven't publicized it much. People who've tried it say it's laughably bad, and probably mostly exists so NET can try to get services grandfathered in case the regulators sensibly continue to regulate them out of the content business. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Voice Message Service Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 04:25:52 GMT In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: [ regarding COCOTS which provide message store and forward services ] > There have been COCOTs doing this in some areas for well over two > years. Of course, they are only able to do this on long distance calls > since the COCOT operator has absolutely no local access other than > dial tone. The LEC has interim access and can manipulate the call, > local or not. There are some COCOTS in the Hoboken, NJ, railroad station which provide message store-and-forward on local calls. How do they do this? Apparently, the store and forward is done entirely within the telephone set. I sent myself a message, and when it was delivered two hours later, the Caller*ID that accompanied the delivery was the number of the COCOT I had placed the original call from. The telephone sets are the ones with yellow LCD displays just below the coin-slot that display the price of a call after you've dialed it, and then suggest that you might want to leave a message, if you get a busy signal, or if you hang up without getting answer supervision. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 10:23:01 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article andrew@frip.wv.tek.com writes: >> Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future >> for the NANP: dialing ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of >> whether they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other >> Digest readers think this would be acceptable?" > Absolutely not. But I didn't think switching from five to seven > digits for intra-exchange calls was acceptable either ... When my home-town exchange went non-SXS last year, they lost the ability to use four-digit local dialing -- even though the switch could have supported the town as a Centrex group with four digits. But things change ... > [Moderator's Note: The options would seem to be seven digits for local > (probably the majority of the) calls one makes and eleven digits for > all others or ten digits for everything since if an area code is > always required then the leading digit '1' could be dropped. I > personally prefer the current arrangement even if I do have to dial > 1-708 for many of my local calls. PAT] Fred's comment (in a published "planning guide") was not individual opinion, but that of the "North American Numbering Plan Administration", headed up by Fred. You have to view the comment in context with the REASON for the comment. The guide assumes a time 20-30 years hence, when the use of overlay NPA's will cause a lot of "local" calls to require dialing of another NPA. In such cases, the callers from those numbers will have to (usually) dial "1+" on a majority of their calls. All callers will have to remember to check the NPA of any neighbor's or business phone they use, to determine if 1+NPA is needed. Also, in 30 years, many calls will be made from phones that have the intelligence to do dialing from other stimulus (voice, etc.). Thus, requiring ten-digit dialing will not be "onerous" and will permit calling any party without the need to first know from where one is calling. And it will "free up" the leading "1" for other uses, perhaps in aiding the conversion to 4-digit NPAs in the far-distant future -- if the first such NPAs are 1XXX, they could be easily differentiated from the "old" NXX-XXX-XXXX numbers. Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 12:02 PDT From: lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Greetings. I for one would welcome the ability to dial all ten digits on local calls. Where I sit here in the L.A. area, where the actual city of L.A. has three different area codes, I can dial *local* calls in all three codes. It is becoming an ever increasing mess when people assume you're in the same code they are (because, after all, you're local) and don't bother giving you the area code. If everyone dialed ten digits routinely, and gave out all ten digits to everyone when giving out a number (I certainly do the latter, regardless of where they are) it would be much more consistent. What irks me is that even if I *want* to dial all ten for local calls I'm not permitted to, forcing once again the silly situation of dialing seven digits for some local calls and 11 (1 + ten) for others. Another advantage of a move to ten digit universal dialing would be the ability to help avoid area code splits and the disruptions those splits cause (especially to businesses). For example, as population density increased in an area, a new area code could be assigned that would exist right alongside the old one in that same area. Of course this would require dialing all ten digits even for local calls. But the technique of just adding a mass of new numbers to an area, rather than disrupting all the current numbers by area code splits, makes a great deal of sense. The way to accomplish this all is pretty clear. Step one, allow people to optionally dial their own area code on calls within their code. Encourage people to use all ten digits, always. After a suitable span of time and appropriate publicity, start adding new codes and requiring ten digit dialing. I think that most people wouldn't object to this in the long run if it were explained to them that this could avoid the hassles of having to change their area code whenever they're "split out" of an existing code. With so many metro areas undergoing *multiple* splits, this would make a good deal of sense. Hey Bellcore -- you can count on my public support if you want to give this plan a try! --Lauren-- ------------------------------ From: adamg@world.std.com (Adam M Gaffin) Subject: Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 02:40:04 GMT The movie is also flawed in its otherwise highly entertaining press kit. Unlike all other movies, which have old-fashioned paper press kits, this one only has one on a computer diskette. The graphics are very nice and colorful and fun and all that. But in a section about hacker history, that big AT&T long-distance collapse a couple years back was blamed on information stolen by the Legion of Doom from BellSouth's 911 system (rather, than, say, software problems at Bedminister, NJ)! Fortunately, movie critics don't tend to care about such stuff, so I doubt you'll see that "factoid" in print anywhere. Adam Gaffin Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass. adamg@world.std.com Voice: (508) 626-3968. Fred the Middlesex News Computer: (508) 872-8461. ------------------------------ From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 01:56:58 GMT In article bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg) writes: > Alas, there was no seductive gun-toting NSA agent to be yanked > away from the dinner table. The film industry's normal flawless > attention to telecom detail :-) failed it here: (415) 273-4196 is now > in area code (510). I don't know what would have been said (at least > on the side of the call in our town!) had someone answered, but the > matter is academic. The number has not been assigned in that area > code. At least, as far as we know. Would we have been rattled if > the phone rang right back when we hung up? Maybe just a little. I haven't seen the movie yet but I am surprised. In almost all movies I've seen (or TV shows for that matter) where a phone number is identified, it's invariably 555-nnnn. This I presume is an invalid number always except perhaps for n=1212 so to avoid telephone phreaks calling the number to see who's there and annoying some poor soul who just happens to possess that number. Laurence Chiu lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 01:43 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out On Sep 12 at 17:59, TELECOM Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: John, I *really* don't think GTE is quite as bad as > you make them out to be; and certainly the events in Hawaii during the > past day would be a severe challenge for any telco Well, I will grant you that a hurricane may be special circumstances, but GTE is as bad as all of that. Notice that all telephone communications with the island have been cut. One would assume that a link as important as that would be backed up just a little bit. For instance, an undersea fiber cable to Oahu would not be out of line. And it would be immune to storm damage. But that would have required planning and intelligence, something in very short supply in the GTE family of telcos. I really do hope that considering the anguish of relatives and the actual suffering of island residents that GTE manages to rise to the occasion and restore telephone service in a timely manner. And then maybe someone can look into why all communications to and from the island were able to be knocked out in the first place. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 01:31 EDT From: catfood@wariat.org (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Publi Access UNI* Site joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes: > leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) writes: >> I received a mailing >> from AT&T, and I was immediately annoyed by this check-looking thing I >> saw inside (it looked like one of those things that are usually marked >> 'You may already have won'). Strangely enough, this was a real check >> for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance' >> or something like that. Anyway, I guess the deal is that if you cash >> the check, you agree to switch over to AT&T. I'll take $40 over my MCI >> totebags and Sprint AM/FM radios anyday ... > Are you sure this is a bona-fide _check_, and not a voucher? AT&T was > offering a number of switch-back programs, but so far the only ones > I've heard about involved them "paying" in _future_ long distance > service discounts; not actual cash. Yep, it's a real check. I'm trying to figure out how to cash the check without triggering the switch-back. Crossing out the fine print? Nah ... Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA Preferred: mark@whizbang.wariat.org | Alternative: catfood@wariat.org ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 01:33 EDT From: catfood@wariat.org (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Publi Access UNI* Site "Octothorpe." Digital calls it that so it must be right. :-) Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA Preferred: mark@whizbang.wariat.org | Alternative: catfood@wariat.org ------------------------------ From: rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: California State University, Chico Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:58:30 GMT Based on my experience living in the U.S., in the great majority of cases "#" is pronounced here in one of two ways, depending on the context. (1) "number", when it's an obvious substitution for that word, and (2) "pound", when identifying the matching symbol on a standard DTMF keypad or when used with computers. Without exception, all voice mail systems I've ever encountered refer to it as "the pound key", but most follow with "located in the bottom right corner of your touch-tone keypad" to avoid possible confusion because of its not-so-standardized name. I lived for a year in Spain, and I remember one guy looking my laptop computer's keyboard over and saying he had never seen the "#" before, and asking me what it was (it's shift-3 on most U.S. keyboards, I believe). They don't have touch-tone-dialing there, so he wouldn't have seen it from a telephone keypad, and he had nil computer experience so wouldn't have recognized it from that kind of exposure either. [Spanish phones do have keypads for dialing, but each button just produces the appropriate number of pulses on the line to simulate rotary dialing.] I guess what you call it depends on where you are. 8-) Rich -> rmintz@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu ------------------------------ From: uflorida!novavax!burtond@gatech.edu (Donald B. Burton) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Date: 13 Sep 92 18:25:46 GMT Organization: Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, FL # is commonly called the pound sign or the number sign ... and less commonly the crosshatch, the tic-tac-toe ... and even octothorpe. MCI started using it to indicate you want to continue a second call on the same billing. Now AT&T and Sprint also use them. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #709 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18981; 14 Sep 92 2:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17666 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:48:14 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16278 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:48:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:48:07 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209140548.AA16278@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #710 TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Sep 92 00:48:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 710 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: MCI Telemarketing (John Higdon) Re: MCI Telemarketing (Paul Wallich) Re: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? (Richard Nash) Re: How do YOU Use "Break" Signals? (Jeff Sicherman) Re: 911 For Everything (was 911 on Jerry Springer Show) Re: 911 Emergency Service Instead of 999 (Laurence Chiu) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Bryan J. Petty) Re: Working Assets Long Distance (Graham Toal) Re: Automatic Fax/Modem Switches (Graham Toal) Re: US Phone System in 1971 (as Portrayed by Hollywood) (John Higdon) Re: VOICE and BUSY Detection (Was V.25bis, or: Are CCITT) (H.Shrikumar) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 10:31 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: MCI Telemarketing dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > I had two calls from MCI this morning and and the person on the other > end wanted wanted me to switch to them via their Friends and Family > plan. I have a rather effective way of handling these calls. Rather than just hanging up, I express interest in establishing a secondary account. Most telemarketing contractors have no idea what this is. Since they are not programmed to accept this information, that usually ends the session. And even if they are, what is the harm in having ANOTHER long distance account? (Many people, including reps of the company, will try to insist that various plans are not available to non-PIC customers. This is usually not true.) I have no PIC on some of my lines and AT&T on the rest and have a secondary account with Sprint that dates back to the old US Telecom days. I gave up on my MCI secondary account after months of bogus billing and other errors -- not to mention some really data-poor connections. The company was given a great deal of slack, but it could never get the problems resolved. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) Subject: Re: MCI Telemarketing Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 18:24:47 GMT Organization: Trivializers R Us In dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > I had two calls from MCI this morning and and the person on the other > end wanted wanted me to switch to them via their Friends and Family > plan. > First of all, I hung up on the first person and then thinking about it > contacted my Telco (NYTel) to put a lock on my numbers (2) due to > fears about slamming. > The second call came in and after a few questions, determined that the > call was due to my number being on a list of numbers to call to get > switching of LD carriers. > It seems that MCI is no better than a telemarketer. > [Moderator's Note; You *were* talking to a telemarketer for MCI, not > the company itself. PAT] FWIW, I got a call from MCI last week and was favorably impressed by the change in their telemarketing strategy. Last year this time one of their slime called, identifying himself initially as being with the local phone company and wanting to verify some information on my phone bill; only after he started the pitch, and after sustained questioning did he eventually identify himself as MCI. This time, just a short intro, a pause to let me get a word in edgewise, and{ a polite hangup after I said I wasn't interested. Of course it's a sad day when you're thankful that people who invade your house uninvited are at least polite about it. paul ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 09:32:07 -0600 From: rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? In article millar@rapnet.sanders. lockheed.com (Jeffrey R. Millar x7047) writes: >> I have two answering machines which hang up on callers. The problem >> apparently began in May ... but we didn't notice it because it >> manifested itself as intermittent loss of the latter part of messages. > I had *exactly* the same problem with once of these fancy new > Audioline answering machines (forget the number) here in the UK. On > some days the machine recorded for longer than others. Interestingly, > I discovered that if I disconnected the answering machine and let the > line ring for a really long time (1-2 minutes) and reconnected the > machine it worked perfectly for several hours. British Telecom visited > three times (we got a young engineer who proudly told me he had just > joined the company and finished the training course). Eventually they > gave up, insisting that the machine must be faulty. However, thanks > to a helpful retailer, we tried several identical machines with same > result. ^---------------------------------^ | This is a good clue! There are two obvious reasons why the same result; i- the problem has absolutely nothing to do with the answering machine and is external to it. ii- Being identical machines, if a design flaw, the problem would most likely manifest itself in an identical fashion. Therefore, the above test cannot be used to afix blame on either the answering machine, or the telco's equipment. Additional tests would have to be performed. > After a couple of weeks of messing around (and losing messages) I gave > up and spent some more money on a really nice Panasonic. I get the > impression that Panasonic address a global market and assume that > their machines will be connected to antique phone systems with really > lousy lines. At any rate, our machine seems to be bomb proof! These statements would suggest that the problem was in the design of the previous answering machine, *NOT* the telco equipment. Losing tail end of a message suggests that the answering machine had a difficult time determining when the callers message was complete. Any of the more modern answering machines have voice detection circuitry that allows variable message lengths to be left by the caller. However, the circuitry has to decide when the voice information is no longer there and terminate the recording. A simple method is to average measure the power in the signal and compare it to a threshold level. If the level is below the threshold for greater than a delay period, the recording will be terminated. Also, a good answering machine will boost a weak callers voice and lower the level of a caller who is excessively loud so that a proper level may be recorded, AGC (Automatic Gain Control). However, there are limits to what the AGC can boost or duck. As suggested above, the location that the answering machine is at, probably has very old cabling from the CO. A poor intermittant connection in any one of the splices along the way could cause the pair to react in the manner described above. Since the loop resistance has increased substantially, the power measured decreases and may be lower than the threshold level, causing premature termination of recording the callers message. Whereas, if you let the phone ring for a while, the poor conenction will temporarily heal itself. (Honest!) This is a phenomena that a good experienced but now unemployed line tester would know about:) :) :) The easiest solution is to demand a completely new pair. Obviously it is still a gamble since the pair would more than likely be in the same cable. Alternatively they can re-terminate each splice (if possible). Note that this phenomena will appear to allow the phone to ring no problem, but will cause the transmission to fade as the message progresses. Testing with a regular phone may not cause the problem as the loading resistances can be different to that of the answering machine. Any obvious noise on the line such as hissing or crackling could be used as additional ammunition to sway the telco into trying the pair exchange. Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca Amatuer Radio Packet: VE6BON @ VE6MC.AB.CAN.NA VE6BON.ampr.org [44.135.147.206] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 15:29:15 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: How do YOU Use "Break" Signals? Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article Toby Nixon writes: > I am researching the current applications for the "break" (continuous > spacing) condition in start/stop (async) communications. > Specifically, I am trying to determine the importance of supporting > break (and preserving the length of the break) in various protocols > that carry async data across different environments. Uh oh, looks like they're getting ready to patent another pre-existing in-band signalling technique. 1/2 :-) Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: 911 For Everything (was 911 on Jerry Springer Show) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 22:36:50 EDT In Toronto, 911 is only for emergencies. If you want a police car dispatched for a non-emergency situation (for example, an automobile accident in which nobody was injured), you are supposed to call the Metro Toronto Police switchboard at 324-2222 and ask for "Police Radio". ------------------------------ From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: 911 Emergency Service Instead of 999 Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 01:43:30 GMT In article mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk writes: > John Perkins writes: >> It's been possible to dial 999 from almost any telephone in the UK to get >> emergency help since at least the 1940's (when I was a kid). I've often >> thought it would have been nice if this had been adopted as a world-wide >> standard and it puzzles me why AT&T chose to use 911 when they must have >> been aware of the UK system. > Well, you'll get an embryonic World standard when Europe adopt a new > code, 112, to replace the UK's 999 and all the other country > variations in Europe. > Will Bellcore follow suit? I doubt it. 112 is one of the easiest > codes to MISdial ... a very bad choice made for what may be political > reasons. Well in New Zealand the code is 111. We adopted the UK standard 999 in position on the rotary dial but since our dials are numbered (clockwise) 0123456789 and the UK and US is 0987654321 then their 999 became our 111. I always thought it had to do with blind dialing 0 i.e. you could feel the left-most hole and move your finger up one hole. 111 on the Uk/US dial or 999 on the NZ dial is too easy to dial -> wrong numbers. With pushbutton dialing all this is no longer germane. How can 112 be any easier to misdial than another number sequence like 445 or 779? Laurence Chiu lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz ------------------------------ From: bjpst5+@pitt.edu (Bryan J Petty) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Date: 14 Sep 92 02:54:49 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh I learned in a C programming class that the correct name for the '#' sysmbol is "octothorpe'. Bryan ------------------------------ From: Graham Toal Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK. Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 20:25:29 GMT In article goldstein@carafe.enet. dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > 1-800-CITIZEN-WITH-AN-X ! > Never mind that there's no Z on the dial, and that's 14 digits instead > of seven. It's just silly. (And after a few weeks, it dawned on me > what their real 800 number might be, but it wasn't immediately > obvious, and I'm not going to dial it. On principle.) It takes me two seconds to assume they meant CITIXEN but I'm not going to dial it either (for different reasons). ------------------------------ From: Graham Toal Subject: Re: Automatic Fax/Modem Switches Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK. Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:06:30 GMT In article plains!midkemia!cooper@ uunet.UU.NET writes: > Is this even possible? I've tried two switches sofar, the one Radio > Shack sells and one made by a company called ACCO. The one by ACCO > works (part of the time, every other call seems to get in) Does anyone > else have any other recommendations of other types/makes of switches? Have you considered not using a switch at all? Set your answering machine to answer on four rings, permanently. Get your modem-answering program to set ATS0=0 and use ATA to pick up the line from the RING report; tell all your modem callers to ring once or twice, hang up, and call again. Write software to ignore the first set of rings, and pick up on a second set within a short interval. Real callers will go straight through to the answering machine. Modem callers who are aware of your system will get your modem on the second call. Modem callers who aren't aware of your system will probably redial anyway and get your modem on the second attempt. Graham ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 10:54 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: US Phone System in 1971 (as Portrayed by Hollywood) David E A Wilson writes: > 1) Did a station to station call differ in any way from an operator > assisted call? "Dialed" has always been distingished from "operator-assisted" calls on telephone bills. It was in the late sixties that "dialed" calls carried a lower rate than "operator assisted" ones which has continued to this day. Back then it made sense; today it is a scam. > 2) The murderer had to stop the victim from using the operator to make > the call to Los Angeles, instead telling him to direct dial it > using the 213 area code. Was direct dial that new and unusual back in > 1971? Yes and no. Direct nationwide dialing was introduced in the early fifties but it caught on slowly. When I lived briefly in southern California in 1956-1958 with my family (I was, after all, a kid), DDD was completely unknown (we were served by GTE, or "General" as it was known then). When we moved to San Jose in 1958, our phone could dial nationwide (what a fun toy!) and that service had apparently been available for a couple of years. DDD did not become widely available in the US until the mid-1960's. After many decades of using operators to complete long distance calls, it is understandable that even in 1971 DDD was still a slight novelty. But the main thing here is the importance to the plot. The murderer wanted a record of a "dialed" call that would prove that the caller had indeed made the call from the cabin outpost. > 3) Would any record of a direct-dial call be kept so that the police > could check the source of the victim's final call (knowing only the > destination) or could they have got it later on when they suspected > the murderer (and thus had a good idea of the source)? The billing records are always available to law enforcement. This is one reason Germany and other countries claim to have no billing detail: to prevent government snooping. In the plot of the movie, you will recall that the murderer made a followup call from a paystation to account for that call from the cabin to the victim's wife. Remember, the murderer claimed to have been the one to make the dialed call. The whole point was to establish that the murderer was supposedly a hundred miles away at the time of the crime. No records are kept of INCOMING calls to telephones. This has only been recently technically possible, but even so it is not done at this time. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 11:40:58 -0400 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: Re: VOICE and BUSY Detection (Was V.25bis, or: Are CCITT) Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst In article Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70. n109.z1.fidonet.org writes: >> Actually, there's another problem. Take USR modem. Put X5 in the >> Initialize string. Now call a Telebit that puts the PEP tomes first. >> Result? The USR reports a result code of VOICE almost immediately and >> hangs up! > That sounds like a problem more with putting PEP tones first than > with the USR, which has a pretty average VOICE recognition. I just Of course, so we know what modems to switch to when the telcos start using their wonderful neural networks :-) (Instead of using their neurons ? :-0 ;) shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #710 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21773; 14 Sep 92 4:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16566 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 14 Sep 1992 01:47:14 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18992 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 14 Sep 1992 01:47:05 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 01:47:05 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209140647.AA18992@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #711 TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Sep 92 01:47:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 711 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Alternate NON-TELCO Local Phone System Tested (Wash Post via Paul Robinson) Comments on NON-TELCO Dial Tone (Paul Robinson) Switch Names (Paul Robinson) Exchange 516-711 (Dave Niebuhr) Eddie Argo, Where Are You? (Lost Book) (Scott Butler) AT&T Mail's Phone Number (Paul Robinson) Telecommunications Directory From Gale Research Inc. (Nigel Allen) Recourse on Cordless Eavesdropping? (Alan Millar) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson, Contractor Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 21:02:03 EDT Subject: Alternate NON-TELCO Local Phone System Tested Alternative Local Phone System Tested {Such Networks Could Eventually Compete Directly With Baby Bells} [Washington Post, September 11, 1992, Page F1] By Paul Farhi and Cathy Skrzycki Washington Post Staff Writers Brian Roberts made a phone call to London yesterday. In the process, he made a little bit of history - and may have opened a window on the future. Roberts' call, initiated from his office at Comcast Corp in Philadelphia, was transmitted to London via an unusual network, a patchwork consisting of fiber-optic phone wires, wireless cellular connections, a satelite relay and even Comcast's cable TV lines. But what was most significant about the call what was {not} used to complete it: the conventional phone network owned by the local phone company, Bell Atlantic Corp. The call was set up by Comcast, the fourth-largest U.S. cable firm, to demonstrate what could be an important telecommunications development of the 1990s. Through a combination of technologies, companies like Comcast and others are moving closer to establishing duplicate local phone systems to compete directly with the regional Baby Bell telephone companies that hold monopolies over local service. This competition, not possible a decade ago before the breakup of the old Bell System, has already begun in fits and starts for business customers. Industry analysts say it could start to become available for residential customers in a few years. If so, it would spur price competition among local phone service providers, much as the advent of MCI Corp., Sprint Corp. and other alternatives to AT&T set off price wars in the long-distance market. To foster this kind of development, the Federal Communications Commission is expected next week to rule that conventional phone companies must make their sophisticated equipment and lines available to outside competitors, thereby enabling these upstarts to expand their networks. These companies, known as alternative access carriers, now are in the business of ferrying calls among offices and businesses along a limited network of private lines. If the FCC rules in their favor next week, they will be able to lease Bell companies' phone lines and use their switching systems. Royce Holland, president and chief executive of Metropolitan Fiber Systems, Inc., which has an extensive fiber-optic network in the Washington area, said that if the commission lets companies like his tap into the local phone companies' systems, "It's D-Day. It's the Normandy invasion. We've established a beachhead." Comcast's demonstration yesterday showed that access to these switches may not even be necessary; Comcast bypassed the local phone system by jury-rigging a network in conjunction with a satelite company, and its own cellular, cable and alternate access businesses to route a call to four locations, ending up in Britain. Comcast is one of many companies that are experimenting with adapting cable television lines to carry telephone conversations via an emerging wireless technology called personal communications services. (The Washington Post Co. is conducting a PCS trial in the Washington area.) The seven regional phone companies publicly say they welcome competition. But in return for opening themselves up to this rivalry, they want major concessions, such as more flexibility on rate increases and permission to own and program cable TV systems. They also want their phone competitors to bear the same burden for providing universal service to customers, the least profitable part of the phone business, instead of being allowed to serve high-paying business customers. Referring to the cable industry's interest in providing phone service, Stuart Johnson, president of regional services for Bell Atlantic, said, "One company or one industry should not continue with monopoly status while we are regulated," Bell Atlantic owns the Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Cos., which serve the Washington area. But while the battle is being fought over who should be allowed to be a phone company, a larger war looms over how far federal and state regulation will allow real competition to go. "There is no question that all of this stuff can be reconfigured any way people want to do it," said Norman Black, a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association. "The challenge is whether regulators can deal with the reality of competition and technology. There is no doubt we're in for a collision" between governmental bodies and nontraditional phone companies. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 22:34:09 EDT Subject: Comments on NON-TELCO Dial Tone Comments about the alternate local phone system article: The article I copied from the {Washington Post} spurred me on a little bit toward some ideas I had. Over the last two weeks I have been seriously considering going into a head-to-head conflict with the local telephone company. By doing the one thing the local Telco has generally had the exclusive right to do: provide wireline dial service. (Sometimes referred to as "hauling dialtone".) By buying trunk lines from C&P, running telephone wire on PEPCO's electric poles, and then selling it to whoever would buy it. (Whether I could get away with it is another matter. I think I could.) My only real concern was raising the financing to do this. What I had decided to do was buying or renting a PBX, buying a block of telephone numbers and running phone wire wherever people wanted to have other (less expensive) phone lines installed. These rates do not include what the electric company would charge to lease space on their telephone poles, nor whether the county would require paying a charge to cross street right of way (I am assuming that hanging wire on the Electric Company's poles would preclude being charged for county right-of-way fees.) I looked up the current rating structure. DID trunks run about $20 apiece per month; the phone numbers are 20c apiece ($4 per block of 20, a whole exchange of 10,000 numbers would run about $2,000 a month.) Outgoing trunks are also about $20 each. (This is for phones in Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland; the rate in DC and VA is $1 per phone number per month, in blocks of 20). So if we assume the average figure is 15 trunks per 100 phones, an exchange of 10,000 estimated phones would require 1,500 incoming DID circuits and 1,500 outgoing trunk lines, plus 10,000 phone numbers. This would cost $62,000 per month to have the equivalent of 10,000 phone lines. Oh my, I forgot the $3.50 per trunk charge, or add another $5,250, for a total of $67,250 per month to have the equivalent of 10,000 phone lines. Which means the base cost (without any profit to me) would be $6.83 per line. The base cost for a residential measured service line is $5.05 per line and 9c per completed outgoing call. Therefore a competing telephone company cannot compete on price in the lowest class of service. Except that the local telco is allowed to impose on all phone lines a $3.50 "Federally mandated subscriber line charge," which while they try to make it look like a tax, it's a way of charging AT&T, MCI and Sprint less for their lines to be connected in order to push the charge back onto the customers. This essentially sets the lowest cost rate for a residential telephone line at $8.50 plus tax from C&P Telephone. C&P's installation cost is around $35 per trunk line, plus the installation of the DID station (telephone) numbers. After the first 20 lines are installed, the numbers cost $4 per 20 additional numbers. The first 20 numbers, to be installed, however, cost $750.00. That means -- on a large scale -- to install a whole exchange and allow connection to it, means that it would cost (not including the PBX), about $108,000 for installation, or $11 a line plus $68,500 a month for the service. Even if I go with something smaller, the numbers are the same. Let's say I go with 200 phone numbers and 30 trunks each way. To install 60 trunk lines will cost $2100 and the 200 phone numbers will cost $800 to install, for a total of $2900 or almost $11 per line. The monthly service charges would be 60x$23 or $1380 for the trunk lines and $40 for the phone numbers or $1420 for 200 phone lines or $7.10 per line. The one way to make money at this is to reduce the number of circuits going to the telephone company. If I figure 10 and 10 per 100, then the numbers are as follows: 10,000 phone numbers 200 phone numbers Incoming 1000 x $20. $40000 20 x $20. $400 Outgoing 1000 x $20. 20000 20 x 20. 400 Phone # 10000 x .20 2000 200 x .20 40 Line chg 2000 x 3.50 7000 40 x 3.50 140 Total 49000 980 Per Line 4.90 4.90 If the charge only applies to outgoing trunks, knock off about $.35 per line. Assuming that the electric company charges, say, $5 per pole and the numbers come out that for hauling traffic I need to allocate $1 per line for renting pole space, the cost comes out to be $5.90 per line as the charge for me to provide the service. On the other hand, I might be able to use the space owned by the cable company for less, perhaps. Current minimum rates for business phone lines are $18 per line per month. This is the only place an alternative carrier can compete on, since I could conceivably offer the same service as the phone company, for $9 a month, charge the same rates per local call, and make a profit. The only thing that would otherwise be a problem is the installation costs which are part of setting up the system, and paying for the PBX. If I rented a PBX the cost should not be astronomical, I hope. (Someone once mentioned a rule of thumb to me of $1,000 per line to buy and install a PBX. Perhaps if I rented a PBX I could do this cheaper, or buy a used one. (Anyone know what a used DMS-100 (or equivalent) sells for? That's about the size needed to handle 10,000 lines. :) ) ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM, TDARCOS@ATTMAIL.COM, From: Paul Robinson Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 05:26:35 EDT Subject: Switch Names In TELECOM Digest 12-685, John Palmer and Pat talk about exchange names: [John Palmer:] > In Detroit, we live in an area where the exchange name used to be > TUXedo...I used to think that the CO name was the name of a street > on which the CO was located (or a street near the CO), but there > isn't a TUXEDO in that area. [Pat:] > [Moderator's Note: But here in Chicago we had a 'true TUXedo' as in > 889. The CO's here were variously named for the street they were > located on or the neighborhood; sometimes an historical person or > event (i.e. HAymarket [riots]; [Mayor Carter] HARrison. PAT] I'm not sure what they are doing here. We have several offices in the (unnamed) government agency I work out of (as a contractor, not as a federal employee) in which we cross two different switch zones of C&P Telephone. One of them is called 'Bethesda' for the office in Bethesda, Md., and the other one is a few miles up the road in Rockville, Md., and is located on Montrose Ave., and that switch is called 'Montrose'. "If I or any user of this account are caught making opinions, the secretary will disavow any knowledge of them ..." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 18:21:04 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Exchange 516-711 I just finished checking the Verification Test Number for several Hicksville, New York (Long Island) exchanges and found that 711 is a valid exchange in the 516 Area Code. New York Telephone hasn't announced via their directory that it is being used and I have absolutely no idea as to why the test number recording would state that it is an exchange along with several others. I tried this several times and each try had the same results. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: at887@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scott Butler) Subject: Eddie Argo, Where Are You? (Lost Book) Date: 13 Sep 1992 19:28:07 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) Reply-To: at887@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scott Butler) Perhaps some kind soul in NetLand can help me out. Years ago I read a piece of fiction about a guy (I think that the character's name was Eddie Argo) who was a computer programmer for the city of Buffalo NY. The character fakes his own death, steals a van and a computer, and becomes a hi-tech Robin Hood, travelling around the country hacking into systems to "steal from the rich and give to the poor". I've been looking for the book the past couple of years but am a little bit hamstrung by the fact that not only can't I remember the name of the book, I *also* can't remember the name of the author. Can anyone help me out? I'd like to find out (at least) the name of the book and the authors name. The publisher and publication date would also really be helpful. Thanks a lot! Scott Butler ------------------------------ From: tdarcos@attmail.com Date: 13 Sep 92 08:40:50 GMT Subject: AT&T Mail's Phone Number In TELECOM Digest 12-678, TELECOM Moderator noted: > [Moderator's Note: You know who else is still giving out a wrong 800 > number? ATT Mail ... 800-555-1212 still cannot come up with a number > for them most of the time; when they do, it is some totally irrelevant > (to the public) office. And the AT&T corporate HQ switchboard acts > like they never heard of ATT Mail either ... pitiful. PAT] When I wanted to try AT&T Mail to see how it compares with MCI Mail, I just called 1-800-222-0400 and asked {them} for the number. The following comes from the signup package for AT&T Mail: The two phone numbers for AT&T Mail are: To call for inquiries and questions: 1-800-MAIL-872 To call up to pick up messages: 1-800-MAIL-123 (You can also use 950-1ATT from many locations). Paul Robinson TDARCOS@ATTMAIL.COM (or) TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Telecommunications Directory From Gale Research Inc. Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 3:55:28 EDT If you would like your telecommunications-related company, association, government agency or periodical to be listed free of charge in the {Telecommunications Directory}, contact: Mr. John Krol, Editor, {Telecommunications Directory}, Gale Research Inc., 835 Penobscot Building, Detroit, Michigan 48226-4094, U.S.A. telephone 800-347-4253 or (313) 961-2242, fax (313) 961-6815 and ask him to send you (or someone else in your organization) a questionnaire for the directory. The previous edition was published in 1991. Your local public or university library may have a copy. Here is the questionnaire that you can fill in and return to the above address (not to me), together with any literature that you think the editors might find helpful: Organization name:__ Address:__ Specific system or service:__ Name of head of system or service:__ Person's job title:___ Phone number:___ Year founded:____ Staff (indicate number in each category: __ Total (__ management; __ technical; __ sales & marketing; __ clerical; __ other) Related Organizations and Their Specific Affiliation:__ General Description:__ Geographic Areas Served: __ Rate Structure: (if unable to supply specific charges, please provide a general rate structure)__ Publications/Documentation:___ Clientele/Availability: (Please list primary types of clients, any limitations or restrictions)___ Key Features Summary:___ Contact Person: ___ Name and title of person completing questionnaire:___ Telephone number:___ Toll-free telephone number:___ Fax: ____ Telex: ____ Electronic mail address (include system name(s) and your code or address)___ ------------------------------ Subject: Recourse on Cordless Eavesdropping? From: Alan Millar Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 12:28:11 PST Organization: The Bolis Group, San Jose, CA I have just learned that the security guard at our mobile home park has been using some sort of ten channel scanner to listen in on cordless telephone conversations. One of the residents witnessed this, and the guard even showed him how it worked. I hear that it is not currently illegal, but it is of course quite sleazy. Our resident's association is sending a letter to the park management demanding that it stop immediately. Does anyone know what recourse we have to deal with this? Can anyone share any experiences or suggestions? Thank you. Alan Millar amillar@bolis.SF-Bay.org ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #711 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06616; 15 Sep 92 4:34 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13032 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 15 Sep 1992 01:35:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08679 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 15 Sep 1992 01:34:55 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 01:34:55 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209150634.AA08679@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #712 TELECOM Digest Tue, 15 Sep 92 01:35:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 712 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Dialogic Corporation VCS Demo lines (James VanHouten) Line Noise: Help Needed Tracking it Down (Mark Marino) Information Wanted: DID and NT Norstar (Lloyd Buchanan) Why Hide the Test Numbers? (Marc Unangst) Information Wanted on Call-Forwarding in 416 (Ian Evans) A Chat With US Sprint (Mark A. Holtz) Mitel Telecom Questions (Adam Ashby) Bell Canada Applies to Charge Most Directory Assistance Calls (D. Leibold) An Interesting Advertisment (Juergen Ziegler) CIS Perestroika: ATS-2 System Opened to Public Access (David Leibold) Caller-ID Support in SupraFaxModem (Monty Solomon) CCITT V.35 Interface (York Lam) Problem With Mail on Telecom Engineers List (Jon Solomon) Re: New Mailing List For Telecom Engineers (John Butz) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:16:09 -0500 Subject: Dialogic Corporation VCS Demo lines The following numbers are Dialogic Corporation demo numbers for their Voice Recognition Technology Demonstrations. I have tried all three and they are impressive. I recommend the last number on this list (Continuous-Word Recognition Demonstration). Here they are: +1.214.404.9405 Alphabet Recognition Demonstration +1.214.490.1210 Connected Recognition of Digits in English and Spanish +1.214.490.0767 Continuous-Word Recognition Demonstration Give them a try. 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: omar@osf.org (Mark Marino) Subject: Line Noise: Help Needed Tracking it Down Organization: Open Software Foundation Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:39:02 GMT I'm having a problem tracking down CRC errors in a new phone line. I had a second phone line installed in my new apartment for use with a modem. The second line uses the same wiring as the first line (but the opposite two wires black-yellow, green-red). I'm using a Zoom V.32turbo modem hooked up to the comm2 port on my Gateway 2000. I'm using DOS5.0 and Telix v3.15. I used to be able to get about 1350 cps at my old apartment virtually error free. Now, however, I'm getting tons of CRC errors and I can't figure out why. File tranfers have dropped to around 1000 cps (from 1350) and I get random CRC errors roughly every 30kbytes of the transfer; sometimes the modem drops the line. I can only assume it's because of line noise. But I don't know how to track down where the noise is coming from (i.e. is there a shorted phone cable somewhere in the house or is the problem elsewhere). How can I track down the line noise problem or even better, is there some device that will improve line quality enough to eliminate the errors? Barring that, can the phone co. check the line quality of my lines? I'd like to solve this without having them come in at $50/hour to diagnose it. Thanks, Mark Marino | omar@osf.org | uunet!osf!omar Open Software Foundation | 11 Cambridge Center | Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------ From: lloyd@Axecore.COM (Lloyd Buchanan) Subject: Information Wanted: DID and NT Norstar Organization: Axe Core Investors, Inc. Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 00:15:14 GMT My company just moved from a huge castle served by a Rolm 9751 PBX into a small office served by a NT Norstar system. In order to retain our phone numbers, we moved our DID service with us. (same CO) In general, I am a highly satisfied customer of the Norstar/Startalk system. One little question though: Callers to our DID lines hear a brief dial-tone-like tone, followed by a pause, followed by a ring. Where does that dial-tone come from? Is this bad programming of the Norstar? CO? What is "wink start" mean? Somebody once posted an excellent description of how DID service works, which I lost. If anyone has that, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks in advance. Lloyd Buchanan lloyd@Axecore.COM Axe Core Investors uupsi!axecore!lloyd 580 White Plains Road (914) 333-5226 (phone) Tarrytown, NY 10591-6834 (914) 333-5208 (FAX) ------------------------------ From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) Subject: Why Hide the Test Numbers? Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:56:10 GMT Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI I realize that the pseudo-numbers for ANI read-back, test tones, etc. vary from CO to CO. But why do the telcos try so hard to hide information about them from the ratepayers? It's impossible to get the magic numbers from the telco just by asking, operators refuse to read back the number you're calling from and deny the existence of such magic numbers; you practically have to beg the telco installer to tell you the magic number for ANI readback. What's the point of all this? Is there a legitimate reason to hide all this? Are the telcos afraid of people using them to troubleshoot problems by themselves? Seems that it would be easier for all involved if they would just print the numbers for each exchange at the beginning of the telephone directory ... Marc Unangst mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us [Moderator's Note: Ringback, readback and test tones are not tariffed offerings from telco. Those are intended only for authorized employees to use. I don't think they are so much afraid of you diagnosing your own problems as they are of you tying up resources their own employees need to use. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Information Wanted on Call-Forwarding in 416 From: ian.evans@bville.gts.org (Ian Evans) Date: 15 Sep 92 00:30:00 GMT Organization: Baudeville BBS - Toronto, Canada 416-283-0114 2000+ conferences Reply-To: ian.evans@bville.gts.org (Ian Evans) I'm looking for some call-forwarding services in Toronto that will extend my calling area so that people in nearby cities can call my service without LD fees. Any suggestions? Rates? CompuServe ID: 73117,545 UUCP: bville!ian.evans| Message created while INTERNET:ian.evans@bville.gts.org | basking in the joy of OTHERS: ian.evans@canrem.com | living in Scarborough [Moderator's Note: In general, unless all points along the way are untimed local calls -- and then, not if the calls are counted and charged for -- linking two or more local lines together with call forwarding for the purpose of defeating tolls will not save money for anyone. Rarely does a toll call cost more per minute than two or more local links connected together. You'd be better off using local area 800 service if such is available. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mholtz@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Mark A. Holtz) Subject: A Chat With US Sprint Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 04:55:44 GMT Well, today, as I was filling out the check to pay my long distance bill to US Sprint, I discovered an error on my bill: My place of residence was listed as at #794 ... kinda impossible since I still live at home. While talking with the service rep, she offered me a "free" program in which the number I call the most during a billing period will be deducted 20%. In addition, any US Sprint customer that I call also gets 20% discount. I said okay. She then said that, unless I object, that the people I call who are not customers would be contacted. I, of course, objected. She noted it. Now comes the wait and see part. I wonder what the reaction would be of the telemarketer of the "non-Sprint" customer being a modem. ;) UUCP: PacBell.COM! -> mholtz!sactoh0 ucbvax!csusac! Internet: mholtz@sactoh0.sac.ca.us Fidonet: Mark Holtz@1:203/90.1701 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:29:18 From: Adam Ashby Subject: Mitel Telecom Questions Hi PAT, A couple of questions for your Canadian audience here ... 1) What products are Mitel producing these days? 2) Where (geographically) are their markets? 3) Are they making any money? 4) Who bought BT's share? 5) Why - on the London market anyway - are Mitel's shares so high? They are currently around 100p having languished around 40p for years. 6) What goes on in the (newish) Mitel building in Slough? 7) Is the Caldicot factory still up and running? And lastly, but by no means leastly, does anyone (Mitel/Newbridge) know the whereabouts of Dr. Don Mills, one of Terry's erstwhile partners in many ventures, including the hotel in Wales, who could talk the hind legs off a donkey -- whatever that means! My coffee mug has prompted this curiosity -- it celebrates Mitel's first $100,000,000 year in 1981. I'll bet they could do with a few of those again!! Adam ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 10:32:06 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Bell Canada Applies to Charge Most Directory Assistance Calls CFRB radio and {The Toronto Star} report Bell Canada's application to the CRTC to charge for most directory assistance calls, including long distance information (ie. 555.1212 calls), plus local 411 calls chargeable even for new number listings or changed numbers. There are a few exemptions to charges which include calls from payphones, non-published numbers, listings not found, emergency numbers and some others. A 25 call allowance is proposed for the handicapped, the illiterate, those over 65. Per call charge would be 50 cents, which would be a reduction from the current 60 cent rate for calls to find numbers in the phone book. Bell Canada claims "losses" of CAD$80 million, and states the ability to find the number on Bell's directory assistance, then place the call on a competing reseller or carrier, as justification to charge the extra rates for directory assistance. A statement from the Consumers Association of Canada rep David Simpson declared "Ma Bell is on the warpath" linking the proposed tariffs to an anti-competitive attitude. I don't have the official text of the application from the CRTC yet, but file numbers, etc should be available. Perhaps those Digest readers in the U.S. familiar with the charging for 555.1212 calls might want to list the arguments used for and against charges to long distance information calls, and perhaps shed some light on whether 411 calls for new or changed numbers should be chargeable. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca dleibold1@attmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 00:12 From: Juergen Ziegler Subject: An Interesting Advertisment Hi TD readers, I read the following ad in the German {Forbes} 8/92 issue on page 117: Free Phone Weltweit kostenlos telefonieren = worldwide tollfree calling Mediumvalue Ltd. Mannheimerstr. 22 6836 Ottersheim 06202/51509 ---------- A lot of the older TD readers will probably remember the same type of advertisment same 20 years ago when "telephone consultants" sold their customers inexpensive telephone services. History seems to rerun again. Actually TELEKOM, the German telephone operator has tremendous problems with phreaking. Just recently there was a report on TV about this problem. TELEKOM estimates the the total damages (loss) is around 20 millions DM ($15 million) a week. Esspecially their toll-free customers are reluctant to offer toll-free numbers to their foreign offices, since such numbers could be used for fraudulent theft of service and I could easily happen that those companies would be liable for those calls, since TELEKOM has no reliable method of detecting phreaking. There is an intersiting article about "blue boxing" in the November 1990 issue if {IEEE Spectrum}. Very informative and very interesting to read. ("The great blue box phone frauds" by David Flory) Disclaimer: I have no intention to get big trouble for stupid phone calls I do not need. So this message does not encourage anybody to get the services of the mentioned company. I am not affiliated with that company either. Juergen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 21:18:07 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: CIS Perestroika: ATS-2 System Opened to Public Access A Reuters article by Fiona Fleck reports that the ATS-2 telephone network, a parallel system to the domestic network in the former Soviet Union, is now available to anyone who wants to pay for it. While the existing domestic Russian network can be quite bothersome to work with, the ATS-2 guarantees connections within 10 seconds, whether inside or outside the CIS. The network is run by the Federal Agency of Government Communications and Information (FAPSI), and was originally a secret Communist party network set up by Stalin in 1931. Radio links, underground cables, satellites are all used in the network, which provides for high survivability ie. one link goes down, it is easily replaced with another route. 300 experts work on the parallel system. Cost of a regular ATS-2 line is billed at CAD$450 (equiv) per year; a broadband circuit throughout CIS and eastern European states costs CAD$4500 per year. There is a directory assistance feature on ATS-2 which even gives out Boris Yeltsin's phone numbers at the Kremlin, the parliament, and his home. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:21:55 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Caller-ID Support in SupraFaxModem Here is an excerpt from the Supra Technical Support Bulletin which discusses the upgraded v.32/v.32bis ROM (1.2G). The complete text can be found in INFO-MODEMS Digest, comp.dcom.modems, or on the Supra BBS at +1 503 967 2444. Implements Silent Answer (allows voice/fax determination): When the phone rings, the modem will start monitoring the telephone line after the 2nd ring. If it detects a fax tone, it will do one of two things: 1. If S-Register S0 - 0, the modem will immediately answer the phone and attempt a fax connection. 2. If S-Register S0 = 0, the modem will quickly issue up to 9 RINGS messages, expecting the fax software to issue an ATA. This eliminates the need for a $150 voice/fax black box. NOTE: DO NOT plug the answering machine into the telephone jack on the back of the modem. The modem should be plugged into the answering machine. This also also works if a telephone is in the circuit before the faxmodem. NOTE: This mode must be supported by the fax software. Implements Caller ID This is a feature is only available in some areas of the country. In between the 1st and the 2nd ring, the phone company will send information on who is calling you. If you ere in terminal mode and had told the modem to answer on the third ring, you would see: RING DATE = 0321 TIME = 1405 NMBR = 5039672400 NAME = SUPRA CORPORATION RING CONNECT 19200 To enable CALLER ID: AT#CID=1 Enables Caller ID in formatted format AT#CID=2 Enables Caller ID in unformatted format (ASCII printable hex numbers) AT#CID=0 Disables Caller ID Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty%roscom@think.com ------------------------------ Organization: Ryerson Polytechnical Institute Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:42:32 EST From: ACPS7052@RyeVm.Ryerson.Ca Subject: CCITT V.35 Interface I am looking for information regarding the recommended V.35 interface. Especially information concerning the electrical characteristics of the interface, for both the data and clock circuits as well as the signalling circuits. The CCITT V.35 interface and the 34 pin Winchester connector as specified in ISO 2593 have become a standard for modem interfacing with circuits operating at 48, 56, and 64kbs. Any information for regarding this interface would be greatly appreciated. York Lam (acps7052@ryerson.ca) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 00:09:50 EDT From: Jon Solomon Subject: Problem With Mail on Telecom Engineers List If you sent mail to "telecom-engineers-request" and the message was received and returned with the error "Can't create output" it means that the mailer is not permitted to make a new file in a directory, so it fails and returns the message. I try to make sure there is an empty "requests" file (the one which telecom-engineers-request points to) after finishing my run of hand-editing the mailing list. This time I didn't and a few people didn't make it through. Would those people please resend either to the list or to myself. thanks. jsol ------------------------------ From: jbutz@homxa.att.com Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 10:10 EDT Subject: Re: New Mailing List For Telecom Engineers python@cs.rutgers.edu writes: > I have just created telecom-engineers, a list devoted to just the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (trouble brewing) > engineering point of view of telecommunications. If you want to be > added, send mail to telecom-engineers-request@cs.rutgers.edu. If you > want to send material, send it to telecom-engineers@cs.rutgers.edu. > If something fails, send mail to me. I've only been reading this list for about eight months now, but this sounds like it could be the divestiture of TELECOM Digest! Competition in the area of telecommunications discussion? I can see it now. Telecom Engineers starting a teleslime and slamming campaign? TELECOM Digest replying with a $40 check to bring us back? Multimillion dollar advertising budgets, Regional Operating Digests, Enhanced and Regulated Digests, new products and services, the possibilites are endless. Say ... haven't we seen this story played out somewhere before? John Butz jbutz@homxa.att.com ER700 System Engineering AT&T-BL P.S.: Pat, will you have Candis Bergen or Dan Quayle as your spokesperson? [Moderator's Note: Cute. Actually, it would help to know a little of the history around here. Jon Solomon began TELECOM Digest in 1981 and at that time it was primarily a technical forum. I took over in 1988 when he was involved with other things for a few years. The Digest gradually became a forum for a much wider audience of people interested in voice telephony. We have split twice already: the first split was to start the Computer Undergound Digest for the (original) purpose of discussing hackers and phreaks. We then split again with articles discussing telecom privacy issues going to their own list moderated by Dennis Rears. Now Jon Solomon is offering to take just the technical stuff for the readers here who only are interested in the technical and engineering aspects. Those messages can still go here also -- in other words, stuff should be submitted as always -- but many people will read Jon's new digest who do not want the extra social issues items we have here. He'll be accepting only the technical stuff. I'll continue to accept everything, including news from the privacy and hacker/phreaker arenas for general discussion. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #712 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07084; 15 Sep 92 4:50 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25976 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:23:52 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22808 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:23:42 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:23:42 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209150723.AA22808@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #713 TELECOM Digest Tue, 15 Sep 92 02:23:43 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 713 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Robert L. McMillin) AIN Trial Information Request Address Needed (Jack Adams) Cellular Accessories Suppliers (Thomas E. Lowe) "Bonding" Protocol State Machines (Richard Lamb) NT EBS Information Request (N. Nackeeran) Allen Frischkorn: Untangling Telecom Regs (Wash. Tech via Paul Robinson) 711 Reaches E911 Center (James J. Sowa) Request For "Phonejak" Information (Bob Shaffer) Utility Meter Reading Switch (Bruce Perens) Recorded Message About no Answer (Carl Moore) Tel Plus Wins Award (Wash. Tech via Paul Robinson) Need Recommendations For Cellular: Portable/Car/Hands-Free (Steve Pershing) 112 (was 911 Emergency Service Instead of 999) (Mark Brader) 19th Century Phone Numbers (Gabe M. Wiener) Touch Tone Decoding Projects: Mine Works -- is There Better? (A. Hightower) Commercial Service Addresses (B. Griggs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 00:54:15 -0700 From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Nigel Allen forwarded a press release from the National Association of Broadcasters and the Consumer Federation of America that supports the Cable TV Consumer Competition And Protection Act of 1992. Granted, cable is a mess: in fact, since I have moved, I haven't bothered to get cable, preferring the disinformation I get from the {Los Angeles Times}, National Public Radio, or Westinghouse Broadcast Group. My experience with cable TV operators (Paragon Cable, specifically) would seem to imply that the words "customer service" don't exist in their dictionaries: I have lost service so many times that I stopped counting. And forget about contacting them to fix anything within a day. Repair technicians come out within a week, if that. Apathetic phone representatives take it as a given that no matter how long you are kept on hold (typically 10 minutes or more), you can't do anything about it anyway. Shut up and like your monopoly. But that doesn't mean that Congressional re-regulation will solve these problems. In fact, I expect them to worsen as a result of this bill. The first warning bells go off with the use of inflammatory prose: > Cable's Distortion Campaign: Now, I grant you that I have heard some wild tales from the cable operators as a result of this bill making the rounds in Congress. But nothing in this proposed legislation makes me feel any easier about dealing with the people running the cable companies. To wit: > Rate Regulation > -- The FCC and franchising authorities are authorized to ensure > that rates for basic service are "reasonable" where cable systems do > not face effective competition. > -- The bill allows citizens, local government and other public > organizations to file petitions to the FCC challenging rates for all > other tiers of service. Can you say, "GTE"? If anybody ever needed an example of how badly a regulated utility can be run and still operate in the purported "public interest", this has got to take the prize. Anybody unfortunate enough to have GTE California knows what I mean: surly technicians, overpriced service (substantially higher than Pac*Bell), and a business office that operates only during the day -- when I am at work. Rate regulation would protect cable operators' profits at the expense of its customers. > Equipment Prices > -- Allows the FCC to ensure that prices for installation, remote > control, converter boxes and other equipment used to provide basic > service shall be "reasonable." Wanna bet the cable business finds some foxes to guard the "reason- able" chicken house? > Customer Service > -- The bill requires the FCC to establish enforceable customer > service standards addressing concerns such as outages and service > calls, system office hours and telephone availability, and information > on billing and refunds. What could "enforceable customer service standards" mean? Who knows! At this point, any improvement in service after passage of this bill would allow its sponsors to crow about how much they've done to help the situation, no matter how tiny a fix. So they've cut your wait on hold from fifteen minutes to ten. Whoopee. > Encouragement of Multiple, Competitive Cable Franchises > -- Franchising authorities may not award exclusive cable > franchises, and may not unreasonably refuse to award additional > competitive franchises. Why do I smell a rat? Refer, if you will, to the section in which we are told that regulators will ensure "reasonable" prices where no effective competition exists. The chief reason we now have monopolies is because there is big money to be had from the cable business for reelection chests. Reason is, after all, in the eye of the beholder. The city councilmen et al. responsible for the present monopolies will no doubt find some very good and reasonable excuses to continue the allotment of exclusive operating contracts. In large cities like Los Angeles which have several large cable contractors, eliminating regional monopolies would be even harder: after all, the city's satraps may say, each operator competes to keep its share of the cable business. In practice, though the franchisees may be pitted against one another for an occaisional show, real competition based on price and quality of service doesn't happen. People still live in a Century Cable neighborhood or a Paragon Cable neighborhood. The only real, effective way to make the present arrogance from cable operators go away is competition. If the experience with local dial tone is any guide, regulation won't cut it. Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@indigo2.hac.com ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: AIN Trial Information Request Address Needed Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 13:21:01 GMT In attempting to reply to the University of Pittsburg poster requesting info on the Bell Atlantic AIN trial, I got the following addressing error message. Would the orginal poster contact me directly, as I have most of what he/she needs. ----- Transcript of session follows ----- While talking to icarus.lis.pitt.edu: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 lis.pitt.edu!st5... User unknown Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} | (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: telb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lowe) Subject: Cellular Accessories Suppliers Organization: AT&T Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:34:33 GMT I need to purchase accessories for my Panasonic EBH30 handheld phone. Can anyone suggest any discount accessory supply houses for cellular accessories? Thanks! Tom Lowe tel@cdsdb1.ATT.COM attmail!tlowe 201-949-0428 AT&T Bell Laboratories, Room 2E-637A Crawfords Corner Road, Holmdel, NJ 07733 ------------------------------ From: lamb@xtcn.com (Richard Lamb) Subject: "Bonding" Protocol State Machines Organization: XtcN Ltd Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:15:22 GMT Where can I find this specification? Preferably something off the net? I know it is a spec for inverse-multiplexing (taking many low speed lines to make a single high speed one). We are doing something like this but it would be nice to stick to some standard instead. Thanks, Rick Lamb XtcN Ltd, lamb@xtcn.com, Tel:508-655-2960, FAX:508-655-4559, Telex:6504829720 11 Roxbury Ave.,Natick MA 01760,4425 Butterworth Pl.N.W.,Washington D.C. 20016 ------------------------------ From: nackee@tdd.sj.nec.com (N. Nackeeran) Subject: NT EBS Information Request Organization: NEC-AM TDD, San Jose, California Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 20:34:56 GMT Can anyqone send me the datails of EBS (Electronic Business Service) provided by Northen Telecom. It is supposed to be using P-Phone. I would like to know the feature and the typical usage. Please e-mail to 'nackee@tdd.sj.nec.com'. Thanks, N.Nackeeran ------------------------------ Reply-To: Paul Robinson From: Message Center Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:59:01 EDT Subject: Allen Frischkorn: Untangling Telecommunications Regulations Andrew Jenks, {Movers} Washington Technology Magazine September 10, 1992, Page 33 [Sidebar:Photo of Frischkorn above address: Allen R. Frischkorn, Jr., President Telecommunications Industry Association 2001 Penn. Ave. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20006 (202) 457-4912 ] As the revolutionary court decision that split away the seven Baby Bells enters its second decade, demonopolization, far from reaching completion, is only now entering its most critical juncture: lifting the three major provisions that now prevent the seven from entering information services, long distance service, and manufacturing. Charged with mediating the competing interests of manufacturers is Allen R. (Mike) Frischkorn, president of the Telecommunications Industry Association, a leading voice for equipment manufacturers. But speaking with one voice for a group of 500 firms covering 95 percent of the telecommunications market is no easy task. An ongoing battle between TIA's board of directors and an insurgent group of smaller members has split the association over how and if to allow the Bells into manufacturing. On one side of the debate is AT&T; on the other a group of small companies. "There is a small group of companies that do support the Bells getting into some aspect of manufacturing," admits Frischkorn. But, he adds, "85 percent of our members oppose the Bells getting into manufacturing." Still, Frischkorn admits that relaxing at least some of the restrictions could open up much-needed financing for smaller companies. So TIA is entertaining a shift in position. Frischkorn envisions three scenarios: - Allowing the Bells to fund other companies and take back royalties. - Permitting joint ventures between the Bells and others. - Allowing the Bells to do R&D on their own and contract out with companies to do actual manufacturing. "You can never satisfy everyone," he says. "You have to strive for consensus." But Frischkorn adds that perceptions of dissent over the manufacturing issue have been inflated by intense lobbying from the Bells. As for his sense of the political winds, Frischkorn sees "total legislative gridlock." Resistance from the powerful Jack Brooks, D-Texas, has rendered the Bells' once-promising legislative trump nearly useless. "The RBOC strategy has shifted to the courts," says Frischkorn, noting that in the area of information services in particular the Bells have made huge strides in the courts. But Frischkorn is not opposed to change, and he realizes that sooner or later the Bells will enter most of the restricted markets. "Safeguards [preventing monopoly abuses] are expensive and ineffective," says Frischkorn. "There are two ways to prevent discrimination. Complete structural separation [of lines of business]. Or let the RBOCs manufacture when they no longer have a local-loop monopoly." Frischkorn says competition in local services is the best guarantee of fair-play in manufacturing. "They will have to buy equipment at the best price to survive -- just like AT&T in long distance." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 17:10:45 EDT From: jjs@ihlpf.att.com (James J Sowa) Subject: 711 Reaches E911 Center Organization: AT&T We just had a strange experience at home that I thought is worth mentioning. My four year old tried call me at work and dial the 713-xxxx number then said "Oops I dialed wrong". After she hung up the phone rang. My wife answered and was informed that it was our local police department and that they had a 911 call and a hangup. They asked if everything was OK, and asked why we called. My wife said no one called, then the dispatcher asked if we had small children and that she should talk to them about not calling in non-emergencies. My wife was talking to my daughter about it and they both heard sirens so my daughter got really scared that she would be hauled off to jail. When I got home I heard the whole story. I believe that my daughter is smart enough to know a seven from a nine so I started wondering about how the misdial could have happened. I asked my daughter why she thought she misdialed. She said she dialed two ones. I began to wonder and then I tried dialing 711 ... well it started to connect and then it was answered by the 911 center. I informed them that I had dialed 711 and the dispatcher informed me that Illinois Bell has turned up 711 to test the 911 routing since we have/are going from basic 911 to enhanced 911. Well, I still don't think my daughter believes me the call was not her fault. Jim Sowa att!cbnewsc!jjjs (708) 713-1312 [Moderator's Note: I just now dialed 711. It started ringing immediatly and after a few rings an intercept came on and said the area code of the number dialed had been changed to 708 ... please hang up, dial 1-708 and the number again. ??? PAT] ------------------------------ From: shaffer@chopin.udel.edu (Bob Shaffer) Subject: Request For "Phonejak" Information Organization: University of Delaware Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:02:29 GMT I have just been given an advertisement showing a "Phonejak" which "turns an outlet into a phone jack!" being manufactured by Phonex. Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with this device, its reliability, safety, accordance with FCC rules, etc.? Any information will be appreciated. Robert K. Shaffer - CNS User Services University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716 Phone: (302) 831-1987 - Fax: (302) 831-4205 internet: shaffer@udel.edu ------------------------------ From: Bruce@Pixar.com (Bruce Perens) Subject: Utility Meter Reading Switch Organization: Pixar -- Point Richmond, California Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:09:59 GMT Yesterday, I spent a few minutes an electric utility trade show in San Francisco. Every one of the exhibitors was showing something related to power meters. Most interesting from a telecom standpoint was a company that sold a data switch similar to a Voice-Fax-Modem switch, but for use to share a voice telephone line with a data-collecting power meter. These data-collecting meters are used by utilities that bill differently for peak and off-peak usage. The switch connects to the phone line before the telephone instrument. When the utility wishes to read the meter, they send DTMF down the phone line _without_ringing_, and the meter picks up the line. They need a special arrangement with the telephone company to do this. The meter downloads its data, and can also be _programmed_. If a telephone instrument is picked up or the CO has a call for that line, the data connection is dropped immediately and re-attempted later on. This sounds like the old "Harmonica Bug". It's interesting that COs can provide such a facility -- a voice path to a particular line without ringing. The potential for abuse is obvious -- it would be trivial to send dial tone down such a connection and provide "Trojan Horse" phone service. There's also the potential for very detailed records of electricity use on a minute-to-minute basis and the use of such records for surveillance. The data-collecting meters can also be manually read. They have a LED and photodetector behind the glass seal, and the meter-reader uses a hand-held computer with a similar optical transceiver to read the meter. This provides an intermittent-use connection with reasonably high bandwidth that is not vulnerable to contamination from liquids and grit. I wonder if these meters are vulnerable to power-factor abuse, or if the internal computer can detect such abuse. Bruce Perens ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 15:52:12 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Recorded Message About no Answer I just now called 9-1-800-xxx-xxxx, and eventually got the recorded message that my (called) party is not answering and (sorry) the call is now being disconnected. I have seen previous notice of this (such as call-ins to Larry King show). Although I was in Maryland, I got "215 4T" at the end of the message; is that a function of the carrier and/or the place I am calling? ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Message Center Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:54:37 EDT Subject: Tel Plus Wins Award {Corporate News} Washington Technology Magazine, September 10, 1992 Pg. 31 Tel Plus of Fairfax, Va. has won a contract from the General Services Administration to provide telephone equipment to federal agencies. The one-year contract is worth $1.25 according to GSA estimates. [Moderator's Note: This surely must be a typographical error. Even the phones at Radio Shack are worth a dollar, twenty-five cents. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Need Recommendsation For Cellular: Portable/Car/Hands-Free From: questor!sp@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Steve Pershing) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 00:00:15 PDT Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: +1 604 681 0670 I am posting this for a friend without net access. He is looking for a decent small portable cellular phone which he could also use hands-free in his car. On-air transmit time while in his pocket (or on his belt) is relatively unimportant. An hour or so would do. Cost, size and ease of use in carrying it and taking itin and out of his vehicle are the more important points. Any suggestions as to the merits of various units on the market would be very much appreciated. Also, where would one look in order to get a good used unit at a low price? Thanks in advance for any help. Steve Pershing, System Administrator, The QUESTOR Project FREE access to Environ, Sci, Med, & AIDS news, and more. [also UUCP] on a ZyXEL-1496S v.42bis, v.32bis, v.33, up to 16,800bps. POST: 1027 Davie St., Box 486, Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6E 4L2 Fones: (+1 604) Data: 681-0670 FAX: 682-6160 Voice: 682-6659 [Moderator's Note: I'd be careful about buying used cellular phones. Like used cars, you are buying someone else's problems often as not. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 01:58:00 -0400 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: 112 (was 911 Emergency Service Instead of 999) Laurence Chiu (lchiu@animal.gcs.co.NZ, emphasis added) writes: > How can 112 be any easier to misdial than another number > sequence like 445 or 779? In New Zealand, it isn't. In almost all of the rest of the world, 112 has only four dial-pulses, and could be generated accidentally by interfering with the motion of a rotary dial, or merely by flashing the hook. In New Zealand, 998 would be a bad choice for the same reason. Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: 19th Century Phone Numbers Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 04:26:11 GMT I recently looked at some issues of the {Columbia Daily Spectator} (our campus paper) from the 1890's. I noticed that some of the ads for local businesses had phone numbers such as 178 Morningside. Was it common in the 19th century manual exchanges to put the exchange name at the end? When I looked at issues from about 1920 or thereabouts, the numbers were in the form of Morningside XXXX. Does anyone know the history of phone numbers in New York? Obviously at some point an extra digit had to get in there. Anyone know when this happened? Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ From: aaron@stat.tamu.edu (Aaron Hightower) Subject: Touch Tone Decoding Projects: Mine Works, is There Better? Date: 14 Sep 1992 23:13:41 -0500 Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station I have a unit that I built entirely on my own that: * Is able to amplify and output preamp audio (from computer); * Is able to detect touch tones; * Is able to detect telephone ring signals; * Is able to determine status of phone call (did they hang up et al); * Is able to be controlled via my own language. The problem is that out of the $21.56 in parts, $7.18 is just for two audio-isolation transformers ... Can someone tell me more about how to make a good DAA that will conform to FCC part 68 for $7.18 or less (IE: not an entire DAA, but providing simply "two to four wire conversion" aka "hybrid circuit".) I have heard rumours about preassembled hybrid transformers for use in phones. Does anyone know a good source of these? Maybe someone would like to donate a sample so that I might buy many many in the future? If anyone needs info on how to get what I have working, I might have the inclination to put something together for you. ;-) Email me if you have a solution! Thanks, Aaron Hightower College of Engineering Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77840 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 10:27 CDT From: BG09110@SWTEXAS.BITNET Subject: Commercial Service Addresses Does anyone know if Telnet addresses exist for the following services? Portal - I understand that this service will offer free, unrestricted access to all who logon through Internet. Delphi? B Griggs BG09110@SWTEXAS.BITNET (Waiting for our domain name...) [Moderator's Note: I do not believe you can truely telnet to either of those sites. It's a lot like 'telnet mcimail.com': it says you got there, but you *really* wind up at the site serving as the gateway and where the name 'mcimail.com' is aliased. I think Portal and Delphi are the same way. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #713 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07343; 15 Sep 92 5:00 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27618 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:49:56 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25535 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:49:47 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:49:47 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209150749.AA25535@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #714 TELECOM Digest Tue, 15 Sep 92 02:49:51 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 714 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: USA to Ten Digits (Harold Hallikainen) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Alan L. Varney) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Ron Heiby) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Rich Greenberg) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Ed Greenberg) Re: Kauai Communications Out (Laurel Indalecio) Re: Kauai Communications Out (Kevin A. Mitchell) Kauai Phones Back (Scott Fybush) Re: education.tele.com (Nigel Allen) Re: education.tele.com (Dave Quinn) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Paul Schmidt) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Joe Trott) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 05:36:56 GMT As I've suggested before, I think the system should allow for any number of digits terminated by a # key or a time out. If I want to call my second line here, I could call 1 805 541 0201 # (using the current country code), or I could just dial 1 #, which would assume all the leading digits are the same as the originating numbers. This would get rid of all this access code stuff where we try to use leading digits to tell how many digits follow. Harold ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 08:20:48 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) writes: > Greetings. I for one would welcome the ability to dial all ten digits > on local calls. {Deleted reasoned rationale for the ability to use ten-digit (or 1 + ten-digit) dialing everywhere in the USA} > Hey Bellcore -- you can count on my public support if you want to give > this plan a try! Actually, Bellcore (or Bellcore acting as the NANP Administrator) isn't just proposing your request, they are RECOMMENDING it. But Bellcore doesn't run the RBOCs; it can only recommend. For example, in the "guide" I've mentioned before, they say: Sec. 3.3.4 -- "Numbering planners have long considered it good practice for switches to accept and attempt to complete any call originated with a valid 10-digit address, including home area calls for which 7-digit dialing could suffice. ... Step-by-step switching technology forced rejection of home area calls not conforming to recommended dialing practices. Such blanket treatment need not be continued with common control." Sec. 5.7 -- "The traveling public is particularly subject to confusion by the differing dialing plans used throughout North America. ... It is also recommended that format-based call rejection associated with toll alerting be limited to 7-digit toll calls." {In other words, 10-digit calls would never be rejected because they happened to be "local".} Sec. 7.1 -- "It is strongly recommended, as a short-term goal, that the dialing of 10-digits, when only 7-digits are required, not result in a call failure. The implementation of a full 10-digit dialing plan requires user awareness that a 10-digit number is always acceptable and does not necessarily connote a toll charge." So we're just waiting for the RBOCs to implement the these recommendations! Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ From: heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:46:10 GMT lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) writes: > It is becoming an ever increasing mess when people assume you're in > the same code they are (because, after all, you're local) and don't > bother giving you the area code. If I called them, then I already know their area code, so they should not have to tell it to me, unless it's different from the one I called to reach them. If they called me, then they already know my area code, so they should not have to tell theirs to me, unless it's different from mine. I don't see the problem. Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod ------------------------------ From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail. Playa del Rey, CA Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:32:13 GMT In article our Esteemed Moderator notes: > personally prefer the current arrangement even if I do have to dial > 1-708 for many of my local calls. PAT] For the benefit of Pat and others who, like me, make frequent local calls to different area codes, I would like to pass on a household hint for the finger-weary ... :-) I had some free memory buttons on my desk phone, so I set four of them to: "1213", "1818", "1714", and "1800". The memory buttons are "One Touch", so I just have to hit one button and then dial the seven-digit number. Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - richg@hatch.socal.com ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 18:11:08 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) writes: > When my home-town exchange went non-SXS last year, they lost the > ability to use four-digit local dialing -- even though the switch > could have supported the town as a Centrex group with four digits. > But things change ... When your hometown was SxS, I'll bet you had to dial 1 before the prefix of any out of town exchange that was in your area code. Now that you have more modern telephone service, you should be able to dial anything in your area code without a 1, and anything outside your area code with a 1. This is the way things are supposed to work in order to allow N[10]X prefixes and NXX area codes in the future. If the telco was to maintain four digit dialing in town, they'd logically require you to dial 1 to make a call outside the "centrex." Maybe even a 9 :-) Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0511 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 23:33:37 HST From: Laurel Indalecio Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out This little tid-bit about the communications situation on Kauai following Hurricane Iniki's devastation was in the Sunday paper here in Honolulu: Hawaiian Telephone Co. emergenmcy crews hope to have basic communications restored between Kauai and the rest of the world today. Two mountaintop telephone microwave relay towers on Kauai were physically intact but were "twisted and skewed" out of alignment by the raging winds, said Hawtel president Warren Haruki. While crews worked to repair the towers, major damage was discovered in another crucial link in the chain: A microwave dish on the roof of the phone company's central office in Lihue had been hit by flying debris and is inoperable. "We've been in touch with Kauai Electric and together we are estimating that 89 percent of the utility poles on this island are lying on the ground," Norman Ahu, island manager for the telephone company said. He estimated that it would take "at least a week, probably closer to two weeks" before local telephone service is restored to the bulk of the individual homes on Kauai. Hawtel spokesman Mark Doyle said the company was trying to fly a portable microwave dish to Kauai last night. A barge with emergency equipment, including two mobile coin-operated phone banks and two cellular phone "gopacs," was loaded and ready to leave Pier 24 yesterday afternoon, Haruki said. Once the microwave system is back in operation, Kauai residents can make free inter-island calls through Sept. 20, said Haruki. The phone company plans to have undersea fiberoptic calbes linking the phone systems of all islands in place by the middle of next year. The cable system is not susceptible to wind damage. Norman Ahu, island manager for the telephone company, estimated that about 11,000 of the 30,000 telephones on Kauai had partial service. - A portion of the front page article of the Sunday edition of the {Honolulu Star Bulletin & Advertiser} (typed by) indaleci@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu [Moderator's Note: So who told us the telco there was GTE-owned? Is HawTel part of GTE? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 09:49:50 CDT From: Kevin Mitchell Reply-To: kam@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Second, key components of Hawaii's hurricane tracking system were > never repaired or replaced after failing some time ago. In other > words, the storm was somewhat of a surprise. 'Scuse me, but I knew from the Weather Channel that the storm was approaching Hawaii, where landfall was expected, and where there were warnings. How could it have been a surprise in this day of weather satellites? Do they get the Weather Channel in Hawaii? I knew all about it, and I live in _Chicago_. In fact, a family friend was on his honeymoon in Honolulu (some honeymoon, huh?), and we'd heard news of what was going on by phone. Kevin A. Mitchell (312) 266-4485 Datalogics, Inc Internet: kam@hermes.dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!kam Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 17:55 EDT From: fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us (Scott Fybush) Subject: Kauai Phones Back The phones are back on Kauai. I tried calling at about 3 AM eastern time (9PM Sunday night Sep. 13 there) and got a message saying facilities were down. About three hours later, calls were getting through OK. The situation there is bad ... phones are back up, but power won't be for another month. There's no running water, thousands are homeless, and information isn't getting out to would-be aid recipients because the local radio stations are off the air. ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen) Subject: Re: education.tele.com Date: 14 Sep 92 21:24:14 GMT Organization: Echo Beach In article rogue@chezrob. pinetree.org (Marc Scott) writes: > I've just recently left high school and I was interested in furthering my > education concerning telecommunications at a higher level, college or > university. Could someone suggest a some suitable choices. Your local library will have copies of course calendars from many different colleges and universities. For information about programs offered at Ontario colleges and universities, see the book Horizons, which is available free of charge from: Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities Communications Branch 8th Floor, Mowat Block 900 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario Canada M7A 1L2 telephone (416) 325-2739 fax (416) 325-2750 The Telecommunications Research Institute of Ontario is located in the Ottawa area, but is a research association, rather than an undergraduate school. You may want to talk to the electrical engineering department at a nearby university to get a better idea about undergraduate coursework in telecommunications. You may also want to see if your local public or university library receives telecommunications-related magazines. Even though you may find some of the technical articles fairly difficult, you should get something out of reading them. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service. internet: bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80 ------------------------------ From: quinn@ender.tamu.edu (quinn) Subject: Re: education.tele.com Date: 14 Sep 92 03:11:00 GMT Organization: Texas A&M University In article <1992Sep10.212414.27723@samba.oit.unc.edu> Nigel.Allen@ bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen) writes: > You may want to talk to the electrical engineering department at a nearby > university to get a better idea about undergraduate coursework in > telecommunications. Here at Texas A&M University, there is a specialized field of the Engineering Technology degree plan which is directed toward telecommunications. As I am not involved in this degree plan, I do not have other information on it, but try 800 directory for Texas A&M ... call up and find out who to talk to. Dave ------------------------------ From: tijc02!pjs269@uunet.UU.NET (Paul Schmidt) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: Advocates for Self-Government - Davy Crockett Chapter Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 13:30:59 GMT Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu () writes: > Here is a press release from the National Association of Broadcasters > and the Consumer Federation of America. [Long press release about price regulation for cable companies.] It was disappointed to see so much effort going into a bill that won't, IMHO solve the problem. I got very tired of the government protected monopoly that our local cable company maintains so I put up an antenna and save $22/mo. There is a problem but price control will only fix a symptom, not the problem. I want to get the best price for cable service. This is not acheived through government decree of "fair" prices. The Soviet Union tried to control prices so that they would be "fair" and lost the automatic pricing controls of the free market which contributed to much suffering. The problem is that cable companies can achieve monopoly status by government decree. This government enforced monopoly doesn't allow the price lowering incentives of competition. The bill proposed does not do anything to solve this major problem. Price regulation generally does increase costs. The government could never require a cable company to lose money. Therefore, it would need to decide what would be a reasonable profit for a company. With a monopoly and a mandated price with a guaranteed profit, cable companies do not have to compete, innovate cost cutting measures, or increase quality for their customers. This system also favors the bigger established companies, while the small struggling companies would suffer. For proof that this does occur, call any broker and ask them about mutual funds for utilities. They will likely tell you that utilities are a very good investment. They are stable and have good yields. Why? Because the government controls their rates and guarantees them a profit. This problem will not be solved by more regulations. The regulations that have already given them monopoly status has raised them enough. If a little alcohol gives you a hangover, you don't try to get rid of it with even more alcohol. Paul Schmidt: Advocates for Self-Government Davy Crockett Chapter President 706 Judith Drive, Johnson City, TN 37604, (615) 283-0084 uunet!tijc02!pjs269 ------------------------------ From: joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:40:28 GMT Uh oh ... Looks like the government that was chartered to secure individual rights is once again going to violate them by initiating the use of force ... If you don't like cable rates, *DON'T BUY CABLE*. Admittedly, the proposal contains some sections that open up competition and prevent _others_ from initiating the use of "force" (in this case fraud/deception). This bill is a grey area. Like any grey area, it is _by definition_ made up of black and white. The black must be weeded out so that we can accept only the white. In other areas, cable rates may very well be held down, but the costs of regulation will raise government spending by at least as much, so we'll pay for it anyway in the form of addition government extortion. My emphasized statement stands. If you don't like ...! JTT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #714 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02759; 17 Sep 92 3:14 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06037 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 17 Sep 1992 01:14:54 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32156 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 17 Sep 1992 01:14:44 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 01:14:44 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209170614.AA32156@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #715 TELECOM Digest Thu, 17 Sep 92 01:14:48 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 715 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Phone Cell Satellites (sci.space via Ben Delisle) Cellular Phone Cell Manufacturers (Gerald Ruderman) USWest's Real Motives (was Helloooo...? [and] Here We Go Again) (A. Burt) Centrex Vs. PBX (Mike Miller) ROLM Announces New PhoneMail SPS (Mickey Ferguson) Unitel Announces its Canadian Long Distance Offering (David Leibold) Scanner Modification Help Wanted (Mike Miller) Help Needed With DOS to Unix File Xfer (S. Norton) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: delisle@eskimo.celestial.com (Ben Delisle) Newsgroups: sci.space Originally-From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) Subject: Phone Cell Satellites Summary: Iridium, Globalstar out to change the space biz Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 06:30:15 GMT [Moderator's Note: This was passed along by Ben Delisle. Thanks Ben. PAT] PHONE CELL SATELLITES Current cellular phones use a network of thousands of ground-based towers each projecting a radio "cell" a few miles across. Service is largely limited to cities in developed countries. Phone cells can greatly expand this service, while developing the critical technology of miniature spacecraft components for the 21st century. The biggest markets are travellers and wealthy third worlders, who number tens of millions despite being a small % of the total -- in Russia, India, China, Brazil, Mexico, Iran, Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey, Eastern Europe, etc. that have no cellular service. Cellsats can also usefully serve international air and ocean lines. At least initially, it won't compete with existing cellular service. The market is universally (well, globally :-) available cellular service, at a higher cost. How much higher depending on how many people sign on ... the old chicken and egg story. If everybody signed on, it would actually be much cheaper than the current local cell system, but these companies do not count on that to happen initially; the systems can pay for themselves by opening new niches. The cost of the most publicized system, Iridium, is projected at $3 billion. If one out of every five thousand people on our planet make $300 worth of phone calls a year for ten years, the system pays for itself. Initially this would be mostly business, not personal use (as was the case for city cellular when it started out). For this market the price will be about twice as high as the current city cellular. If the market expands well beyond 1/5,000 of the world population, the price can go below that of current urban markets, supplanting the thousands of towers with a more efficient set of radio cells projected from space. Concievably, with an expanded set of satellites the price of cellular service could drop well below the price of current international long distance, replacing GEO satcoms altogether for this $10 billion/year market. Initially, the technology will be quite properly marketed at the 90% of the Earth's surface currently without cellular service. IRIDIUM Here are the Iridium specs. Note that the constellation has been redesigned for larger satellite and cell size, reducing the number of satellites from 77 to 66: satellite: 386 kg user handset: 3 lbs voice,data,fax digital and encryptable global digital switch network markets: - general aviation and business aircraft - maritime communications - rural, Eastern Europe & Third World locations $3/minute - 1/2 to local providers - 1/2 to Iridium members 370 mi. dia. cell * 37 * 11 * 7 (100K mi.^2) 66*4 cross-link antenae, each 20 Ghz adjacent planes move in opposite directions Some tasks the Iridium people are working on: * Building the satellites. Since the scale is small, new technology can be incorporated and tested with small risk. Thus, there is no need to stick with old electronic technology used in the larger GEO satcoms. Lockheed will be in charge of developing the satellite bus and choosing the launcher. Motorola will develop the communications payload and make and market the cellular phones. * Choosing a launcher capable of boosting test and replacement satellites into their unique orbits for less than $10 million, as well as a launcher for the main satellites, from one to seven at a time, for less than $8 million apiece. Currently Pegasus costs $10 million and fits the first bill, although with only one good launch under its belt it needs to prove its reliability. Delta or Atlas launching Iridium in groups of six could fit the second bill, and a rumored Russian competitor to Pegasus might be able to launch singlets for less than $8 million. OSC needs to finish the Pegasus' hydrazine stage to improve the orbital insertion accuracy. The development of Pegasus' low entry-level-cost capability was a main driver behind the inspiration and genesis of Iridium and several other emerging small satellite industries. * The Iridium Consortium must obtain a set of frequencies in all the countries in which it wants to market its service. Phone cell satellites have obtained frequency from WARC and now each proposal must compete at national government levels. * New members must be added to the Iridium consortium; Motorola and Lockheed probably won't pay all the $3 billion on their own. The finance folks are busy talking to people like AT&T, NTT, and dozens of other deep pockets. Whoever puts in the most money could very well gain control over the world's cellular phone industry. GLOBALSTAR This information is from Klein Gilhousen of Quallcomm, Inc., which is teamed with Loral and several European companies on Globalstar: There will be 24 satellites in LEO (750 nm) in the initial deployment with coverage optimized for the U.S. Later, when international agreements are in place, the constellation will be expanded to 48 satellites, providing global coverage and improved coverage and capacity over the U.S. The system uses NO intersatellite relays. (I believe that these relays are a prime cost driver of the Motorola approach and that they would solve a non-existent problem. The problem is to connect mobile users into the network. Period. Global routing of phone calls is something that we already have.) By virtue of have no crosslinks, the satellite is significantly smaller and cheaper than the Iridium system. Total launch mass of one satellite is 262 kg. Eight satellites would be stacked and launched at once by a Delta, Ariane, or other standard launch vehicle. Airtime charges are projected to be in the same range as cellular service. According to the filing, initially, the airtime would be $0.31/minute with a monthly access fee of about $24. Later on, charges would fall to about $0.22/minute. The mobile phones will be based on CDMA digital cellular phones with RF adaptors to make them work in the L and S bands of the satellite system. Thus, the cost would be that of a CDMA cellular phone, plus maybe ten to twenty percent for the adaptor. The system would offer call capacity comparable to that of the Iridium system's satellite network with many fewer and less costly satellites through the use of the CDMA technology. Because a much smaller investment is required, the service cost will be correspondingly smaller. CONCLUSION Thinking small -- thinking at the optimum economical scale of technology, instead of the idealistic scale of technology -- is one of the major paradigm advances of phone cell satellites. The Iridium and Globalstar breakthrough is a good example of why industry is needed to set the standards for space technology, instead of government dictating to industry. Private industry is far more in tune both with the advance of technology and the needs of people. Government civilian programs have practically ignored -- spent less than 1% of their budgets on -- the technology needed for this lucrative market. Private industry is putting up its own money to fill this gap. szabo@techbook.COM ------------------------------ From: GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman) Subject: Cellular Phone Cell Manufacturers Organization: Rational Systems, Inc. Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 16:47:57 GMT A friend is researching a problem and would like to get some information on who makes cellular phone cells. (Is that the right term for the radio stations and their associated equipment?) Thanks, Gerald Ruderman geraldr@ratsys.com [Moderator's Note: Yes, that is the right term, and the answer is everyone makes cellular calls ... or at least a large and growing percentage of the population. All sorts of people use cell phones including myself. PAT] ------------------------------ From: aburt@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (Andrew Burt) Subject: USWest's Real Motives (was Helloooo...? [and] Here We Go Again) Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 14:11:09 GMT After some checking around here, and talking to some inside sources, and I think I have a handle on the whole thing now. Save this as an FAQ for when this abomination comes to your town ... It looks like the electronic directory via videotex/etc. is not expected to be a viable service, and USWest knows it. In fact, they apparently are only doing it because of some slip-up in the regulations which will be closed if the Brooks Bill passes in Congress -- so they want to create an information service, not matter how lousy it is, so they can further their position as an information provider (which of course the regulations are out to prevent). I'd guess anyone who says "it's a great service" is either ignorant or just spewing the coporate line; but even the insiders I've talked to agree it's garbage. They wanted quick'n'dirty. Apparently, also, the initial idea was to make this free (not $.15/minute) but between regulations and the French, it wound up being charged for. Oh, BTW, the server is in France. (Regulations prevented one server in the US since LATA boundaries would be crossed.) So, it all comes down to this being a tactical maneuver, not a real service we're expected to like or use ... Sigh. Andrew Burt aburt@du.edu ------------------------------ From: mmiller1@attmail.com Date: 16 Sep 92 14:57:55 GMT Subject: Centrex Vs. PBX I would like to get some facts on buying a PBX or buying Centrex. I would like to know what you like about Centrex and what you don't like about it. The same goes for the PBX. I myself am biased in favor of the PBX, but with Centrex prices dropping, there seems to be a cause for Centrex. I will publish my findings if this doesn't make the thread. Mike Miller ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 18:04:49 PDT From: mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: ROLM Announces New PhoneMail SPS Organization: Rolm ROLM TARGETS LOW-END MARKET WITH NEW PHONEMAIL SPS, ENHANCES PHONEMAIL SOFTWARE SANTA CLARA, CA, Sept. 15, 1992 ROLM, a Siemens Company, today made two announcements aimed at meeting the voice processing needs of small-to medium-sized businesses and also unveiled software enhancements for PhoneMail and PhoneMail SP systems. ROLM intrucduced PhoneMail SPS, a feature-rich, cost-effective, 4- to 12-channel product recommended for small businesses. The company also reduced the list price of its PhoneMail SP product by 15 percent and increased its capacity to 12 channels, creating a more flexible, cost-effective offering for customers requiring more complex applications. The new software features introduced for PhoneMail and PhoneMail SP include a strong s4et of multi-vendor offerings and advanced system management and security features, as well as PhoneMail Plus, a set of integrated messaging solutions. PhoneMail SPS, which carries a list price of $10,700, is a 4- to 12-channel system that integrates with ROLM Redwood, Siemens HCM 200, Siemens SATURN, Northern Telecom and Centrex switches. PhoneMail SPS supports the PhoneMail Network Option and can be upgraded to PhoneMail SP as customer application needs change. PHoneMail SP, introduced in June 1991, is designed primarily for use with ROLM's 9751 CBX Model 10 but integrates with all ROLM CBXs, as well as most non-ROLM PBX and Centrex systems. "The PhoneMail SPS extends the rich set of PhoneMail solutions to a wider range of businesses," said James R. Mackey, DIrector, Information and Voice Processing. "And the lower price and expanded number of channels on PhoneMail SP make it even more attractive for users wanting the full spectrum of PhoneMail features but not needing more than 12 channels. The new software features increase ROLM's multi-vendor support capability with: - AMIS Analog Networking Option, through which PhoneMail can be networked with non-ROLM voicemail systems meeting the AMIS analog specification; -Digital integration of PhoneMail with AT&T PBXs to provide a wide range of features and superior voice quality; - PhoneMail Information Exchange (PIE), which provides two-way message notification between PhoneMail and virtually any electronic mail system. With the new Export Data feature, PhoneMail data can be sent in ASCII format to a report generator that creates customized reports. With system security being a top priority for businesses today, ROLM has added the Default Password Check and Transfer Restriction Tables features, which reduce the chance of unauthorized mailbox access and unauthorized transfer from PhoneMail. PhoneMail Plus solutions extend ROLM's voice processing power by functionally integrating with other communications offerings to deliver Fax, TDD, call center and electronic mail support. This approach lets customers add capabilities, leverage investments in existing systems and get the highest functionality in each application. ROLM, a Siemens Company, is a leading supplier of telecommunications products and applications. With PhoneMail, ROLM pioneered integrated voice messaging and is a leader in developing digital telephones and switches, Automatic Call Distribution and integrated voice/data technologies. The Siemens family of companies employs more than 30,000 people in the United States and has annual U.S. sales of more than $4.5 billion. ROLM and PhoneMail are registered trademarks of ROLM. SATURN is a registered trademark of Siemens. CBX and TDDisplay are trademarks of ROLM. ----------- Mickey Ferguson -- Rolm -- FergusoM at scrvm2 -- mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 22:09:38 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Unitel Announces its Canadian Long Distance Offering Unitel's limited competing voice network will be offered to the public starting 19th October. Service will initially be offered in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, likely by means of a local number port (FG A?) plus the need to dial the number and a billing code. An appeal of the CRTC ruling opening up long distance competition prevents Unitel from having equal access (10xxx) or default dialing operations, and alternate 800 number services are also prohibited until the appeals launched by the incumbent telcos (Bell Canada, BC Tel, etc) are cleared up. Olympic medalist Silken Laumann was on hand to place the first public voice call on Unitel's network ... this was to another olympic rower in Victoria BC. Unitel expects to offer a discount of 15% on incumbent telco long distance rates, while offering up to 40% off on certain business packages. There is a goal of 25 000 residential customers by Christmas and 2-3000 small to medium sized business customers. Unitel won't exactly be the first on the block to offer the general public standard voice long distance access. A resale company called Smart Talk Network has been making the BBS rounds to offer its network goodies, including U.S. 800 number access at about 49 cents/min (ie for those U.S. 800 numbers not reachable from Canada, STN offers bypass). dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ From: mmiller1@attmail.com Date: 16 Sep 92 05:14:03 GMT Subject: Scanner Modification Pat, I have a Bearcat 210 scanner. Do you know how I can "enhance" my scanner to monitor the 800 mh freqs? [Moderator's Note: No, I don't know about this particular radio, and I want to remind everyone who has written me with similar questions that it is illegal to modify any radio unless you are a licensed technician. I picked your letter out from several received as typical, not to just single you out or harass you. If the radio has some 800 range to it, then it can probably be brought around to include the cellular area. If it only goes to 512 megs, then I would have my doubts if it could be done conveniently or inexpensively at all. I've seen radios which through tricks of one kind or another were able to be programmed into the 800 range (which otherwise did not include that band as built in the factory); they would sit there and scan, but not actually receive any signals they could deal with. To receive 'forbidden frequencies' within a range of the spectrum the radio is otherwise designed to receive is as trivial as cutting a trace here and there and adding a couple jumpers to make selected pins on the chip go high or low (or to ground) as desired. Maybe a diode has be pulled out. But if you get into a whole new range of frequencies the radio was not tuned for, then problems of broadbanding the unit come up ... and I am not sure I would want to tackle it myself although an exacto-blade and a little solder don't bother me at all. If you even *touch* those cores in there without knowing what you are doing you will be sorry! If anyone knows about Mike's radio, perhaps they will write him direct. PAT] ------------------------------ From: snorton@galaxy.gov.bc.ca Subject: Help Needed Wtih DOS to Unix File Xfer, HELP Date: 17 Sep 92 16:21:29 -0700 Reply-To: snorton@galaxy.gov.bc.ca Organization: BC Systems Corporation I'm currently running Kermit as a DOS terminal emulator and file transfer software, accessing a Unix mini. We are starting to transfer fairly large files and are having some problems with the speed in kermit. Some transfers are taking 20 minutes plus. I'm using ATI 9600 baud modems, but the bottle-neck seems to be Kermit. Does anyone know of a public domain file transfer package I can use between a DOS pc and a unix mini. I intend to continue with Kermit for terminal emulation, but would like something faster I can run under kermit for the actual file transfer. If you have any suggestions please respond via mail, to snorton@galaxy.gov.bc.ca. I appreciate the help. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #715 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15058; 17 Sep 92 10:07 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04252 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 17 Sep 1992 07:37:52 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20067 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 17 Sep 1992 07:37:44 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 07:37:44 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209171237.AA20067@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #716 TELECOM Digest Thu, 17 Sep 92 07:37:49 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 716 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson DSN Circuit Survives Andrew (Government Computer News via Paul Robinson) Phantom NXX Codes (was Bad Connection...) (Jack Winslade) SS7 Connections to IC (Carl Knoblock) Microlog Sells VMX Systems (Washington Times via Paul Robinson) Comsat Buys Stake in Plexsys (Washington Times via Paul Robinson) SWB in Texas Proposes CALLID Tariff (Greg T. Stovall) Manuals Needed For Toshiba Strata VI (John J. DiLeo) Telecom Frequent Flier Programs (Rolando Vinluan) Full Page Pacific Telesis Ad (John Higdon) Telecom-Engineers List Still Gathering Names (Jon Solomon) SS7 Job Opening in NJ (Tretech Solutions Inc) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 02:02 GMT From: 0005066432@mcimail.com Subject: DSN Circuit Survives Andrew DSN Circuit Survives Hurricane Andrew {Government Computer News, September 14, 1992, Pg. 6} By S.A. Masud, GCN Staff By the time Hurricane Andrew had finished flattening Homestead Air Force Base, Fla., a solitary four-wire Defense Switched Network circuit was the only working communications link between the base and the outside world. An AT&T Co. official who visited the base just after the storm said Andrew's fury ripped away an air-conditioning system and part of the roof of the building housing the base's AT&T system 85 switch. James Orefice, AT&T's account manager for the Air Force, said he saw the switch standing in water and covered with debris. Before Andrew's pre-dawn attack, a microwave connection was set up from Homestead AFB to BellSouth Corp., the Regional Bell operating company in that area. Mounted on a trailer, the switch became the base's link to the outside. Orefice said more than 100 phone lines, including about 48 DSN circuits, now have been established for the base. For all the havoc wrought by Andrew, effects apparently were negligible on the government-wide FTS 2000 system, supplied by AT&T and Sprint Corp., and on the Defense Department's Defense Commercial Telecommunications Network, which is also supplied by AT&T and supports the DSN. "I'm absolutely satisfied with FTS 2000," said William Cunnane, the General Services Administration's deputy associate administrator for FTS 2000. "We did not have any switching nodes go down. The vendors performed very well. They responded to all our expedited requests by getting in service when we needed it, and they continued to keep us updated on any service impacted in that area." Jack Tozier, head of Sprint's integrated management center for the company's Government Systems Division, said Sprint took no unusual precautions other than putting in emergency generators to augment battery backup at key network sites. Sprint's FTS 2000 services are part of the company's nationwide network made up of 42 DMS-250 Northern Telecom Inc. switches, including one in Orlando for Southern Florida. AT&T's FTS 2000 network has 18 of its 5ESS switches, one of which is located in Miami. Tozier said the Small Business Administration and a number of other agencies sent in priority orders for expedited service. An AT&T official said the Federal Emergency Management Agency put in about 3,000 priority orders with long-distance and local carriers because of Andrew. James Jackson, manager for AT&T's FTS 2000 network center, said FEMA asked for 96 lines the day Andrew hit Florida. The request was made about 7:15 p.m. and by 11 a.m. the following day, FEMA had service between the BellSouth central office in Miami and the FTS 2000 network. Jackson said the Energy Department asked that its 800 service be moved from the New Orleans area to Texas. The service was moved to two separate locations in Texas over a two-day period at the agency's direction, Jackson said. If Andrew had taken a different route in Louisiana, both AT&T and Sprint were prepared to route traffic from the Agriculture Department's National Finance Center in New Orleans to the Recovery Operations Center, an alternate site in Philadelphia. Jackson said AT&T maintains contingency plans that range from what the company can do for particular agency in an emergency to what needs to be done if there is a problem in the network itself. For instance, as soon as AT&T officials saw a problem in southern Florida, they immediately shifted some of the traffic from FTS 2000 to AT&T's commercial network in order to maintain communications so long as there was local service in Florida. "When customers lost connections, we were aware of what was happening because we were monitoring these locations very closely," Jackson said. "The management system allows us to gather all the alarm data from all network components." Both AT&T and Sprint officials said that extensive use of optical fiber cabling, combined with rerouting, has made networks robust enough to withstand Hurricane Hugo and the California earthquake in 1989. On the other hand, the end links that deliver services to customers are far more vulnerable. One end link that Andrew did not affect at all was mobile phone use with cellular service, AT&T officials said. On the Homestead base, the Air Force used microwave equipment to restore communications, they said. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 11:32:50 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Phantom NXX Codes (was Bad Connection...) Reply-To: jack.winslade%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha In a message dated 13-SEP-92, John M. Sullivan writes: > would have a tag like "2ED". Not having a phone book, I tried > 999-9999. I got a message "the number you have dialed, 341-9999, ...". > What happened there? For various reasons, the phone companies will occasionally assign two (or more) central office codes to the same physical switch and group of lines. Here in Omaha there have been a number of cases of this. The first one I remember was (I was told why this was the case from someone at TPC) with Union Pacific's home office. They were on an old stepper PBX with DID off of the 402-271 prefix. However, their main switchboard number was always listed as 402-281-xxxx. At the time, dialing 271-anything and 281-same-anything would reach the same line. I was told that this was because they wanted the high volume of non-DID dialed calls to come through certain trunks and not to clog the trunks used for the DID calls. What was really strange was that the main number (281-xxxx) was a seemingly normal four-digit number, not x000 or xx00. I assume this may have been the number they had before DID and simply added the DID and kept the original. When UP ash-canned the stepper, 402-281 went with it. ;-) It no longer shows in the NXX lists. There was a short-lived 'choke' prefix here in Omaha used for a weather line and maybe a few others. It was 402-894 and it was first an alias for 402-344 and later for 402-444. It was discontinued many years ago. (Omaha's new choke prefix is 402-962.) Good day. JSW Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 14:50:36 CST From: Carl.Knoblock@ivgate.omahug.org (Carl Knoblock) Subject: SS7 Connections to IC Reply-To: carl.knoblock%inns@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE I don't rememember who asked, but yes there are SS7 connections from LECs to ICs already. The only one *I* know of is in Omaha, Nebraska, where we have SS7 to MCI. AT&T is scheduled to go SS7 soon. Omaha has had local SS7 and CLASS services for about two years now. U S WEST is also actively promoting "PC Phone" (ISDN) services here. The relaxed regulatory climate in Nebraska is largely responsible for our advance ahead of the rest of U S WEST area. Tarrifs are automatically in affect a short time after filing, if not challenged, so new services can be rolled out in short order. Of course I could be wrong ... Carl Knoblock - Omaha Nebraska carl.knoblock@inns.omahug.org Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.3 inns.omahug.org +1 402 593 1192 (1:285/27.0) ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 22:24:42 EDT Subject: Microlog Sells VMX Systems {Washington Times}, September 1, 1992, Page C2 Microlog Corp, a Germantown [Md.] communications-products firm, said GTE Telephone Operations of Irving, Texas has agreed to buy Callstar 1000 and 2000 systems worth $1 million over the next year. Callstar is a voice-mail and automated attendant system. The order consists of various port and storage capacities, spare kits, and optional software packages. USA Digital Radio Test a Success USA Digital Radio, an Arlington high-tech venture, said it successfully tested its over-the-air AM digital audio broadcasting system after receiving an experimental license from the Federal Communications Commission. The FCC awarded licenses to USA Digital Radio -- a partnership formed by Gannett Broadcasting, CBS Radio and Group W Radio -- to test its over-the-air AM and FM digital audio broadcasting systems. The AM test was conducted Aug. 26 in Cincinnati. An FM test by the same partnership is expected soon. ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 22:30:50 EDT Subject: Comsat Buys Stake in Plexsys {Washington (DC) Times} September 4, 1992, Pg. C3 Washington-based Comsat Corp. acquired a 20 percent equity interest in privately held Plexsys International Corp., a firm that makes cellular network systems mainly for rural regions. Terms were not disclosed. Plexsys, based in Naperville, Ill., has installed its cellular systems in 15 countries. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 07:30:00 +0000 From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall Subject: SWB in Texas Proposes Caller-ID Tariff Southwestern Bell in Texas has proposed a tariff for Caller ID services. While there is some concern over conflicts with Texas privacy and wiretapping laws, the tariff is expected to be approved. Services are: Caller number: $6.50 Caller name: 6.50 Caller name and number: 8.00 Call Block rejection 3.00 (if ordered separately from CALLID. $1.00 if ordered with other services) Since other optional features here in Texas cost about $3.10, (although SWB is raising the price on Call Waiting to $3.85 due to popularity), these new tariffs seem rather steep. I am looking for some information on pricing structures in other states; any direction would be helpful. Gregory T. Stovall gstovall@bnr.ca Bell-Northern Research Richardson, Texas, USA (214) 684-7009 My opinions are not necessarily endorsed by BNR. ------------------------------ From: John J. DiLeo Subject: Manuals Needed For Toshiba Strata VI Date: 16 Sep 92 16:12:42 GMT Organization: Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity HELP! I have obtained a used Toshiba Strata VI key system (posted for sale here recently), but it did not come with manuals. As the cost for new manuals from a supplier is rather extreme, I hope that someone out there can help me. I would be willing to purchase the configuration and programming manuals for a reasonable price, or would pay for photocopying and shipping, if you like. Thanks, John DiLeo dileo@brl.mil ------------------------------ From: Rolando Vinluan Subject: Telecom Frequent Flier Programs Organization: Cornell University, CS Dept., Ithaca, NY Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 16:40:18 GMT >> MCI is pretty incompetent, in my experience. If they didn't >> have that Northwest tie-up, I'd never have gotten them. As soon as >> AT&T starts offering a competitive Frequent-Flyer program (their >> current one is still lousy), I'll definitely switch back. > What is AT&T's frequent flier offerring? I didn't know they > even had one. > Ralph Well, I don't remember exactly what the details of AT&T's offer was. Last month, I just got this mailing; all I remember is that it wasn't much compared to MCI's Northwest deal. I think it was a one-for-one thing, though: For every AT&T dollar, you get one bonus point on your favorite FF program. If I'm mistaken, then at the very best it must have been a one-for-two offer. Because if it was one-for-three, I'm sure I would have given it serious thought. (Just *thought*, mind you ... I'm so cheap that doubtless I'd have stuck by MCI's one-for-five offer [for NorthWest, which has so far given me no reason to change airlines]). BUT HERE'S NEWS: I just got a call from Sprint a few hours ago, and they're matching MCI's international and domestic rates, *and* has a one-for-ten (!) FF offering. I'd have changed right then and there, but I wanted to stick to MCI a month more just to make *sure* they and Northwest credit my past bonuses [Northwest's WorldPerks center moves so slow...]. Gee, one-for-ten, and then I have my Amex miles (a one-for-one thing). At this rate, I'll surely have a free trip by December! When an AT&T operator asked me my reasons for changing carriers, I suggested that you have should have a FF program, too. I guess AT&T was listening, and to people who don't go on long trips or make a lot of long-distance calls, it might be just as attractive as the competition. But for people like me, though, not to take advantage of the competition's offerings would be unwise. I don't need clearer lines *that* badly! :-) Randy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 14:10 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Full Page Pacific Telesis Ad From the back of the second section of the 9/16/92 {Chronicle}: (quoting ad) IF THE CONGRESSMAN FROM TEXAS GETS HIS WAY, CALIFORNIA WILL BE OUT 179,000 NEW JOBS. Evidently, Representative Jack Brooks (D-Texas) thinks economic growth can wait a few years. His proposed bill would prevent the regional Bell companies from producing new products and service and expanding their networks for years to come. That means much-needed jobs that could be created, won't be. Experts estimate it could mean a loss of one and a half million new jobs nationally. And 179,000 new opportunities in California. Gone. It's not too late to act. Call our toll-free number, and we'll see that a mailgram opposing the Brooks bill is sent immediately to your Congressional Representative. At no cost to you. Or do nothing, and before long you might see a lot more American workers doing exactly that. Stop the Brooks bill. Call 1-800-999-7998. Pacific Telesis (End quoted advertisement) So do you think that Pac*Bell would be willing to set up this same "free" service (paid for by ratepayers) so that supporters of the Brooks bill could make THEIR feelings known to Representatives? I thought not. This is the most blatant appeal to emotionalism through distortion of facts that I have seen yet from the RBOCs. Of course there is no mention of how many independent information and equipment providers will be put out of business or how much extra the public will pay when the RBOCs have their information and equipment de facto monopolies created. Just what we really need: more of the old Bell System. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: Did the advertisement *specifically* say that the ad was being paid for by ratepayers? If not, perhaps it was paid for by stockholders. How do you know? IBT runs political commentary ads sometimes but they are paid for by the company stockholders and say so in the ad itself in small print somewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Telecom-Engineers List Still Gathering Names Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 09:14:37 -0400 From: Jon Solomon It's still new. I haven't sent out one Digest (and I have gotten only a small amount of input); only requests to be added (about 250). When I receive more input, I will send out a digest. Please send all input to "telecom-engineers@cs.rutgers.edu" thanks. jsol ------------------------------ From: tretech@well.sf.ca.us (Tretech Solutions Inc) Subject: SS7 Job Opening in NJ Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 05:11:46 GMT Tretech Solutions Inc, is a NJ based consulting firm, servicing the computing and engineering needs of Fortune 500 companies. We offer highly competive compensation, a full line of benefits, and will sponsor. Immediate Consulting Position in Central NJ: Software test tools developer for SS7 communications development lab: Must have experience programming in UNIX, C. Knowledge of voice/data communications protocols including SS7, knowledge of emulators such as Tekelec. Work experience required. Qualified candidates only, FAX your resume immediately to 908-946-4175, and follow up with either Email copy or DOS compatible floppy (with paper copy) to Tretech Solutions, Inc., PO Box 44, Holmdel, NJ 07733. Tretech saves all paper resumes for future consideration. We currently do not save emailed resumes. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #716 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15299; 17 Sep 92 10:16 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10860 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 17 Sep 1992 08:07:38 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02038 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 17 Sep 1992 08:07:30 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 08:07:30 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209171307.AA02038@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #717 TELECOM Digest Thu, 17 Sep 92 08:07:34 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 717 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cellular Frequencies (Richard McCombs) How Can I Tell if Call is LD or Local? (Otto L. Miller) Caller ID Arrives in New York (Dave Niebuhr) Caller ID and Security Codes (Dave Niebuhr) PBS Videoconference Announcement (Tom Flavell) What Does a DS-3 Circuit Terminate at? (Kevin W. Mullet) Users Claim AT&T Charges Higher Rates For Identical Services (J. Bergstein) More Norstar Comments and Questions (Jeff Wasilko) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cellular Frequencies From: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org (Richard McCombs KB5SNF) Reply-To: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 21:44:21 CDT Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, Ok Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> writes: > I'm wondering if it is illegal to listen in on these frequencies. In > other words, does the law say it is illegal to listen in on cellular > calls, or does it specifically mention 869-894 MHz. Why isn't 895-920 > MHz blocked on scanners since you can overhear cellular? Also, why > would the party on the other end of a cellular call sound stronger > than the cellular user? Pat says: > Ahhh -- too bad! It is illegal to listen to cellular calls, period. It > is also quite easy to do the mods required on most scanners with 800 > megs capability to bring those frequencies in. Some Radio Shack > dealers sell the PRO-34 scanner (my model) with a straight look on > their face then on your way out the door hand you a crudely photocopied > sheet of paper with pictures of the circuit board telling you to pull > diode D-3 and D-4 to recover the full band ... but only to be done > when the scanner is being exported outside the USA, of course ... of > course! PAT] I don't disagree with what Pat says, with the exception that I didn't get a copy of the MOD sheet when I bought my PRO-34 which was over two years ago but that's not the reason for me responding. Jeff is probably receiving cellular calls by tuning to the image frequency. I probably at this point should explain the operation of super-hetrodyne receivers, but I'm trying to keep this short. The point is the PRO 34 has such poor image rejection that when I took my unmodified PRO 34 to a city in which the Police, Fire and other city communication was on 800 MHz I couldn't listen to the city without getting interference from cellular towers. So with the PRO 34 sometimes you can here the cellular calls even when you aren't trying. Internet: rick@ricksys.lonestar.org, bo836@cleveland.freenet.edu UUCP: ...!rwsys!ricksys!rick, {backbones}!ricksys.lonestar.org!rick BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm Fidonet: Richard McCombs @ 1:385/6 [Moderator's Note: The legal catch is, you aren't trying. That's why there is the loophole in FCC regulations about hearing something versus deliberatly tuning; and repeating what you hear, etc. The nature of radio waves being as they are, you can't help what you hear sometimes. Thus, no law against hearing something on the radio, just in benefitting from it or telling others. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 07:30:08 EDT From: Otto L. Miller Subject: How Can I Tell if Call is LD or Local? G'Day all, I have a problem and I suspect someone out here knows the solution! I have a list of NPA-NXX, given a pair from the list how can I tell wheather it is a LD or local call? Does pair order make a difference? I know in MOST cases if the NPAs are different then it is a toll call, however, in the Wash D.C. area (where I am) this rule does not hold true. Are there any programs, lists etc. that will define this for me? Any help will be appreciated. Thank you all in advance! I hope this has not been a waste of bandwidth. In addition, Please e-mail me direct. I have not been on the net in a while due to an OFFFFFF net location. Regards, Otto L. Miller olm@ssds.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 07:52:19 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Caller ID Arrives in New York New York has announced the availability of Call ID (their term) for a selected area of the state starting in November, 1992. This area includes Newburgh, Poughkeepsie, Kingston, Beacon and the surrounding mid-Hudson area, Rockland, and in parts of Nassau, Suffolk, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten island. It will be available to those subscribers whose exchanges are equipped to handle Phone Smart(tm) which is Call Return, Repeat Dial, etc. Two types of restriction will be given: per-call and all-call with all phones set to per-call initially. Two changes are allowed in the first six months and it will be $5.00 after that for each change. It goes on to explain just what is involved with Call ID and the potential for an unlisted number to be displayed if care is not taken with the select code (*67) or call restriction option. I called the business office to get more information but the person I talked to didn't have that much more information; therefore, I can't give any further particulars on this. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 08:23:36 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Caller ID and Security Codes An interesting question was posed on a newsgroup where I work concerning security codes and Caller ID. My employer requires the use of security codes stored in a database that allow callback when a certain number is dialed and another code is entered. Therefore, my question is: Will the callback number be displayed on a Caller ID display unit? Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note: Not if the dialing string commences with *67 it won't ... or if the modem lines have per-line blocking, if that feature is available. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tflavell@pbs.org Subject:PBS Videoconference Announcement Date: 16 Sep 92 18:39:01 EDT Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA Please check with your local PBS station Education Services Director to see if this will be broadcast in your area: TELECOMMUNICATIONS: BRINGING THE WORLD INTO THE CLASSROOM, a professional development videoconference for educators and school boards will be presented on October 22, 1992, from 2:00-4:00 PM Eastern Time by the National School Boards Association's Institute for the Transfer of Technology to Education, the PBS Elementary/Secondary Service and the National Foundation for the Improvement of Education. This live, interactive videoconference will investigate issues in telecommunications use in schools from a variety of perspectives -- from policymaker to practitioner. The videoconference will feature NFIE's 1992 award-winning Christa McAuliffe Educators, who employ some of the most innovative applications of technology in schools today, such as: *Connecting Students from Around the Globe Via Lumaphones and slow-Scan-Video: Voice and picture messages are carried over telephone lines from Michigan to Japan connecting students and teachers in the Garden City Public Schools with their Japanese contemporaries. *Teaching About Cultures Close to Home: Technology is being integrated into multicultural curriculum programs in Little Wound School in South Dakota to educate and instill value of traditional native American customs. *Achieving Real Life Studies of Our Earth: Students in Arlington, Virginia are taking part in the National Geographic Kids Network to share current information in an international telecommunications-based science and geography curriculum studying acid rain. *Opening Up the World of Science: Students are utilizing a variety of technological tools including computers, video disc, scanners, telecommunications, and robotics to complete classroom assignments and discover the world of science. *Creating a Global Perspective, Community, and Classroom: Students in Covina, California are being introduced to Prodigy and E-mail and other educational technology to engage students in collaborative efforts to examine worldwide problems. By offering this videoconference, educators in your area will learn how (and be able to ask questions of) these innovative teachers are applying telecommunications-based programs in exciting ways. Questions? E-mail TFLAVELL@PBS.ORG or call Tom Flavell at PBS at (703) 739-5402. Or write: Tom Flavell;PBS;1320 Braddock Place; Alexandria, VA 22314. ------------------------------ From: kev@sol.acs.unt.edu (Kevin W. Mullet) Subject: What Does a DS-3 Circuit Terminate at? Organization: University of North Texas Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 07:49:09 GMT I need to find out what's needed to route IP,IPX and possibly Appletalk over a DS-3 circuit to our local net. We're a site based on Cisco AGS+ routers, and I'll ultimately need to terminate on one of them. Here's what I think I know. Please take the liberty of correcting me if this isn't correct. A DS-3 line, otherwise known as a T-3, is the equivalent of 28 T-1 channels and operates at 44.736 Mbps. Physically, it is implemented as fiber. At the link level, my choices seem to be SMDS, BISDN, Frame Relay and 802.6 DQDB. I think a few outfits like ADC Fibermux, Network Equipment Technologies, and Newbridge Networks make T-3 multiplexers that will bridge between T-3, Ethernet and Token ring. Has anyone used any of these boxes? The T-3 Backbone of the Internet/NSFNet runs on IBM's RS/6000-based IP routers -- does anyone know if IBM is selling these commercially yet? If they are, the idea of IP tunneling the IPX, and scrapping Appletalk is pretty interesting. What I need to know is what plugs into what to funnel a DS-3 circuit down to a campus Ethernet network in a way that uses the most available trunk bandwidth possible within a somewhat conservative budget. As always, please reply to me via electronic mail, and I'll post a summary to the net. Kevin Mullet University of North Texas kev@unt.edu ------------------------------ From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 01:35:47 -0500 Subject: Users Claim AT&T Charges Higher Rates For Identical Services From {Information Week}, 9/14/92, p.46 "Billing, 1 Service, 2 Prices" by Mary E. Thyfault "Users claim AT&T charges higher rates for identical services" It happens all the time. You find what appears to be the same item with two different prices. If you ask why this is, sometimes the clerk just shrugs, or tells you about a difference that appears insignificant. Five corporate users claim that is precisely what AT&T has been doing for years, unlawfully charging two to three times as much for identical service. Charles Schwab & Co, Inc. Japan Air Lines' American Region, Quotron Systems Inc., Texaco Inc., and TRW Information Systems' Group Credit Data Division have lodged a formal complaint with the Federal Communications Commission, seeking to recover $1.4 million in alleged overcharges. "There may be hundreds of users affected by this," says Henry Levine, a partner in the Washington law firm of Morrison & Foerster, which is representing the five organizations. "We have no way of knowing. They might not notice because it is only a difference of $100 to $200 a month. But over time, that can add up." Levice estimates that AT&T has overcharged business customers between $50 million and $150 million since divestiture. The petitioners discovered wide differences in pricing when Telecom Services Ltd. West Inc. in San Francisco, a telephone bill auditor that list all five as clients, check their charges. At issue is Tariff 11, the private-line service AT&T offers customers who want to connect two different local locations. AT&T can either directly connect the two sites, know as "prem-to-prem," or, for two to three times the price, run the private line through one of is own offices on the way to the second location, called "prem-pop-prem." An AT&T spokesman argues "the two choices are clearly stated in the tariff. Customers are all charged in accordance with that tariff. We believe the FCC will agree with us." The users charge that AT&T did not initially tell them about the options. "AT&T simply installed the more expensive one," says Levine. "but to the user, and sometimes even to AT&T, it appears to be the same service." According to a sworn affidavit by Ernestine McClelland, a regional service center manager for Quotron, AT&T initially told Quotron it was billing prem-to-prem circuits at an incorrect, higher rate. In 1985, AT&T "corrected" the pricing on about 300 circuits, but continued to bill about 60 circuits at the inflated rate. After user complaints, AT&T justified the higher cost of prem-pop-prem, saying it can better monitor the offering. However, actual maintenance of both services is performed by the local phone company, not AT&T. And, the users add, the more expensive service is less reliable, with more points of possible failure." ------------------------------ From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) Subject: More Norstar Comments and Questions Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 21:28:44 EST Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div. Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com > My company just moved from a huge castle served by a Rolm 9751 PBX > into a small office served by a NT Norstar system. In order to retain > our phone numbers, we moved our DID service with us. (same CO) > In general, I am a highly satisfied customer of the Norstar/Startalk > system. So are we. We just bought one and cut over last Friday. We've got 60 ports (34 station, 12 CO lines, eight DID trunks and six OPXs). It's got the feel and features of a much bigger switch. > One little question though: > Callers to our DID lines hear a brief dial-tone-like tone, followed by > a pause, followed by a ring. Where does that dial-tone come from? Is > this bad programming of the Norstar? CO? What is "wink start" mean? First, be sure that you are using DR4 software, as it is the first to support real DID trunks -- maybe someone hacked something together under an earlier SW release. When someone calls our DID numbers, they do not hear dialtone -- just a pause, a clunnk and the call starts ringing (call me at 203-834-2322 to hear what it sounds like). There was also a new DID module under DR4 I think, so if you don't have one then something is definitly wierd. However, we found that for some strange reason that the Norstar is putting dialtone on the DID trunks. If we put a butt set on one of the DID trunks we get dial tone. We can then outpulse three digits and get connected to a station. Both the WilTel installer and the SNET tech thought this was very strange. Is this normal for a Norstar? Also, the Norstar can simulate a DISA port over a DID trunk -- make sure that feature is off, or you might be getting dialtone from this. > Somebody once posted an excellent description of how DID service > works, which I lost. If anyone has that, I would greatly appreciate > it. As I understand it, DID maps a range of numbers (such as 834-2300 to 834-2399) to a few dedicated trunks. When a call comes in on one of the DID numbers, the CO switch grabs one of the dedicated trunks and sends the last few digits of the dialed number to the PBX. So if you call my DID line (834-2322) the CO grabs one of our DID trunks, outdials 322 (the last 3 digits) and then our PBX returns either ringback or busy. As for wink start, I'd like a definition, since that's what our DID trunks are. Also, there is very low-traffic list specially for Northern Telecom switches. Mail submissions to telswitch-nt@dg-rtp.dg.com and telswitch-nt-request@dg-rtp.dg.com for subscription requests. Jeff Jeff can also be reached at work at: jwasilko@airage.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #717 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22217; 18 Sep 92 4:31 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28451 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 18 Sep 1992 02:07:41 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30003 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 18 Sep 1992 02:07:31 -0500 Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1992 02:07:31 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209180707.AA30003@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #718 TELECOM Digest Fri, 18 Sep 92 02:07:36 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 718 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Scanner Modification (Mike Peyton) Re: Scanner Modification (J. R. Pendleton) Re: Scanner Modification (Paul Cook) Re: Scanner Modification (Michael A. Covington) Re: Scanner Modification (Mark Walsh) Re: Scanner Modification (Rich Greenberg) Re: Scanner Modification (Gary W. Sanders) Re: Scanner Modification (Jim Rees) Re: Scanner Modification (Bruce Taylor, IV) Re: Scanner Modification (Michael Ardai) Re: Scanner Modification (Ed Greenberg) Re: Cellular Phone Cell Manufacturers (Andrew Klossner) Re: Cellular Phone Cell Manufacturers (Seth Breidbart) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Scanner Modifications From: epiwrl!wireless!mike@uunet.UU.NET Date: Fri, 18 Sep 92 00:36:50 EDT Organization: Center for Wierd Wireless Studies [Moderator's Note: I guess it was one of those days ... I'd have been better off going to bed early and getting some sleep at night for a change. The following responses were selected from ** 74 ** received in the mail today all saying mostly the same thing. PAT] mmiller1@attmail.com writes: > Pat, > I have a Bearcat 210 scanner. Do you know how I can "enhance" my > scanner to monitor the 800 mh freqs? > [Moderator's Note: No, I don't know about this particular radio, and I > want to remind everyone who has written me with similar questions that > it is illegal to modify any radio unless you are a licensed technician. ^^^^^^^? ^^^^^^^ False, the above is only partically true, even for transmitters. ANYONE can work on virtually any receiver. It is even still legal (though admittedly up to some interpetation) to add cellular frequencies to a scanner. It IS illegal to LISTEN to cell phone calls. Congress is currently trying to make it illegal to manufacture a radio with cell frequencies, but as far as I know it hasn't passed yet. In fact much to the disgust of those of us in broadcasting at the time, The FCC dropped most technicican licensing requirements back in the early 1980's. It was the old "deregulate industry, industry will police itself, and consumers won't listen to distorted station" routine. I do have to admit that there hasn't been as much interference and problems, as had been predicted. ** stepping off soapbox ** PS: It is true that even though it is legal, it doesn't mean you won't kill yourself :-) Mike Peyton mpeyton@mcimail.com or wireless!mike@wrl.epi.com equals uunet!epiwrl!wireless!mike [Moderator's Note: Speaking of killing yourself, or almost killing yourself, did I ever mention the time I picked up an old 11 meter linear amplifier in a trade? A nice unit with a 100 watt output, but it needed a couple minor repairs (loose solder connection, a burned out lamp illuminating the dial, a tube to be replaced, etc.). Usually I have enough wits about me to first probe around inside things with a screwdriver with a plastic handle which I touch from capacitor to ground from time to time -- I enjoy seeing the look on people's faces when one of those big boogers discharges the stored up juice and shoots fire with a loud defiant bang at whoever is watching me work :) But one time I forgot to discharge those caps first ... hee hee ... it was *not* funny then when I got knocked on my keister ... although I laugh about it now. If you like electroshock therapy, you'll love sticking your hand inside old radios and televisions which haven't been properly discharged first. :) But read on ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: jerryp@key.amdahl.com (J. R. Pendleton) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Date: 17 Sep 92 18:12:51 GMT Organization: Employer not involved in this. Mr. Townson - I was rather intrigued by the above note. With the exception of the celluar frequencies and certain other parts of the spectrum, I was under the impression that it was legal for anyone to build recieving devices. The statement that I have to be licensed Radio Tech to modify a reciever makes felons out every kid who every put togather a crystal radio set or every ham who modified his own gear. I'm not flaming, and mayhaps you know more than I, but could you justify the above statement? Many thanks, J. R. Pendleton, who does not speak for Key Computer Labs or Amdahl Inc. uucp: jerryp@key.amdahl.com Voice : (510)623-2146 Amateur : KC6RTO ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 19:16 GMT From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Anyone can build or modify a radio receiver. There are no licensing requirements. There are still Part 15 requirements for certification that a device does not radiate excessively, but these are for manufacturers of mass produced products, and nowhere in Part 15 does it restrict modifications to the radio receiver. The FCC used to license technicians who work on transmitters, but under the "Reagan FCC" this was derregulated. The commercial phone FCC license isn't even required for engineers at broadcast stations anymore. The Bearcat 210 doesn't even tune much above a half GHz, so there aren't any diodes to clip to "unblock" cellular frequencies, since it doesn't operate anywhere near this band. Paul Cook 206-881-7000 Proctor & Associates MCI Mail 399-1080 15050 NE 36th St. fax: 206-885-3282 Redmond, WA 98052-5317 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 19:20:37 GMT > [Moderator's Note: No, I don't know about this particular radio, and I > want to remind everyone who has written me with similar questions that > it is illegal to modify any radio unless you are a licensed technician. Falsch. There has never been any law requiring a license to build or modify any type of _receiver_. (Maybe you didn't catch the fact that he was talking about a receiver.) There used to be an FCC regulation allowing only licensed technicians to adjust and repair certain kinds of _transmitters_, but my understanding is that the requirement has been dropped (the FCC feels it is sufficient to require the transmitters themselves to meet specifications, regardless of how they get that way). Cellular eavesdropping is, of course, illegal, as are various other _uses_ of radio equipment to violate people's privacy. Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ From: walsh@optilink.com (Mark Walsh) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Date: 17 Sep 92 23:41:03 GMT Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA Whoa, since when? I know that it is illegal to modify type accepted equipment (e.g. CB's) without a radiotelephone license, but since when has been illegal to modify our own equipment? Hams not only modify their own equipment, they even build it in some instances. Also, while it has always been illegal (at least since 1934) to divulge the contents of just about anything (other than broadcasters, hams, and CB'ers) heard over the air, the prohibition on the mere monitoring of cellular phone transmissions came from the 1986 ECPA (Electronic Communications Privacy Act). Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh AOL: BigCookie -- Amateur Radio: KC6RKZ@WX3K -- USCF: L10861 ------------------------------ From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail. Playa del Rey, CA Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1992 03:21:02 GMT Pat, I beg to differ with you on this. I am an FCC "licensed technician" (1st class phone for 20+ years) and there are no licensing requirements to do whatever you want to a RECEIVER. If its a TRANSMITTER, then yes, the license is required for most transmitter work. There are some exceptions, mainly for Hams (amateur license is required however) and CB (license? We dont need no steenken licenses. ..). :-) Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - richg@hatch.socal.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 13:58:52 GMT From: gary.w.sanders@att.com Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Organization: AT&T The radio is question was a receive only scanner and it is not illegal to make changes/mods to a receive only radio. No license is required. It is LEGAL to own a radio that covers 800mhz including cellular. It is as we all know (and ignore) illegal to listen in on cellular calls. Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR) gary.w.sanders@att.com AT&T Bell Labs 614-860-5965 ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 14:23:13 GMT I'm a licensed tech myself (FCC First Class Radiotelephone, or whatever it's called now, and Amateur Advanced Class), and I think you're wrong. You need a licensed tech to do transmitter work, and certain other kinds of work (like nav/comm radios in airplanes), but anyone can work on a receiver here in the US. Laws in other countries may vary. I'm not even sure it's technically illegal for an unlicensed person to work on a transmitter. Doing so violates the type acceptance of the transmitter, which is not in itself illegal. Putting such a transmitter on the air after having worked on it is almost certainly illegal, even if the transmitter otherwise meets all the appropriate specs. There are even some classes of transmitters that anyone can work on without a license of any kind. An example of this is the low-power AM & FM wireless mics. Anyone can build one of these, although there are limits both to the power output (input?) and the antenna size. It's illegal to listen to cellular phone calls. I don't know whether it's legal to modify an existing radio to receive cellphone frequencies. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 10:47:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Taylor, IV Subject: Re: Scanner Modification There is no law against random individuals modifying radio equipment, in the USA. There are rules regarding *transmission* from modified radio equipment, excepting licensed amateurs in their ranges of frequencies. On the other hand, the Electronic Communication Privacy Act restricts the ability to listen to certain frequencies and transmissions, including Cellular. Somehow I thought this'd been run into the ground already ... Bruce Taylor blt+@cmu.edu [Moderator's Note: You are right. After this issue, it has been run into the ground unless something interesting comes along. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ardai@zax.ATB.teradyne.com (Michael Ardai) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Organization: Teradyne, Inc. Boston MA Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 15:40:16 GMT Actually, you can do whatever you want with a receiver. You must be a licensed tech to do any repairs/mods on a type-accepted transmitter. A ham may do any mods on transmitters that work only in the ham bands > If the radio has some 800 range to it, then it can probably be brought > around to include the cellular area. If it only goes to 512 megs, then > I would have my doubts if it could be done conveniently or inexpensively > at all. If the scanner will pick up 400-512, you can use a block shifter that will image the 800 MHz band down to 400 MHz. This device sits between the antenna (or preamp) and the radio. > To receive 'forbidden frequencies' within a range of the spectrum the > radio is otherwise designed to receive is as trivial as cutting a > trace here and there and adding a couple jumpers This will only work if the radio is designed/programmed to allow it (which most scanners that have the 800MHz range are). In this case, the mod is usually very simple for someone with minimal electronics experience and doesn't require retuning the radio. Please remember that it is illegal to listen to cellular phone calls, either with a modified scanner, down converter, TV with channel 80-83, or anything similar. The cellular companies don't want their users to realize they are talking on an open channel :-) Michael L. Ardai N1IST Teradyne EDA ardai@maven.dnet.teradyne.com [Moderator's Note: I think the manufacturers are getting heat about this situation -- where the pins on the chip can be diddled to bring in 'unauthorized' frequencies -- and are changing the way they do things. I know Motorola had to quit using a chip called the 02-A in CB radios for this reason when the feds started getting after them. Now everything seems to be in ROM. Either it is a frequency you are supposed to use or the radio just won't operate, period. It used to be you could disconnect the tuning knob (usually a big gang switch with lots of connections on it) from the chip and install a device called a 'Digi-Scan' in its place and go all over the 10/11 meter band. Getting the radio to *actually oscillate* way up in 10 meters was another story; but brave souls would turn those cans until either it worked (rarely) or they messed the radio up totally (usually). Then it was up to me to sadly inform them they sounded like pooh ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 16:34:11 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Hi Pat, I hate to jump on you again, but I think you've slipped a fact. This is the USA. It may be illegal to USE A MODIFIED TRANSMITTER in most services, but last time I looked, it was certainly legal to modify a receiver. In fact, here in the land of the free, etc., we are even allowed to BUILD radio receivers without a license. Now, it may be illegal to monitor cellular calls, and it may even be illegal to sell radios that can, but the blanket statement that it's illegal to modify a radio receiver is just plain false. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0511 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) [Moderator's Note: I thought there was still a legal objection (by the FCC) to doing things which might cause the IF to stray on a reciever. I remember as kids how we would take old-fashioned tube style AM radios and divert the IF from normal use, sending it up an antenna and radiating somewhere around a quarter of a watt of power all over the neighborhood. Tuned to 1620 or 1630 kc we'd then walk for a couple blocks in all directions listening to our 'radio station'. One day we got the bright idea of attaching the IF to one side of a telephone pair. It made no difference on the phone line (the RF just coasted along on the 'antenna') and I think we went almost a mile away, holdiog a little pocket radio up to telephone poles and hearing our signal. Even with a regular antenna, we could hear the quarter-watt of IF nearly a mile away when we stood next to electric or telephone poles although we had to strain to hear it through the hash. The aluminum flag pole in the park six blocks away made an excellent receiving antenna to listen to our 'radio station'. I assumed in my earlier -- obviously in error -- posting that the FCC was still opposed to people tinkering inside radios at all for reasons such as I describe above. At least none of you guys objected to my warning against messing with the trim pots or turning the cans! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 12:53:44 PDT Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Cell Manufacturers Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman) said: > A friend is researching a problem and would like to get some > information on who makes cellular phone cells. ^ You replied: > ... the answer is everyone makes cellular calls ... ^ Apparently you read an 'a' where Gerald wrote an 'e'. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 11:50:15 -0400 From: sethb@fid.Morgan.COM (Seth Breidbart) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Cell Manufacturers Pat, I think you misread something. Seth sethb@fid.morgan.com Subject: Cellular Phone Cell Manufacturers ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ A friend is researching a problem and would like to get some information on who makes cellular phone cells. (Is that the right term ^ for the radio stations and their associated equipment?) Thanks, Gerald Ruderman geraldr@ratsys.com [Moderator's Note: As I said at the start of this issue, I think yesterday was not a good day. I think I should have gone to bed early instead of putting out a Digest. Maybe I got distracted thinking about my birthday next week and how I shall commit Hari-Cari or some other unmentionable act at 5:27 PM on September 24. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #718 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23817; 19 Sep 92 14:14 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06805 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 12:09:19 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23914 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 12:09:10 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 12:09:10 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209191709.AA23914@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #719 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Sep 92 12:09:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 719 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Kauai Phones Back (Mark Walsh) Re: Kauai Communications Out (Mark A. Cavallaro) Re: Kauai Communications Out (Jack Adams) Re: Kauai Communications Out (Gary Morris) Re: Kauai Communications Out (John Rice) Re: Kauai Communications Out (indaleci@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu) Re: Kauai Communications Out (John Higdon) Re: Kauai Communications Out (Brian K. Uechi) Hurricane INIKI Update (Stan Schey) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Dr. Math) Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" (Tim Tyler) Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" (James Zuchelli) Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" (Rob Hansen) Re: Scanner Modification (Christopher Wolf) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: walsh@optilink.com (Mark Walsh) Subject: Re: Kauai Phones Back Date: 19 Sep 92 20:18:23 GMT Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA In article , fybush@unixland.natick. ma.us (Scott Fybush) wrote: > The situation there is bad ... phones are back up, but power won't be > for another month. There's no running water, thousands are homeless, > and information isn't getting out to would-be aid recipients because > the local radio stations are off the air. It should be pointed out that within a few hours of the disaster, amateur radio operators were passing message traffic from the island using both voice and packet on 20 and 40 meters (7 and 14 MHz). I did a bit of listening, and their throughput was truly commendable. Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh AOL: BigCookie -- Amateur Radio: KC6RKZ@WX3K -- USCF: L10861 ------------------------------ From: Mark A Cavallaro Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 10:25:52 PDT Pat, you asked if HTC is a GTE company. I spent three years as a defense contractor on OAHU. I worked with HTC, and AT&T to upgrade the Navy EAS. YES, HTC is a GTE company. But this only interferes with services on tariff issues, and policy. When it come to disasters of this kine, GTE policy is largely ignored. The technical ability of the average HTC employee is far better than I typically find in the mainland US. There are many frustrations when dealing with HTC, particularly if they perceive you as a potential rival. Their political clout is unmatched. After all, it is a community of islands, and VERY clannish. I could go on for hours on that subject; nough said. Mark Cavallaro ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams) Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 12:50:42 GMT In article , indaleci@uhunix.uhcc. Hawaii.Edu (Laurel Indalecio) writes: > This little tid-bit about the communications situation on Kauai > following Hurricane Iniki's devastation was in the Sunday paper here > in Honolulu: > Hawaiian Telephone Co. emergency crews hope to have basic > communications restored between Kauai and the rest of the world today. > - A portion of the front page article of the Sunday edition of the Insert smirkey, ;-) above^. Honestly, the Hawaiian Telephone folks, based on my experience with them (An emergency circuit provisioning exercise in 1989) are top drawer. Since I have personal friends who live near Princeville, Kauai (north side of island) I am especially thankful for their yeoman efforts at restoring service. Of course, as my patron Saint, Jimmy Buffet says ... Changes in latitude, changes in attitude ... also applies to GTE in the Garden Isle. Mahalo mui loa HawTel, Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore NVC 2Z-220 (908) 758-5372 {Voice} | (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: garym@telesoft.com (Gary Morris @pulsar) Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out Organization: TeleSoft, San Diego, CA, USA Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 01:00:06 GMT In indaleci@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Laurel Indalecio) writes: > Hawaiian Telephone Co. emergency crews hope to have basic > communications restored between Kauai and the rest of the world today. > [Moderator's Note: So who told us the telco there was GTE-owned? Is > HawTel part of GTE? PAT] According to an article in Clarinet News (clari.nb.telecom), cellular phone service (they don't mention the provider) was restored in Kauai on September 13th. It goes on to state that regular phone service is provided by "GTE Hawaiian Telephone", which is bringing in phone vans to allow residents to call out. Gary Morris Internet: garym@telesoft.com Ada Software Development UUCP: uunet!telesoft!garym TeleSoft, San Diego, CA Phone: +1 619-457-2700 ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 03:10:45 GMT In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > I really do hope that considering the anguish of relatives and the > actual suffering of island residents that GTE manages to rise to the > occasion and restore telephone service in a timely manner. And then > maybe someone can look into why all communications to and from the --- > island were able to be knocked out in the first place. Got to disagree with John on this one. Ham radio operators were communicating quite reliably from Kauai to Oahu, continuously throughout the course of the storm and continue to do so. 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 06:54:46 -0500 From: indaleci@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out Organization: University of Hawaii at Manoa > [Moderator's Note: So who told us the telco there was GTE-owned? Is > HawTel part of GTE? PAT] Yes. HawTel is, as the local commercials have so ingrained in my head, short for GTE Hawaiian Tel -- our local BOC equivalent. indaleci@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 10:35 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out Organization: Green Hills and Cows > [Moderator's Note: So who told us the telco there was GTE-owned? Is > HawTel part of GTE? PAT] I did. Yes, it certainly is a part of GTE. As a matter of fact, most GTE employees assume that it was brought into the fold so that the Stamford executives would have a nice place to visit (officially) once in a while. According to an ex-employee, GTE/Hawaiian Tel is the Guinea pig for new procedures and equipment. Honestly, I am surprised that you were unaware that GTE owned Hawaiian Tel. One only has to experience the look and feel of the company to realize this. Haven't you been to the islands? In article kam@hermes.dlogics.com writes: > 'Scuse me, but I knew from the Weather Channel that the storm was > approaching Hawaii, where landfall was expected, and where there were > warnings. How could it have been a surprise in this day of weather >satellites? Do they get the Weather Channel in Hawaii? According to sources on Oahu, Hawaii's independent hurricane tracking system has been crippled for several years because its repair has become a political football in Washington. In this particular case, The Weather Channel called it correctly. But some on the islands are highly annoyed that their own system has suffered neglect. And in case you are unaware, our satellite capability in re: hurricanes is in serious trouble. Normally there are two GOES series satellites, one positioned over the Pacific and the other over the Atlantic. A couple of years ago, the Pacific satellite died so the Atlantic one was repositioned over the central US. This has severely restricted the hurricane watching capability over both oceans. In addition, the remaining GOES satellite has passed its design life span and could fail at any moment, virtually blinding our weather forcasters. The next launchings (GOES-NEXT) are scheduled for mid-1994. I leave it to you to see the potential trouble. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: No John, I have never been 'to the islands'. I have been as far away as Stony Island Avenue on the south side of Chicago however, and to Goose Island, a little body of land completely surrounded by water (the Chicago River) which is part of Chicago. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out From: brian_u@verifone.com (Brian K. Uechi) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 04:34:04 GMT Organization: VeriFone, Inc. Yes, HawTel is owned by GTE. I see the HawTel name less and less (some trunks have GTE in large letters and HawTel in small). I suspect the HawTel name will eventually disappear. ------------------------------ From: STAN.SCHEY@gte.sprint.com Date: 19 Sep 92 17:12:00 UT Subject: Hurricane INIKI Update GTE employees are working nonstop to restore telephone service on the Hawaiian island of Kauai which last Friday was devastated by Hurricane Iniki, a Category 4 hurricane. Damage to and restoration of telephone network: The telecommunications network on Kauai suffered major damage, but only minor damages were sustained on Oahu. Offers of help have been pouring in from other GTE companies. Currently, portable digital microwaves are being flown in from California and the Northwest; VSAT radios are coming from GTE Spacenet and a radio system is coming from the Northwest. As of Tuesday morning, approximately 50 percent of the telecommunications network on Kauai had been restored to service, with an extensive continuing restoration effort under way by GTE Hawaiian Tel. GTE Hawaiian Tel air-shipped portable phone banks for use by island residents, many of whom remain without phone service. They were set up at the Lihue Shopping Center and in Kapaa next to the company's switching center. For those on Kauai able to use their telephones, and for those using the coin-free phone banks, GTE Hawaiian Tel is providing free interisland calling through Sunday, September 20. ------------------------------ From: Doctor Math Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Organization: University of Notre Dame Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 03:57:25 GMT In article backon@vms.huji.ac.il writes: > The National Headquarters of the American Red Cross in Alexandria VA > seems to be on the Internet as: red-cross.org Indeed: > set q=any > red-cross.org Server: bind.nd.edu Address: 129.74.250.100 Non-authoritative answer: red-cross.org nameserver = CURLY.RED-CROSS.ORG red-cross.org nameserver = SIVA.RED-CROSS.ORG Authoritative answers can be found from: RED-CROSS.ORG nameserver = CURLY.RED-CROSS.ORG RED-CROSS.ORG nameserver = SIVA.RED-CROSS.ORG CURLY.RED-CROSS.ORG internet address = 162.6.5.5 SIVA.RED-CROSS.ORG internet address = 162.6.6.2 > red-cross.org siva.red-cross.org Server: siva.red-cross.org Address: 162.6.6.2 red-cross.org origin = siva.red-cross.org mail addr = root.siva.red-cross.org serial = 1 refresh = 10800 (3 hours) retry = 3600 (1 hour) expire = 604800 (7 days) minimum ttl = 86400 (1 day) red-cross.org nameserver = siva.red-cross.org red-cross.org nameserver = cross.red-cross.org siva.red-cross.org internet address = 162.6.6.2 sanger 209# finger @siva.red-cross.org [siva.red-cross.org] No one logged on ess = 162.6.6.2 sanger 209# finger @siva.red-cross.org [siva.red-cross.org] No one logged on ------------------------------ From: tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler) Subject: Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" Organization: UMCC Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 19:34:13 GMT In article lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > I haven't seen the movie yet but I am surprised. In almost all movies > I've seen (or TV shows for that matter) where a phone number is > identified, it's invariably 555-nnnn. This I presume is an invalid > number always except perhaps for n=1212 so to avoid telephone phreaks > calling the number to see who's there and annoying some poor soul who > just happens to possess that number. They ought to use 976 numbers, so that the genetic wonders that decide to call for the hell of it will learn a lesson. 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 PADI, USPA, AFCEA, INEOA, P226, VFR700, etc. ------------------------------ From: claris!qm!James_Zuchelli@decwrl.dec.com (James Zuchelli) Subject: Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" Date: 19 Sep 92 19:18:49 GMT Organization: Claris Corp In article , lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > In article bei@dogface.austin.tx.us > (Bob Izenberg) writes: >> Alas, there was no seductive gun-toting NSA agent to be yanked >> away from the dinner table. The film industry's normal flawless >> attention to telecom detail :-) failed it here: (415) 273-4196 is now >> in area code (510). I don't know what would have been said (at least >> on the side of the call in our town!) had someone answered, but the >> matter is academic. The number has not been assigned in that area >> code. At least, as far as we know. Would we have been rattled if >> the phone rang right back when we hung up? Maybe just a little. > I haven't seen the movie yet but I am surprised. In almost all movies > I've seen (or TV shows for that matter) where a phone number is > identified, it's invariably 555-nnnn. This I presume is an invalid > number always except perhaps for n=1212 so to avoid telephone phreaks > calling the number to see who's there and annoying some poor soul who > just happens to possess that number. I called the number (in area code 510) and the phone rangh a few times and then switched and rang somewhere else. The person who answered the phone said the number I reached was for the IRS. The person said the number I reached was not the number dialed (273-4196.) I guess someone wants to play a joke on the IRS? ________DISCLAIMER_________ The above does not represent the opinion of Claris Corp or my employer. ------------------------------ From: hansen@inference.com (Rob Hansen) Subject: Re: Phone Number in "Sneakers" Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 11:59:40 PDT bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg) wrote: > A few friends and I saw the movie "Sneakers" recently ... > Toward the end, River Phoenix's character asks for the phone number > of a female NSA agent. One of our group remembered her number... Well, I guess I'll admit that I also made a note of the number, and I think you got it wrong. It was 415-273-xxxx, which when translated into 510 rings into an "unassigned" voice mailbox. The recording says the number is unassigned, but then goes on to say "if you'd like to leave a message, please wait for the tone." Then, presumably because of the movie, you're told that user can't receive any messages at this time (meaning their box is full). Sounds like an NSA front to me...! ;) ------------------------------ From: cmwolf@mtu.edu (CHRISTOPHER WOLF) Subject: Re: Scanner Modification Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 11:13:03 EDT Is it illegal to listen to "cellular calls" or to listen in at the "frequencies of" cellular calls? I ask merely because someone suggested shifting the cellular frequencies down to where a scanner could more easily pick it up, and I wondered how the law would be worked on that particular case, in which you would be listening in on the content, but not at the frequency. Christopher Wolf Electrical Engineer cmwolf@mtu.edu [Moderator's Note: It is illegal to listen to cellular calls, regardless of how you manage to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #719 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25986; 19 Sep 92 15:15 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16046 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 13:03:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08772 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 13:02:56 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 13:02:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209191802.AA08772@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #720 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Sep 92 13:03:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 720 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (Jeff Hibbard) Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (Andrew Klossner) Re: Why Non-Authorized Cellular 911 Works. Maybe. (Jeff Hibbard) Re: Why Non-Authorized Cellular 911 Works. Maybe. (Don Ford) Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (Jeff Garber) Re: AT&T Mail's Phone Number (Darrin Robinson) Re: AT&T Mail's Phone Number (Correction) (Fred E.J. Linton) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Jack Decker) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Carl Moore) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Joseph Bergstein) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Lauren Weinstein) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Richard Cox) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Alan L. Varney) Re: USA to Ten Digits (John Higdon) Re: USA to Ten Digits (Steve Gaarder) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jeff@bradley.bradley.edu (Jeff Hibbard) Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Organization: Bradley University Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 06:50:18 GMT johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > There could be plenty of liability issues if a telco refused a 911 call > from a phone whose ESN was marked bad by mistake. Given that we seem to > be moving toward a national ESN data base updated by all umpteen hundred > cellular carriers, it's almost certain that some of the data will be bad. Yes, especially if my carrier (United States Cellular Corp.) is allowed to update it (and I presume they are). At the rate I'm going, I will soon be on their deadbeat list, but it's not because I haven't paid *EVERY* legitimate bill from them *ON TIME*. These people are just confused beyond all belief. They are also very slow to post payments, and occasionally lose one altogether. After routinely getting dunned for not making payments on time, despite mailing them sufficiently in advance, I started driving to their office every month and paying in person. The first time I did this, they hit me with a late charge. When I called to question this, they said "We ALWAYS post payments the day we receive them, and we didn't receive yours until ... it must have been delayed in the mail." The office of the clerk claiming she didn't get my payment for four days is literally about 20 feet from the person who accepted the payment. Even since I've been paying in person, more months than not I've received disconnect warnings for not paying ... always postmarked AFTER I personally delivered the payment in question. I am currently disputing a $160+ error which should be obvious to any non-moron examining my bill. The person I've been working with acknowledges that they massively overcharged me, but the process of putting a credit through takes MONTHS, during which time there is no mechanism for stopping the ever-escalating warnings about what they'll do to deadbeats like me who won't pay this $160. Personally, I'm surprised my phone still works these days. Jeff Hibbard, Peoria IL ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Date: 19 Sep 92 00:29:00 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon Our Moderator writes: > If the ESN is marked bad by mistake, then a problem might exist if a > call to 911 were denied. If the ESN is correctly marked, then no > liability would exist." This ignores the fact that, in today's litigious environment, liability is whatever a jury of twelve people say it is. I'd love to be the lawyer filing a wrongful death suit against a cellular carrier who denied 911 service. Regardless of whether liability *ought* to exist in this case, a cell carrier would be truly stupid to block 911 calls from any phone, for any reason. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) ------------------------------ From: jeff@bradley.bradley.edu (Jeff Hibbard) Subject: Re: Why Non-Authorized Cellular 911 Works. Maybe. Organization: Bradley University Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 05:37:35 GMT Paul Robinson writes: > Every telephone in every state (every one that gets a bill, that is! > :) ) is being assessed a surcharge ranging from 2c to 25c a month for > 911 or Enhanced 911. 2c to 25c? I pay 80c for each of the multiple lines in my house here in Peoria IL (Illionis Bell territory). And we don't even have Enhanced 911 yet because the county and all the cities in the county can't agree on who gets to run the dispatch center(s). > [assumption that 911 air time comes out of the 911 line tax] Dialing 911 on a cellular phone around here connects you to the state police, who are not involved in POTS 911 and its finances, so I doubt your assumption is correct. My guess (and that's all it is) is that cellular companies provide 911 for free for good will and/or (more likely) because they perceive it as being cheaper than getting sued by the heirs of someone they didn't allow to make a critical 911 call. Incidentally, some system south of here (probably Springfield IL, but I was between cities and it's hard to know for sure) will not complete cellular calls to 911 at all. ------------------------------ From: dwford@uswnvg.com (Don Ford) Subject: Re: Why Non-Authorized Cellular 911 Works. Maybe. Date: 19 Sep 92 15:26:18 GMT Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc. Paul Robinson (FZC@CU.NIH.GOV) wrote: > 'caller pays all charges number' and 911 is probably also paying for > the airtime too. Nope, we class 911 calls as unbillable. 911 is allowed to go through for reasons of public 'good will.' Don Ford U S WEST NewVector Group Inc. (206) 450-8585 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 04:34 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago In article John Perkins wrote: > It's been possible to dial 999 from almost any telephone in the UK to > get emergency help since at least the 1940's (when I was a kid). I've > often thought it would have been nice if this had been adopted as a > world-wide standard and it puzzles me why AT&T chose to use 911 when > they must have been aware of the UK system. Possibly because 999 is a regular CO exchange number in many places in the U.S. Here in 714-land, it is (and has been for a long time) an Anaheim (CA) exchange. I've noticed that most of the pay phones inside Disneyland are 714-999-99xx. As a bored teenager, I used to call the Disneyland payphone at 999-9998 (located in Tomorrowland, I believe, but still a local call for me) and ask whoever answered how they were enjoying their day at Disneyland, what rides they've been on, where they were from, etc ... Surprisingly, most people would go along with me and answer my questions without asking who I was! If I had been smart about it, I suppose I could have made a carreer of it and sold the resultant demographic, customer interest, and satisfaction data to Disney execs ... Jeff Garber My opinions are just that. ------------------------------ From: robinson@stout.geo.brown.edu (Darrin Robinson) Subject: Re: AT&T Mail's Phone Number Date: 19 Sep 1992 17:49:20 GMT Organization: Brown University, Providence RI 02912 In article tdarcos@attmail.com writes: > When I wanted to try AT&T Mail to see how it compares with MCI Mail, I > just called 1-800-222-0400 and asked {them} for the number. > The following comes from the signup package for AT&T Mail: > The two phone numbers for AT&T Mail are: > To call for inquiries and questions: 1-800-MAIL-872 > To call up to pick up messages: 1-800-MAIL-123 > (You can also use 950-1ATT from many locations). Paul tried the "universal" AT&T approach ... AT&T's consumer and business centers (1-800-222-0300 and 1-8000-222-0400 recpectively) will have the information for you. AT&T went to a ONE number for all problems methodology back in 1989. Darrin E. Robinson (DER31) Hamnet N1LLV 146.700-, 146.880- MHz DCNS Sysstems Programmer Internet darrin@mit.edu M.I.T. n1llv@porter.geo.brown.edu Cambridge, MA 02139 SPAN(et) PGGIPL::ROBINSON (Node 7132) AT&Tnet: (617) 253-0131 Nasamail derobinson@nasamail.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: 19-SEP-1992 00:45:30.83 From: Fred E.J. Lnton Subject: Re: AT&T Mail's Phone Number (correction) In , tdarcos@attmail.com (Paul Robinson) cites 1-800-MAIL-872 as the phone number for AT&T Mail inquiries and questions. In fact, 1-800-MAIL-672 works; as for ...-872, I dunno -- never tried it. [The other numbers he cites do work for me.] 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) [Moderator's Note: My point was, why can't 800-555-1212 come up with the number for AT&T Mail? That is the standard way to go about finding 800 numbers from directory assistance. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 92 16:28:57 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits In message , edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) writes: > When your hometown was SxS, I'll bet you had to dial 1 before the > prefix of any out of town exchange that was in your area code. > Now that you have more modern telephone service, you should be able to > dial anything in your area code without a 1, and anything outside your > area code with a 1. This is the way things are supposed to work in > order to allow N[10]X prefixes and NXX area codes in the future. Who said that things are "supposed" to work that way? Here in Michigan, the telephone companies are REQUIRED to make you dial a "1" in front of any toll call. I think you guys out in California are just used to it being the other way, so you don't want it to change, and frankly, I feel the same way about our system. The NICE thing about requiring a "1" on toll calls is that I can never accidentally make a toll call by dialing what I thought was a local prefix (and if I choose to buy a toll restriction device, I can use one that simply looks for a leading "1", rather than having to buy a more expensive unit and then trying to program in all the toll/non-toll exchanges). I *would* support full ELEVEN digit dialing ("1"+area code+number) on ALL toll calls, including those in your home area code (as is now required in the 313 area code around Detroit), and even PERMISSIVE dialing of all 11 digits on local calls. But I would definitely fight any effort to make it possible to dial a seven digit toll call (no leading "1"), and indeed, some consumer groups have fought it in the past when Michigan Bell proposed doing it that way. I guess folks on the left coast must have money to burn, if the possibility of making inadvertent toll calls doesn't bother you, but that thought seems to bother a lot of folks here in the midwest! Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Sep 92 16:20:59 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Last year, I wrote of making a call (charged to a major credit card, I believe) from an airplane in flight. As I recall, the call was made with just area code + seven digits (no leading 1); since all calls from that phone required area code + seven digits, the leading 1 was superfluous. Another case where the leading 1 is omitted would be on a sequence call (after the # sign to terminate preceding call) when charged to a calling card. That is: 0-xxx-xxx-xxxx (and enter calling card number); # (you can now dial another call which can be handled by that carrier); xxx-xxx-xxxx (probably required if you are in an area which has programmed for N0X/N1X prefixes; if not, you still have [until late 1994?] just N0X/N1X for area codes and NNX for prefixes) ------------------------------ From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 15:24:51 -0500 Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits In a message from Lauren Weinstein, he writes: > Where I sit here in the L.A. area, where the actual city of L.A. > has three different area codes, I can dial *local* calls in all three > codes. > What irks me is that even if I *want* to dial all ten for local calls > I'm not permitted to, forcing once again the silly situation of > dialing seven digits for some local calls and 11 (1 + ten) for others. I would also support full ten digit dialing for ALL calls in the NADP. Here in the Washington D.C. metro area, we have ten digit dialing for local calls between DC, Virginia, and Maryland. In MD where I live ten digit dialing for local calls is accepted for calls within my AC. This really helps when we're passing around files with local BBS numbers, which don't have to be edited based on which jurisdiction you live in. Most businesses have accomodated the change and advertise the A/C. A few "haven't gotten with the program yet", and still omit their A/C in print and radio advertising. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 11:24 PDT From: lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Greetings. Ron Heiby (heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com) asks why area code confusion would occur when a party needs to know the area code to call the other person in the first place. The problem is that many people have grown very sloppy about area codes, and it *still* hasn't sunk in that you can make local calls in multiple area codes. Especially when you get numbers from people in person or on forms (even where area code is explicitly requested) many people tend to leave it out if they think of you as "local." What's really depressing is the number of people who are still confused about which area code they're in (or simply give out the wrong one), long after a split. And they're now talking about *another* split, this time of the new 310 code, within less than ten years. The whole concept of area code splitting is just falling apart under the impact of the massive increase in number usage. The original plans didn't take into account this kind of usage, and it's time to bite the bullet and look at the ten digit universal dialing alternative. I'm glad to hear that Bellcore is actively pushing this! Unfortunately, I don't have much faith that the local operating companies will be rushing to go along with such recommendations! --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 11:26 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Reply-To: mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk Al Varney writes: >> Actually, Bellcore (or Bellcore acting as the NANP Administrator) isn't >> just proposing your request, they are RECOMMENDING it. But Bellcore >> doesn't run the RBOCs; it can only recommend. For example, in the >> "guide" I've mentioned before, they say: >> Sec. 7.1 -- "It is strongly recommended, as a short-term goal, that >> the dialing of ten digits, when only seven digits are required, not >> result in a call failure. >> The implementation of a full ten digit dialing plan requires user >> awareness that a ten digit number is always acceptable and does not >> necessarily connote a toll charge." And he's missed the point! The ability to dial all ten digits - with or without the "1" - is not the issue (we've had the equivalent facility here in the UK for some time now) although I understand that if you haven't got the ability to dial ten digit numbers for your local calling area, getting that far would certainly be a priority. What Bellcore are now suggesting is that the seven digit format be made unacceptable - i.e. ten or eleven digits will soon have to be dialed for ALL calls ! The psychological unlinking of ten digit dialing from toll charging is not for the benefit of the customer. Telcos in many countries are now serving most customers from switches that are outside their local calling areas, by providing local concentrator muxes. The cost to the telco of a local call has become exactly the same as the cost of a (shorter) long distance call. It is only a matter of time for customers to forget which "codes" are charged at the local rate, and which are long-distance ... and for the "local" charge rate to be gradually subsumed into a standard call charge irrespective of the distance of the connect ! (I think this benefits the telco !) 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 10:31:04 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL Here's a brief response to three articles enclosed: In article edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) writes: > In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L > Varney) writes: >> When my home-town exchange went non-SXS last year, they lost the >> ability to use four-digit local dialing -- even though the switch >> could have supported the town as a Centrex group with four digits. >> But things change ... > When your hometown was SxS, I'll bet you had to dial 1 before the > prefix of any out of town exchange that was in your area code. ^^^^^^ PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE: "1+" and "*67" are PREFIXes; the NXX codes are called "central office codes" or just "office codes". The term PREFIX is used to imply that the digits are part of a dialing plan, but NOT part of the telephone number. Aouthwestern Bell says you have to dial "1+" for all non-local calls, period. So, 1+ is STILL required for any out of town exchange. > Now that you have more modern telephone service, you should be able to > dial anything in your area code without a 1, and anything outside your > area code with a 1. This is the way things are supposed to work in > order to allow N[10]X prefixes and NXX area codes in the future. I agree -- but that isn't the way the dialing plan works there (at least when I discussed it with a TELCo employee two years ago). And interchangeable NPAs do not prevent the continued use of "1+" for ten digit intra-NPA calls -- it only requires the removal of "1 + seven digit" intra-NPA calls. > If the telco was to maintain four digit dialing in town, they'd > logically require you to dial 1 to make a call outside the "centrex." > Maybe even a 9 :-) But all calls "outside" already require "1+"; the town looks a lot more like a Centrex group than an entire exchange anyway. Every four-digit number began with 33XX, 34XX or 35XX. The number part of the directory (business and residential) is four 5x7 pages, with lots of white space. For many years, Southwestern Bell maintained dozens of towns with five-digit local numbers (NOT SXS). In areas that require 1 + Home NPA for "non-local" calls, I don't see any technical reason one should dial more than the minimum number of digits to uniquely identify the desired party. Of course, I don't support "1 + Home NPA means Toll" anyway. In article , hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > As I've suggested before, I think the system should allow for > any number of digits terminated by a # key or a time out. If I want > to call my second line here, I could call 1 805 541 0201 # (using the > current country code), or I could just dial 1 #, which would assume > all the leading digits are the same as the originating numbers. This > would get rid of all this access code stuff where we try to use > leading digits to tell how many digits follow. But what do we do with the extra digits (if any), and how are mis-dialed calls (not the reader, those other folks) detected? With length prediction from the initial digits, the switch can often connect your call before you can hit the "#" key. And I don't believe dialing your own country code (as in "011 + country code") is permitted (for direct dial). It's obviously excluded from "01 + country code" operator access. In article ,>From: heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) writes: > lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) writes: >> It is becoming an ever increasing mess when people assume you're in >> the same code they are (because, after all, you're local) and don't >> bother giving you the area code. > If I called them, then I already know their area code, ... > If they called me, then they already know my area code, ... Nice to hear from you again, Ron, but you should really get out more. You know, meet some folks face-to-face, exchange seven digit telephone numbers, guess the NPA. You know -- PARTY!! Al Varney - just MY opinion(s). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 10:29 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) writes: > lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) writes: >> It is becoming an ever increasing mess when people assume you're in >> the same code they are (because, after all, you're local) and don't >> bother giving you the area code. > I don't see the problem. Well, this is even a problem when there are no local calls involved. I wish I had a nickel for every time a message was left on my machine from someone I never heard of leaving a seven-digit phone number that was either in 415 or 510 rather than 408. Prefixes in all three area codes are being added so fast that even I am having trouble keeping up with them. This is a pain in the neck. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 02:14:26 -0400 From: anarres!gaarder@TC.Cornell.EDU Subject: Re: USA to Ten digits Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) writes: >> Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future >> for the NANP: dialing ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of >> whether they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other >> Digest readers think this would be acceptable?" > Absolutely not. But I didn't think switching from five to seven > digits for intra-exchange calls was acceptable either ... I agree. I think Mr. Gaechter's proposal reflects an urban bias. Lots of us live where even seven digits is more than we need. *You* try explaining to a long-time rural resident whose switch just went from step to digital why he or she now has to dial all seven digits when the old system only required four or five! I suppose if we adopted the # key as terminator for all calls, it could be set up so you could dial any number of digits, with the missing ones assumed to be at the beginning and the same as those in the calling number. Steve Gaarder gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #720 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26396; 19 Sep 92 15:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07336 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 13:27:00 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01567 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 13:26:51 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 13:26:51 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209191826.AA01567@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #721 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Sep 92 13:26:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 721 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Phillip Dampier) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Tim Russell) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Andrew Klossner) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Michael A. Covington) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Kevin A. Mitchell) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Tom Olin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 06:18:51 -0500 Subject: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation In a message by: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) >> Rate Regulation >> -- The FCC and franchising authorities are authorized to ensure >> that rates for basic service are "reasonable" where cable systems do >> not face effective competition. >> -- The bill allows citizens, local government and other public >> organizations to file petitions to the FCC challenging rates for all >> other tiers of service. > at work. Rate regulation would protect cable operators' profits at > the expense of its customers. This is simply untrue. I, like hundreds of other home satellite dish owners and cable subscribers, have been working closely with Senator Al Gore (D-TN) and John Danforth (R-MO) to bring some competition to the cable television industry. The language in the current legislation has been designed specifically to avoid court challenges by the revenue rich cable television companies. Since the Reagan and Bush appointments, legislation relating to business has to be carefully crafted because the last two administrations have resulted in increasing corporate rights at the expense of consumers. The current cable legislation provides first for increased competition. As you'll see in a moment, that is not as easy as it sounds, and is of key importance to a lot of players in the cable playground. Where competition does not exist, the regulatory approaches kick in. Cable itself has begun to advertise itself as "as necessary as power or telephone," and where there is one operator, they should be regulated as such. >> Equipment Prices >> -- Allows the FCC to ensure that prices for installation, remote >> control, converter boxes and other equipment used to provide basic >> service shall be "reasonable." > Wanna bet the cable business finds some foxes to guard the "reasonable" > chicken house? The history of this segment of the legislation came about because some cable operators were charging up to $700 for a lost/damaged cable converter box, even if the box had normal wear and tear over its life. Since most cable operators are owned by large MSOs, they order in quantity, and most pay no more than $120 for the most sophisticated boxes out there. On the installation question, several cable operators have gouged consumers with obscene installation charges when cable subscribers want "economy basic" service. This generally consists of channels 2-13 (local broadcasters, C-SPAN, public access). Cable operators in Alaska and Minnesota were caught charging up to $800 (!) for installation of this tier of service, while giving away or charging less than $30.00 for their standard basic service. The FCC has recently called for all cable systems to offer an "economy basic" and cable operators discourage this tier by charging sometimes massive installation fees. Some cable operators REQUIRE you to rent their remote control device, sometimes costing up to $3.00 a month. This is a hidden rate hike, considering the charges continue to rack up over the life of your subscription, not just until the remote has been paid for. The FCC is quite intelligent and informed about the true costs of doing business. > What could "enforceable customer service standards" mean? Who knows! Suggested standards are included as part of a committee report and by Congressional offices. In fact, several cable legislation proponents want the National Cable TV Association's own standards enforced as law. If it comes from cable's own trade association, you know it's reasonable and enforceable. > At this point, any improvement in service after passage of this bill > would allow its sponsors to crow about how much they've done to help > the situation, no matter how tiny a fix. So they've cut your wait > on hold from fifteen minutes to ten. Whoopee. NCTA standards call for all calls to be answered in much less time than that. Most cable operators agreeing to these standards are aiming for 30 seconds or less, and many are open 24 hours a day for repair. >> Encouragement of Multiple, Competitive Cable Franchises >> -- Franchising authorities may not award exclusive cable >> franchises, and may not unreasonably refuse to award additional >> competitive franchises. > Why do I smell a rat? Refer, if you will, to the section > in which we are told that regulators will ensure "reasonable" prices > where no effective competition exists. The chief reason we now have > monopolies is because there is big money to be had from the cable > business for reelection chests. Reason is, after all, in the eye of the > beholder. This is totally wrong in 90% of all cases. Since cable was deregulated in 1986, few city franchise authorities have much of any role to play in cable television operations. The municipality language in the original deregulation bill specifically was designed to remove such influences. Unfortunately, the language written was far too broad, and today, most cities recognize that failure to renew a cable franchise will bring about a lawsuit where the cable operator claims their First Amendment rights are being deprived. The cable operators virtually always win. TCI has had a history of going further than that, engaging in threats of financial ruin through lawsuits against city officials in Jefferson City, Missouri. They were found guilty in court, and that is the subject of a challenge by several consumer groups against TCI being involved in the small dish satellite services (DBS). The REAL reason we have a lack of competition has been documented in several General Accounting Office reports, brought out in testimony in more than a dozen hearings, and common knowledge to all in the industry: Cable operators have realized they have been granted a de facto monopoly and have indirectly agreed to not compete with one another. John Sie from TCI, admitted to Congress that cable operators needed to be reigned in! (He was quickly moved to TCI's new mini-pay service Encore when it started -- angry stockholders probably). In the early 1980's fledgling MSOs tried a few test cases of competition, and the incumbent operator retaliated by "overbuilding" (competing in an existing cable franchise) into the aggressor's own territory. By the mid-1980's cable operators engaged in documented shakedowns with cable programmers to assume control or partial interests in almost every single cable network. The end effect has been a documented study showing that cable networks refuse to sell their programming to competing cable systems/ multichannel technologies (TNT to name one example), or charge up to 800% (GAO study, 1988, National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative, et al.) more for basic cable networks being sold to dishowners and wireless cable than they charge cable operators. Since under the Reagan Administration, the Justice Department wouldn't know antitrust if it bit them on their hinnies, nothing was done to stop this despite 13 Attorneys General from states all over the country taking their own action against cable operators. The State of Texas sued several cable operators for antitrust and rate fixing. > The only real, effective way to make the present arrogance from cable operators go away is competition. If the experience with local dial tone is any guide, regulation won't cut it. I agree completely that competition is the best solution to this problem. But cable operators have become so entrenched and vertically and horizontally integrated, just passing legislation that the Bush Administration wants (let the telcos in with no restrictions on them), is only going to result in a massive buyout of the cable industry by phone operators using creative accounting to get ratepayers to submit the capital. Then you have an 800 pound gorilla that has had 70 years of practice at being a monopoly versus the current cable industry, which has had about seven years. S.12, the current cable legislation, will lay the critical foundation necessary to open up the multichannel marketplace to new technology, including, perhaps, carefully regulated entry by telcos. Here is what the legislation will do that is critical: 1) Where cable operators OWN or CONTROL cable networks (that's virtually EVERYTHING), they must not be permitted to continue to deny competitor access to the programming on unreasonable terms. Independently owned cable networks are exempt. Alternate technology (satellite, wireless, possibly telcos) should also have access. The primary reasons are the exclusive arrangements that have been made with program suppliers, notably in the pay television arena, to lock out films from competitors, thus making any new start up services operate with a significant disadvantage. 2) Cable operators must not impede competition lest they find themselves regulated. In a rich multichannel marketplace, several operators could co-exist in a rate regulation free environment. The legislation also paves the way for competition between telcos and cable for fiber optic cable/telephone service, as it generates a race between competitors for the best possible service and offerings. In less than 50 cities, there are more than one cable operator. In those places, one generally pays about $8.00 for a 60 channel+ basic service, $5-6 dollars for movie channels, and service calls answered on the same day. Passing S.12 makes it possible for the rest of America to enjoy the chance to get something similar. ------------------------------ From: trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 13:12:45 GMT tijc02!pjs269@uunet.UU.NET (Paul Schmidt) writes: > The problem is that cable companies can achieve monopoly status by > government decree. This government enforced monopoly doesn't allow > the price lowering incentives of competition. The bill proposed does > not do anything to solve this major problem. I'm having trouble understanding where you get this idea, since there is a specific clause forbidding exclusive franchise contracts in this bill. Additionally, the bill will also put a stop to cable's unfair practices that are making it difficult if not impossible for systems that will compete with cable to start up, such as DBS. Cable companies are attempting to unfairly deny programming to these systems to hobble them. Tim Russell Omaha, NE trussell@unomaha.edu ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Date: 19 Sep 92 00:59:40 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon > Local television stations may opt for must-carry protections, > or may elect to negotiate with local cable operators over the > terms and conditions of carriage on cable systems. This can be painful. For Santa Barbara CA, the nearest CBS affiliate is in Santa Maria. It's closer than the affiliate in Los Angeles, but it constantly preempts network programming for locally originated,shows, commercial messages, and religious broadcasts. Under the must-carry protection of a decade ago, the Santa Barbara cable system had to carry this channel. They didn't carry the Los Angeles channel (no bandwidth for two different CBS signals), and so much CBS programming was unavailable via cable. I hate to see this state of affairs return. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 05:09:00 GMT Having your own TV antenna is now impossible in many places because of real estate covenants. Ask any ham radio operator. Meanwhile, in sci.electronics, we regularly (perhaps every six months) hear from people who are apparently _unaware_ of the existence of TV broadcasting; they ask if there is "any way to get TV without cable" or words to that effect. And if such people exist among net users, I wonder how many there are among the general public. In article joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes: > If you don't like cable rates, *DON'T BUY CABLE*. I would like to see a law overturning real estate covenants that forbid all outdoor antennas. The covenants are supposedly voluntary agreements, but in practice the customer has little choice. Their effect is to create monopolies for cable TV companies. Remember that only small parts of the US have acceptable TV reception from indoor antennas. Big-city dwellers tend to forget this. Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 10:30:40 CDT From: Kevin Mitchell Reply-To: kam@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes: > If you don't like cable rates, *DON'T BUY CABLE*. But the problem is that there are things on cable people want, and no competition on how to get them. If I want/need milk, I can choose between the local convenience store, drug store, gas station, or large supermarket chain. The lack of monopoly keeps the price of milk down. If I want CNN and the Weather Channel, I have to deal with the one cable company that handles my town. And, I live in a condominium building that has an aging MATV system that only receives 5 of 13 broadcast channels in Chicago. That's all there were in 1967 when the building was built. To my cable company's credit, you can order basic service, which is around $2/month and includes all broadcast and public access channels (i.e. what they don't have to pay for -- "Standard" service channels like CNN et. al. cost the cable a certain price per subscriber-month). I'd bet that THIS is the rate that would go up by 50% if the broadcasters could charge retransmission fees. Not that I'm for those fees. The broadcasters get advertising rates that are based on their audiences. If those audience counts don't include cable customers, they should. I don't see what the difference is between me raising an antenna on my own roof, or paying the cable company to use their antenna. At the least, I'd demand that if I'm paying extra for broadcast channels, they could supply a landline to the cable company. Kevin A. Mitchell (312) 266-4485 Datalogics, Inc Internet: kam@hermes.dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!kam Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 08:14:11 EDT From: adiron!smgttro@uunet.UU.NET (Tom Olin) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Reply-To: tro@partech.com In article joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes: > If you don't like cable rates, *DON'T BUY CABLE*. I used to make this same argument. However, as others keep reminding us, regulated monopolies such as cable TV and local telephone service are businesses with an unnatural advantage. That is, they are guaranteed profits and no competition by various government bodies. Now, I don't know about you, but no government guarantees *me* any profit. As long as certain companies are going to benefit from such government protection, they should be kept on a short leash -- i.e., their rates should be subject to review and restraint. I agree with those who argue that competition is the correct answer. However, I've always thought that phone and cable exist as regulated monopolies in order to avoid the problem of N different competitors stringing N different systems of wire all over the place. I know that there are a few places in the country where there *is* real competition for either phone or cable service. How did those places resolve the wiring problem? If those places ignored the issue, how *should* we resolve the wiring problem? And are there any other logistical obstacles to opening up these industries to competition? Tom Olin tro@partech.com uunet!adiron!tro (315) 738-0600 Ext 638 PAR Technology Corporation * 220 Seneca Turnpike * New Hartford NY 13413-1191 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #721 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28389; 19 Sep 92 16:41 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01216 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 14:33:03 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01764 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Sep 1992 14:32:55 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 14:32:55 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209191932.AA01764@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #722 TELECOM Digest Sat, 19 Sep 92 14:32:56 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 722 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Comments on NON-TELCO Dial Tone (John Higdon) Re: Information Calls Direct to Desired Party (Richard Nash) Re: GTE Community Involvement (steven@alchemy.uucp) GTE Intercept: What Number Are You Calling? (Kevin Alexander) Re: Vermont Payphones (John R. Grout) Re: How do You Pronounce # (Tim Gorman) Re: OK What Exactly Does IRC Stand For? (George Mitchell) Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Vance Shipley) Re: Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere? (Robert Aaron Book) Re: Cellular/Government NPAs in Washington DC (Carl Moore) Funny Spellings in 800 Numbers (David Bernholdt) Another Big Overflow of Messages (TELECOM Moderator) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 09:54 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Comments on NON-TELCO Dial Tone Paul Robinson writes: > My only real concern was raising the financing to do this. I can think of another concern you had better have. How are you going to provide service reliability? What happens when one of your cable pairs fail? What happens when your switch goes down? What happens when your interconnection to the LEC goes haywire? One of the biggest complaints against all of the alternate local dial tone providers is the attitude toward service reliability. This is something that the traditional LECs (except, of course, GTE) take very seriously. There is redundancy in the CO switching equipment; there is excess cable capacity to handle spot outages; and there is a twenty-four hour maintenance crew. Cable companies, cellular providers, and others seem to take a very laid back stance when it comes to the importance of providing uninterrupted service. Cable outages can be caused by electric utility failure and cellular service is constantly punctuated with "cell site repairs" and switch maintenance. Until all of the local service pretenders get a clue concerning the importance of having that telephone work twenty-four hours a day, day after day, non-stop, no-kidding, this whole idea of "local competition" will end up being so much hot air. > Current minimum rates for business phone lines are $18 per line per > month. This is the only place an alternative carrier can compete on, > since I could conceivably offer the same service as the phone company, > for $9 a month, charge the same rates per local call, and make a > profit. Other than the fact that you have made not one speck of provision for G&A, labor, promotion, or rent, I guess you will be making a fortune. Do you intend to do this all yourself AND be on call twenty-four hours a day? Also, since you will only be competing with business service (as I suspect all other players would desire to do), you will simply drive residential rates from the LEC through the roof, at least temporarily. Make no mistake. I am a fan of LEC competition. But the transition period of weenie, half-baked, cream-skimming schemes such as your proposal will be hard on us all. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 09:47:06 -0600 From: rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: Information Calls Direct to Desired Party Alec Isaacson writes: >> I was listening to the radio last night and I heard a commercial from >> Cincinnati Bell offering a service called "Call Completion". The >> commercial went on to say that if you call 555-1212 (rather than 411) >> for directory assistance you can hit a touch tone 1 after the number >> is looked up and be connected to that number. (Then it went on to >> rave about how you will never need to fumble for pen and paper again :) >> The verbal "fine print" said this service cost $0.35 a pop, fee waived >> for busy numbers, not available in certain areas or on rotary phones. > And as a side-effect, by not fumbling, you've neglected to write down > the number, so can pay 35 cents the next time, as well ... This service offering is quite old (about two - three years). More than likely, Cincinnati Bell was waiting on Northern Telecom to finally release BCS 34 ( Buggy Coded Software:) :) :) ) for their DMS200 TOPS (tm) which addressed the billing problems associated with call completion. One simple example is: Question: Is the calling customer accountable for toll charges if the directory number listed is out of the local (free) calling area? One Answer: If the telco policy is to allow toll call completion, (thus making the caller accountable), some customers will get very upset when some unauthorized person calls Directory Assistance (DA) and elects to automatically complete the call. (Do most PBX's restrict access to DA?) Conversely, if the policy is to inhibit toll call-completion, then customers will have the confusing situation whereby some DA requests can be offered for call completion, and other seemingly similiar requests won't be offered. The above is just one of the many issues regarding call-completion that BCS34 had to adderess. Perhaps the TELECOM Digest readers would be interested in hearing from anyone who has experienced positive/negative benefits from using the call-completion service? Standard Disclaimer: I see nothing, hear nothing, know nothing and my remarks are not necessary the view of my employer, and I certianly don't speak or represent them here! Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: steven@alchemy.uucp Date: 19 Sep 92 15:09:00 UT Subject: Re: GTE Community Involvment They are active in northern California. We have people in helping out in the schools in the area as well as Red Cross among other community activities. I say 'blowing our horns' since PacBell has been running ads for the past couple of months; I see nothing wrong with it. I guess GTE does not feel that the public would be interested. Also they are a major sponser on PBS. On putting our money and effort towards better service, believe me we are. I know it does no good to try and get anything to Mr. Higdon since he feels GTE will never be any good because he has had a few problems in the past as have his friends. Well, a lot more people have good things to say. Also service is being restored in Hawaii. Service to most of the damaged island has been restored and service to the rest will be shortly as will the link to the world. The microwave was damaged, but I believe there is a fiber link in service or ready for service. Many GTE people are in Florida right now and we are moving people from California and other areas to help. Within a few days many techs will be there. A few from our group were asked and will go. I would except I have a family here and at this point that is more important. I worked seven days a week, ten hours a day in 1971 when Sylmar was hit by the quake and just can't handle that right now. ------------------------------ From: kja2192@tamsun.tamu.edu (Kevin Alexander) Subject: GTE Intercept: What Number Are You Calling? Date: 19 Sep 1992 10:44:24 -0500 Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station Within recent months I have been calling some local numbers around the College Station area (we're serviced by GTE -- I'm not sure what kind of switching equipment GTE uses), and I have been getting an operator who'll say, "You have reaached an intercept. What number were you dialing?" When I tell her she'll say, "The new number is xxx-xxxx." We are able to get call-waiting, three-way, forwarding, and all that good stuff, so I'll assume we have some ESS type switching (is this an accurate conclusion?) and usually if a number has been changed we can get the "Beep Beep Beep. The number you dialed has been changed. The new number is..." My question is this: Who did I connect to? An operator? How does the switching system handle the call? Why does the operator answer the call instead of the automated "... number you have dialed has been changed ..." message normally received? Kevin Alexander Texas A&M University ------------------------------ From: grout@sp90.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: Vermont Payphones Reply-To: j-grout@uiuc.edu Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 15:45:45 GMT johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: > Every telco pay phone in the US sends 1+ calls to AT&T, because > they're the only ones set up to handle inter-LATA coin paid calls. It > is my understanding that the 0+ carrier is chosen by the owner of the > premises where the phone is placed, or the town for phones on the > sidewalk. What about the telcos which got permission to provide limited inter-LATA services? For example, New Jersey Bell provides inter-LATA service from certain areas in North Jersey to New York City and from certain areas in South Jersey to Philadelphia. I'm sure that NJB can handle coin-paid calls (references were made to payphones in their advertising of their access code, 10NJB) ... but I don't know under what circumstances (if ever) their inter-LATA service is primary ... but it would make sense to route calls from one's own payphones over one's own inter-LATA service, wouldn't it? John R. Grout INTERNET: j-grout@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Date: 19 Sep 92 13:27:46 EDT From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce # uflorida!novavax!burtond@gatech.edu (Donald B. Burton) writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #709: > # is commonly called the pound sign or the number sign ... and less > commonly the crosshatch, the tic-tac-toe ... and even octothorpe. > MCI started using it to indicate you want to continue a second call on > the same billing. Now AT&T and Sprint also use them. Lest anyone get the wrong idea, the # was used as far back as 1979, I believe, by AT&T for sequence calling via its operator system. It was, therefore, not a use started by MCI. Tim Gorman - SWBT *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ From: george@tessi.com (George Mitchell) Subject: Re: OK What Exactly Does IRC Stand For? Organization: Test Systems Strategies, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 17:35:14 GMT shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar{shri@ncst.in}) writes: > In article is written: >> TRT = Tropical Radio Telegraph, one of the oldest International Record >> Carriers (i.e. telex companies). > Question: Is an IRC "equivalent" to a telex company ? My understanding (from context) is that an International Record Carrier is a telegraph company. For telegrams crossing international boundaries, unlike voice calls, users have had a choice of carriers almost since the service came into existence: RCA, ITT, Tropical Radio Telegraph are probably the oldest providers around. But I believe that Western Union never handled international traffic. When telex came into use, apparently everyone thought it was similar enough to telegraphy that everyone in the telegraph business got into the telex business, too. (I'm not sure of my facts here, though.) George Mitchell (george@tessi.com) ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 04:48:54 GMT In article the Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: Multi-line phones were first in use in New York > City in the middle 1920's. Does anyone remember the old three line > phones with six buttons? There was a hold button for each line. I These were known as 1A1 key systems. There was no KSU as such but there was a master set. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) Subject: Re: Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere? Organization: Rice University Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 05:50:03 GMT In article , mdw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (mark.d.wuest) writes: > In article simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon > Streltsov) writes: >> I'm looking for a service; someone who can receive my fax and route it >> to me by e-mail as a TIFF file or after running a character >> recognition program. > I'm not sure what they'd charge, but a fax/modem for my NeXT is under > $500 (PeeCee stuff is actually a tad cheaper) and the software does > just this -- provides a TIFF. It also makes for an inexpensive > scanner (only 150 dpi, tho). You can get a fax/modem for a PC for $69. Maybe less. If you still need to e-mail the fax, you could write a batch file that would take the incoming fax, convert it to TIFF (if necessary), uuencode it, dial using the modem part of the fax card (almost all fax cards include a modem), and e-mail the result. Robert Book rbook@rice.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 9:14:39 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Cellular/Government NPAs in Wash. DC Doesn't the Department of Defense (Pentagon, area 703 in VA) also have 545, 602, 614 and 746? The 614 prefix is the replacement for 202-694, which (due to 703-694 being in use at Stuart, VA) could not be moved as is to the 703 area. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 14:03:48 EDT From: bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Subject: Funny Spellings in 800 Numbers The discussion of World Assets Long Distance's 1-800-CITIXEN reminds me of something that happened in Chicago in about 1983. The radio station WFMT runs a week long fund raising drive for the Chicago Symphony Orchestra (which runs a deficit of several million dollars each year), if they have an 800 number for out-of-town folk to call to contribute. That year they had requested 1-800-CLASSIC, but someone messed up (WFMT blamed Illinois Bell) and they got 1-800-CL1SSIC. They tried to explain this several times, but eventually just started pronouncing it: one eight hundred kluh-one-sick. Fans of the Anti-Digital Dialing League would also be proud of WFMT because they used to (in the early/middle 1980s at least) try to use exchange names instead of numbers in advertisements read on the air. I haven't been in the Chicago area much since 1986, so I don't know what they're doing lately. David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365 [Moderator's Note: What has basically happened with WFMT in the past decade is they have been abandoned in droves by a large number of listeners who have tuned to WNIB instead. Many of their announcers were (and some are still) such primma-donnas that people grew tired of them. The use of exchange names versus numerical digits long after the names had been abandoned and largely forgotten was one such example of what happened. Advertisers bought time, included a 7-D phone number in their message and the announcers would read it as a name instead. When no one called on the phone the advertisers would get sore. Some of their music is very far out and inappropriate for the time of day it is played. For a long time they largely ignored listeners and went around in their own orbit oblivious of anything going on in RealWorld. Perfectly good and enjoyable classical music would not be used if they had some grudge against the artist or organization involved. They were very snooty and snobbish. It finally caught up with them. Tiny little WNIB with a staff of about five people and virtually no connections in the very snobbish clique which makes up 'the fine arts' in Chicago has been ahead of them for more than a year in the radio ratings, playing classical music from 5 AM to midnight daily, and around the clock on Saturday and Sunday nights. The guy who brokers the midnight to 5 AM slot Monday through Friday has some time left on his contract; once it runs out they will probably go classical full time. When WNIB first went ahead of WFMT in the ratings, the fine arts crowd in Chicago was absolutely shocked, because prior to that time they assumed no one but no one listened to WNIB ... a lot they knew! I listen to WNIB most of the time, only tuning occassionally to WFMT. PAT] ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Another Big Overflow of Messages Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1992 14:00:00 CDT Once again, you reader/writers have responded by blowing me away here with messages. Over two hundred messages have been dumped from the queue due to my inability to even come close at catching up. Thanks to all who have written in the past week that won't be used. Remember, I do not pick and select here based on personal agreement with the messages or the writer. I try to simply present a wide cross-section of stuff and REplies to those which seem to draw the most interest. In the past I've tried to put out ten or more issues of the Digest over the weekend to catch up with the backlog, and three or four issues each day. I don't think that serves anyone very well, least of all me. If your message was not included this past week and you really feel it should have been, send it to me again via 'telecom-request@ eecs.nwu.edu' and ask that it be reconsidered. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #722 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02413; 20 Sep 92 16:53 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00813 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 20 Sep 1992 14:39:04 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31305 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 20 Sep 1992 14:38:56 -0500 Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 14:38:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209201938.AA31305@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #723 TELECOM Digest Sun, 20 Sep 92 14:39:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 723 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Data Hut - DONT! (Chad Burr) Sent-Paid Coin Calls (John R. Levine) Re: Recourse on Cordless Eavesdropping? (Carter Gregory) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (John Higdon) Re: GTE Community Involvment (John Higdon) Re: Kauai Communications Out (John Rice) Re: USA to Ten Digits (John R. Levine) Re: AT&T Mail's Phone Number (Daniel K. Cheng) Need Information on Telecommunications School (Park Yunjo) What is This Instrument? (Michael A. Covington) More LATA Nuttiness (John R. Levine) Another Look at Cliff Stoll's Book (TELECOM Moderator) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pegasus@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (chad burr) Subject: Data Hut - DONT! Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 05:37:34 GMT This is a PUBLIC WARNING ABOUT DATA HUT. Advertised in: PC Sources Computer Shopper Reason for Warning: false advertising being untruthful poor customer service unorganized personell Note: The above mentioned magazines probably have no idea of the shoddy quality of the merchandise sold by Data Hut. Therefore I DO NOT hold the above magazines responsible in any way. Both are GREAT publications and are respected. In late November I had a Bar Mitzvah. As most of us know large gifts are usually exchanged at the Bar Mitzvah. After that night I decided to do a little shopping for my computer (Tandy 1000 HX). There in the DataHut Ad was a 2400 bps internal modem and an internal 720k disk drive kit for the HX too! I immediatly called and ordered the mentioned objects. The modem came with what looks like a home built adapter cable for the HX that fit right but worked about as good as painting your house and then burning it down. I tried their so called "TECH line" which just kept ringing -- by the time I got a chance to speak to a tech and get an RMA number, my 90 day period was up. I could no longer get a refund (the disk drive did not perform either). I had to take a credit. Again I reordered the modem and again got the shoddy adapter and my modem -- nevertheless it still DID NOT WORK. I promptly returned the item (after trying the Tech Line again with no luck) and requested a refund. -- No dice -- I had to take a credit. The only thing these complete morons did not screw up on was when I had them ORDER a phone routing switch (they did lie to me and tell me they had ordered the box two weeks before they actually did) from Damark International . They also told me that they had to use a personal credit card because Damark would not take a credit card order from them. It was now early into 1992 -- I have recieved my calling box and it is the only thing I got from them (through them) that I actually enjoy the use of. This was my first time ever mail ordering anything and I was very disappointed. Since then I am STILL at 1200 baud but I did get the internal 720k from another company. Steer clear of Data Hut! Data Hut #6 N. CT. St. Owingsville, KY 40360 Fax- 606-674-3917 Other - Local - 606-674-3916 Other - Order - 1-800-487-3488 Thank you. C. Burr ------------------------------ Subject: Sent-Paid Coin Calls Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 19 Sep 92 23:21:45 EDT (Sat) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) I wrote: > Every telco pay phone in the US sends 1+ calls to AT&T, because > they're the only ones set up to handle inter-LATA coin paid calls. John Grout asks: > What about the telcos which got permission to provide limited > inter-LATA services? For example, New Jersey Bell provides inter-LATA > service from certain areas in North Jersey to New York City and from > certain areas in South Jersey to Philadelphia. Funny you should mention that. I was at the Philadelphia airport the other day and called home on a regular Bell of PA telco panel type payphone using 0+ to make a calling card call. The dialing sounded a little strange -- listening carefully, it was clear that the phone was buffering the digits I dialed and then outpulsing them when I was done. I presume that the reason was so that in case the call was it could prefix their 10xxx in case the call was into the part of south Jersey to which Bell of Pa. is allowed to carry inter-LATA traffic. I've never seen a BOC payphone do COCOT-like digit munging, but a little experimentation showed that the only calls that got fudged were ones to the waiver area not dialed with a specific 10XXX. Is it a technical or legal limitation that a phone line can have only a single 1+ long distance carrier so the phone has to do this sort of nonsense? And do they really have to reprogram every pay phone in Philadelphia when NJ Bell adds a new prefix in Camden? (Yes, I know that they can probably do it remotely.) I didn't try 1+ to see who asked me for money -- I presume Bell of PA would send those calls to themselves since like any telco they're already set up to handle intra-LATA sent-paid calls. NJ Bell does the same thing going the other way -- the instruction card clearly states that NJ Bell handles toll calls where authorized, otherwise it's the normal LD carrier. There's a map in the Philadelphia phone book of the waiver areas on both sides of the river and they're suprisingly large -- reaching all the way to Pemberton on the NJ side (near Fort Dix) and covering most of the Philadelphia suburbs on the PA side. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 16:22:35 cdt Subject: Re: Recourse on Cordless Eavesdropping? Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering From: carter@cae.wisc.edu (Carter Gregory) In article Alan Millar writes: > I have just learned that the security guard at our mobile home park > has been using some sort of ten channel scanner to listen in on > cordless telephone conversations. > Does anyone know what recourse we have to deal with this? Can anyone > share any experiences or suggestions? Thank you. I have an EASA-PHONE which if you go out of range of the base and do a channel change, it will scan for any available signal, and usually I can pick up people having some conversation somewhere. I thought each channel had its own security code? Well, maybe its an IS a problem. Greg ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 17:36 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: > Having your own TV antenna is now impossible in many places because of > real estate covenants. Ask any ham radio operator. I did. Several of them. It was universally agreed among them that real estate covenants and city ordinances CANNOT prohibit the construction of antenna arrays for amateur radio service. The ham bands are Federally regulated (as are all radio frequencies) AND are considered to have importance concerning public service. So ... If you want to put up an antenna, become a ham and put up your multiband array. Do you think that any of the property police dweebs will be able to identify a TV antenna hiding out with your 40 meter beam? And regarding this "lack of competition" nonsense, Kevin Mitchell writes: > If I want CNN and the Weather Channel, I have to deal with the one > cable company that handles my town. No, you are perfectly free to do what many have done and buy a TVRO dish and have access to those and all the other "cable" channels. And you will be dealing directly with the program service providers who typically charge less than your cable company does. TVRO too expensive? Then maybe cable is not such a bad deal after all. But do not say there is no competition. Maybe the problem is that you do not feel that you should have to pay for the things you enjoy. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 18:08 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: GTE Community Involvment steven@alchemy.uucp writes: > They are active in northern California. We have people in helping out > in the schools in the area as well as Red Cross among other community > activities. Oh really? I have lived here for about thirty-five years and have yet to see it. But I will take your word for it. So tell me then, why does GTE have no BUSINESS presence in northern California? If the company can do all these good works for the community, why can it not provide acceptable telephone service? > On putting our money and effort towards better service, believe me we > are. I know it does no good to try and get anything to Mr. Higdon > since he feels GTE will never be any good because he has had a few > problems in the past as have his friends. No, I am sorry I do not believe you. The proof is in the product as it were, which is sorely lacking. And do not try to dismiss my comments and observations with that glib "because he has had a few problems" male cow excrement. I am, and have been for over a quarter-century, a telecommunications professional. I have made a living dealing with telephone companies worldwide. My dealings and experience with the telecommunications industry has been anything but casual. So with that said, let me make something perfectly clear. Of the many telcos I have done business with, GTE is the absolute worst and way ahead of what might be considered second place (NYNEX, in case you were wondering). EVERY SINGLE transaction has been deficient or undesireable in some way. I think it is safe to say that anyone with the proper credentials will agree with my stance on GTE. You may feel (as I know the people at GTE do) that by attempting to discredit me and/or my remarks that somehow the company will become acceptable to customers. > Also service is being restored in Hawaii. Service to most of the > damaged island has been restored and service to the rest will be > shortly as will the link to the world. Well, I should hope so. It has been quite a few days since the storm past. > The microwave was damaged, but I believe there is a fiber link in > service or ready for service. It will not be ready for some months. The microwave link is being repaired with parts flown in from the mainland. Don't you listen to the GTE newsline? But this is straying from the issue. My complaint about GTE is not how fast it fixes major outages (like whole islands) or even how much it contributes to the community. The beef centers around how the company does in providing day to day telephone service. On my scoresheet and on many others' in the same position and occupation as myself, it rates a big, fat "F". If the company would finally admit that it is lacking and start doing significant things to change the situation, it would have no greater supporter than myself. But when all it does is whine about how everything is someone else's fault, or that the customer is just a complainer; or even when it sits back and does absolutely nothing, content to let apologists such as yourself defend the indefensible, it deserves its reputation as a third-class hack. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Kauai Communications Out Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Sat, 19 Sep 92 17:09:05 GMT > [Moderator's Note: So who told us the telco there was GTE-owned? Is > HawTel part of GTE? PAT] Yes, Hawaiian Telephone Company was bought by GTE in the late 60s. 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 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 19 Sep 92 22:43:02 EDT (Sat) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > Who said that things are "supposed" to work that way? Here in > Michigan, the telephone companies are REQUIRED to make you dial a "1" > in front of any toll call. I think you guys out in California are > just used to it being the other way, ... It's not just California. Here in New Jersey, 1+ has never meant toll. For a long time, you never had to dial a 1+ at all, and it ignored it if you did. When the 201 area filled up and they had to go to NXX, the dialing went to 1+ for ten digits. From where I sit, all calls within 609 are dialed with seven digits, whether they be local, intra-LATA toll, or inter-LATA toll. > I guess folks on the left coast must have money to burn, if the > possibility of making inadvertent toll calls doesn't bother you, ... Personally, I only dial calls when I want to communicate with someone, don't particularly care if it's going to cost eight cents or not, and find it really annoying to remember what's supposed to be 1+ and what isn't. At home in Boston, there are so many different billing plans that the distinction between local and toll is meaningless. I have two phone lines at home with different classes of service and a call that is free on one line can cost three cents/minute on the other, even though the call is nominally "local." And I do have to dial 1+ to call a few parts of the 617 area, for "toll" calls that don't cost much more than "local" ones. And due to crufty old switches, there are a few towns where you have to dial 1+ for calls that are classed as local (but may not be free.) Fooey -- if I wanted a phone that told me how much a call was going to cost, I'd buy one. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Sep 92 17:11 GMT From: Daniel K. Cheng <0004654269@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: AT&T Mail's Phone Number > [Moderator's Note: My point was, why can't 800-555-1212 come up with > the number for AT&T Mail? That is the standard way to go about finding > 800 numbers from directory assistance. PAT] Yes, you can certainly find the number of AT&T Mail with 800-555-1212. But you just have to ask for the right department. There's no department under AT&T named AT&T Mail, as AT&T Mail is a service provided by AT&T Easylink Services. Regards, Daniel Cheng ------------------------------ From: yp5424@csc.albany.edu (PARK YUNJO) Subject: Need Information on Telecommunications School Organization: State University of New York at Albany Date: Sun, 20 Sep 92 04:29:55 GMT Hi everyone! I am currently admitted from the U of Pitts and U of Colorado at Boulder in the telecommunications program. I have questions if you can help me: 1) Is the telecommunications program that being taught in school (U of Pitts and U. of Colorado) really relevant to the work you are involved in now? 2) How's the job prospects? 3) I am an undergraduate computer science major. Is it advisable to pursue telecommunications in graduate school rather than studying computer science for an MS? I am looking forward to hear from experienced people like you. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: What Is This Instrument? Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 18:34:40 GMT What is a "Sierra 860A Phase Jitter Test Set"? I picked one up at a hamfest and am wondering what it's used for. It is apparently an audio oscillator plus some kind of analysis of the signal (sent through an amplifier, or cable, or something). Assuming I turn out not to have a use for it, I would sell it for any offer substantially higher than the value of the parts and enclosure. It appears to be in working order. Many thanks to anyone who can assist. Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ Subject: More LATA Nuttiness Date: Sun, 20 Sep 92 14:36:19 EDT From: John R. Levine While perusing a local map, I found that the Ocean County NJ, where I am currently camped out at my beach house, is in three different LATAs: the northern half is in the North Jersey (201/908) LATA, the southern half is in the Atlantic Ccity LATA (a little bit of 609) but New Egypt a/k/a Plumstead Township, is in the Camden/Trenton LATA (the rest of 609.) Between New Egypt and anywhere else in the county it is a fairly pricey inter-LATA toll call, though I expect they can call adjacent points in Monmouth or Burlington counties for free. Are there any other counties so divided? While we're looking at pointless LATA statistics, the Atlantic City LATA appears to be the smallest one in the country based on the number of prefixes, of which it only has 64, and probably number of subscribers. Are there any other smaller ones? It may also be the smallest in land area, since it takes only an hour on the Parkway to drive from Barnegat at the north end to Cape May at the south end. Regards, John Levine, comp.compilers moderator johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us or {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Another Look At Cliff Stoll's Book Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 14:00:00 CDT If you are not a regular subscriber to Computer Underground Digest you may wish to look at the current issue which is devoted entirely to articles discussing Cliff Stoll's book of a couple years ago detailing his efforts to identify the German hacker who was breaking into various compuiter systems in the USA. The articles are good and tempt me to re-read his fascinating story. Computer Underground Digest had its origins here in TELECOM Digest a few years ago, and I am pleased at how well it has developed and prospered on its own merits. For information about Computer Underground Digest and to start your own subscription, contact the Moderators: tk0jut1@mvs.cso.niu.edu. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #723 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25182; 21 Sep 92 3:10 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24158 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 21 Sep 1992 00:35:35 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03825 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 21 Sep 1992 00:35:23 -0500 Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1992 00:35:23 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209210535.AA03825@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #724 TELECOM Digest Mon, 21 Sep 92 00:35:27 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 724 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Antenna Regulation (was U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation) (Paul Schleck) Omega IV Phone System (James VanHouten) List of Satellites Wanted (Dan Odom) 1+ Information (was USA to Ten Digits) (Bill Hofmann) Replacement Telephone Wiring Into Multi-Family Buildings (Ed Gilbert) Re: Vermont Payphones (NJB Now) (Douglas Scott Reuben) Re: Atlantic City LATA (Smallest) (Douglas Scott Reuben) Re: New "Call Completion" from Cinci Bell (Andrew M. Dunn) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Michael A. Covington) Funny 800 Number Spelling (Tony Harminc) Re: Another Look at Cliff Stoll's Book -- Correction! (Chip Rosenthal) Coin Phone Numbers and Collections in the Past (TELECOM Moderator) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pschleck@cwis.unomaha.edu (Paul W Schleck KD3FU) Subject: Antenna Regulation (was Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation) Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 23:16:29 GMT john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: >> Having your own TV antenna is now impossible in many places because of >> real estate covenants. Ask any ham radio operator. > I did. Several of them. It was universally agreed among them that real > estate covenants and city ordinances CANNOT prohibit the construction > of antenna arrays for amateur radio service. The ham bands are > Federally regulated (as are all radio frequencies) AND are considered > to have importance concerning public service. So ... That's not completely true. FCC PRB-1 (Private Radio Bureau) provides licensed amateurs with LIMITED federal pre-emption of state and local law (zoning regulations, safety rules, etc.). However, as you might guess, sometimes city councils say, "so, sue us!" requiring a lot of time, money, and motivation to win your case in court. The FCC also hasn't explicitly stated what is acceptable tower height and offset from your property, so pre-emptive relief will vary greatly from case to case. Covenants attached to deeds are considered private contracts (even though they are de-facto laws in some areas) and are not covered by PRB-1. It's a maddening situation for many hams. The courts are not prepared to overturn these private agreements (a BIG DEAL, legally) like covenenants of days past which banned sales to blacks and Jews because, although amateur radio is indeed very worthwhile, the practice of it is not a constitutional right. Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU pschleck@unomaha.edu ------------------------------ From: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 21:50:44 -0500 Subject: Omega IV Phone System * Forwarded from "CFORSALE" Still looking for a vendor of this phone system, made by Iwatsu. Need programming manual, and expandability options, and voice mail capability. Please call, write or fax to: Fred Chambers c/o Stow-Glen Retirement Village 4285 Kent Rd. Stow, Ohio 44224 (216) 686-2545 (216) 686-4880 FAX Regards, Fred Chambers Internet: Fred.Chambers@p3.f100.n157.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Dan Odom) Subject: List of Satellites Wanted Date: 20 Sep 1992 18:41:46 -0500 Organization: Kansas State University Is there any list of all commercial and amateur communications satellites? Ideally, such a list would include name, model, owner, location, etc, etc. Please respond via email. Dan Odom Peon Kansas State University danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu ------------------------------ From: wdh@well.sf.ca.us (Bill Hofmann) Subject: 1+ Information (was USA to Ten Digits) Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 18:16:55 GMT OK, I'm a newcomer to this group, and to most of the jargon. But I have a question. I'm working on a communications product which needs to know, based on where the user is, how a number should be dialed. What this means, at least in the US, is that I need a fairly complete list of "dial 1 + seven digits when you're here dialing there, otherwise dial seven digits, otherwise dial 1 + AC + seven digits" etc, kind of rules. The question is, where does one get this information in a complete form, and, with that one answered, how often does it change. Post or mail, I'll summarize if desired. Thanks! Bill Hofmann ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 15:38-0400 From: Ed Gilbert Subject: Replacement Telephone Wiring Into Multi-Family Buildings I live in a condo complex in Watertown Massachusetts (a near suburb of Boston). We have ten buildings with 11 apartments in each building. New England Telephone (NYNEX) is running new wires along the streets and into the buildings. I got some information indirectly, (from the NET project manager through the telecomm non-literate complex manager to whom I gave scripted questions.) Two things trouble me: - We will not be given individual demarcation blocks with modular jacks, the reasoning being that those are only for single-family dwellings. My concern is that without demarcation blocks, phone troubles can more easily be blamed on subscribers. Without the blocks, I could maybe stumble around the patch blocks and connect my phone, but most of our residents couldn't. - The panels supplied by NET are in unrestricted areas of the buildings, (the laundry rooms) but they cannot be locked. The reasoning is that if most residents of the buildings wanted to steal dial tone, they wouldn't be knowledgeable enough. I'm not concerned about most residents, but about the single one who may be knowledgeable, and happens to be dishonest. (Not me, of course!) My expectations are obvious from the above descriptions, but am I being reasonable? If I am being reasonable, how might I pursue this? I realize that these are somewhat contradictory, in that demarc blocks in locked cabinets are useless to subscribers, while having them in unlocked cabinets would make it that much easier to steal services. Ed Gilbert Standard disclaimer, I suppose GILBERT@RIVERSIDE.SCRC.SYMBOLICS.COM ------------------------------ Date: 20-SEP-1992 16:50:17.14 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Re: Vermont Payphones (NJB now) grout@sp90.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout), on 19 Sep 92, notes: > I'm sure that NJB can handle coin-paid calls (references were made to > payphones in their advertising of their access code, 10NJB) ... but I > don't know under what circumstances (if ever) their inter-LATA service > is primary ... but it would make sense to route calls from one's own > payphones over one's own inter-LATA service, wouldn't it? Payphones in Newark Airport (NJ) and other high-volume areas where many Calling Card calls are placed to NY will (as noted before) capture the digits, check to see if New Jersey Bell can handle the call, and if so, dial the call over NJBs calling card system. You can of course use 10288 to override this and force the call over AT&T, which is helpful if you are an ROA Calling Card Option customer. 1+ calls are also handled by NJB, and the rates are somewhat lower for 1+ calls as well. NYTel does not seem to do this (although I haven't ever been to the Port Authority Bus Terminal since this started, so I'm not sure). Additionally, you can NOT dial 10NYT+0-201-xxx-xxxx from New York. Thus, even though you can call 10NYT+1-201-314-xxxx and have the call billed via NYTel, you can not dial 10NYT+0-201-314-xxxx to use your calling card, as the call is generally rejected. If you are using NYTel's (pathetic!) Calling Card system, and try to make a sequence call to NJ, your call will be blocked, but a customer using NJB's Calling Card system can generally make calls both within the LATA in New Jersey as well as to the New York "waiver" areas. Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: 20-SEP-1992 16:52:28.33 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Re: Atlantic City LATA (Smallest) John R. Levine , on Sun, 20 Sep 92, noted: > While we're looking at pointless LATA statistics, the Atlantic City > LATA appears to be the smallest one in the country based on the number > of prefixes, of which it only has 64, and probably number of > subscribers. Are there any other smaller ones? It may also be the > smallest in land area, since it takes only an hour on the Parkway to > drive from Barnegat at the north end to Cape May at the south end. I haven't checked the "LATA List" which was posted here a while back, but I think Fisher's Island, NY is smaller, assuming it is a LATA. All calls to and from Fisher's Island (516-788) are handled by an IXC. The two nearest BOCs, NYTel and SNET (again, not a "true" BOC) will not handle any sort of traffic to and from the Island. (NYTel used to, AT&T or whatever IXC does now). Anyhone know more about this? Is the Island indeed a very small LATA? Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: amdunn@mongrel.UUCP (Andrew M. Dunn) Subject: Re: New "Call Completion" from Cinci Bell Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada Date: Sun, 20 Sep 92 14:47:41 GMT > In TELECOM Digest V12 No. 696 (item 9) Alec Isaacson acs.muohio.edu> writes: >> I was listening to the radio last night and I heard a commercial from >> Cincinnati Bell offering a service called "Call Completion". The >> commercial went on to say that if you call 555-1212 (rather than 411) >> for directory assistance you can hit a touch tone 1 after the number >> is looked up and be connected to that number. (Then it went on to >> rave about how you will never need to fumble for pen and paper again :) Of course not. If you used pen and paper you'd never use their service again, and they wouldn't get their nice juicy $0.35 any more. Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp) ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn) ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1992 02:23:54 GMT In article John Higdon writes: > mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: >> Having your own TV antenna is now impossible in many places because of >> real estate covenants. Ask any ham radio operator. > I did. Several of them. It was universally agreed among them that real > estate covenants and city ordinances CANNOT prohibit the construction > of antenna arrays for amateur radio service. The ham bands are Not quite. The FCC, in PRB-1, forbade _local governments_ from banning ham antennas. But covenants are (supposedly) _voluntary contracts_ and the FCC is not presently empowered to overturn them. This question comes up repeatedly in rec.radio.amateur.policy. Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. [Moderator's Note: But even with the 'voluntary' nature of covenants, there are still some things we cannot 'voluntarily' agree to do. We cannot agree among ourselves to exclude blacks or Jews as an earlier message noted. I think courts will consider public policy in deciding which 'voluntary' agreements can be upheld. But as the earlier message pointed out, ham radio operators are not a legally protected category, however public policy may be that ham radio operators provide valuable services and should be permitted to have antennas as needed. I think most of these things get settled case by case in court don't they? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Sep 92 00:41:00 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Funny 800 Number Spelling Bell Canada advertises (800) 668-BELL as the general service number for things like Call Management Services (CMS aka Caller*ID), and similar services. In light of the coming long distance competition, perhaps they should point out that it can also be dialed as (800) NOT-BELL. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: chip@chinacat.unicom.com (Chip Rosenthal) Subject: Re: Another Look At Cliff Stoll's Book - Correction! Organization: Unicom Systems Development, Austin, TX Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1992 04:32:59 GMT In article TELECOM Moderator writes: > If you are not a regular subscriber to Computer Underground Digest you > may wish to look at the current issue which is devoted entirely to > articles discussing Cliff Stoll's book [...] This issue -- and all other issues of the CuD -- may be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest newsgroup. > For information about Computer Underground Digest and to start your own > subscription, contact the Moderators: Please don't if you can obtain the CuD through one of its many distribution mechanisms. (Besides, I think you published the personal email address of the editors and not the CuD address.) The following information from the CuD masthead provides full details on availability: | Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are | available at no cost from tk0jut2@mvs.cso.niu.edu. The editors may be | contacted by voice (815-753-6430), fax (815-753-6302) or U.S. mail at: | Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL 60115. | | Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest | news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of | LAWSIG, and DL0 and DL12 of TELECOM; on Genie in the PF*NPC RT | libraries; from America Online in the PC Telecom forum under | "computing newsletters;" on the PC-EXEC BBS at (414) 789-4210; and by | anonymous ftp from ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) and ftp.ee.mu.oz.au | For bitnet users, back issues may be obtained from the mail server at | mailserv@batpad.lgb.ca.us | European distributor: ComNet in Luxembourg BBS (++352) 466893. ----------- Chip Rosenthal 512-482-8260 Unicom Systems Development [Moderator's Note: Please note I earlier gave the address: tk0jut1@mvs.cso.niu.edu ^ It is preferred that we use instead: tk0jut2.mvs.cso.niu.edu, as per the note from Chip. ^ And if you can access Usenet, then the newsgroup may be a better way to read CUD. PAT] ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Coin Phone Numbers and Collections in the Past Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1992 00:00:00 GMT [Moderator's Note: Reprinted below are excerpts from a thread which first appeared in TELECOM Digest in January, 1988 under the title, "Enterprise Numbers and Other Funny Phone Numbers". I thought you might enjoy seeing it again. PAT] Date: 7 Jan 88 22:39:45 GMT From: decvax!ima!johnl@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (John R. Levine) Organization: Not enough to make any difference Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers In article <2257@cup.portal.com> Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com writes: > OTHER MORE OR LESS STANDARDIZED PHONE NUMBERS IN THE 1930'S - 1950'S: > ... > Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally > recognized ... Well, not quite universally. My phone number is -9650 and as far as I can tell hasn't been changed since the house got dial service, other than changing the prefix from UNIversity to the equivalent 864. (I'm not that old, but the number came with the house.) I note that -9649 is indeed a payphone in a nearby bar. -9950 used to be the local business office, causing a certain number of strange calls. My understanding is that they put special relays on pay phone lines that bounced when they connected, making a distinctive ticky-ticky sound that the operator could recognize. For that matter, when you make a toll call from a payphone, how does the long distance company know that it's a payphone? Special trunks? Special bits in ANI messages? Only AT&T does anything interesting with direct dialed calls from payphones, but the other LD companies at least know to block them. John Levine, ima!johnl ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jan 88 05:32:22 GMT From: ptsfa!perl@ames.arpa (R. Perlman) Organization: Pacific Bell Marketing Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers In article <838@ima.ISC.COM> johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine) writes: > In article <2257@cup.portal.com> Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com writes: >> OTHER MORE OR LESS STANDARDIZED PHONE NUMBERS IN THE 1930'S - 1950'S: >> ... >> Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally >> recognized ... > Well, not quite universally. My phone number is -9650 and as far as > I can tell hasn't been changed since the house got dial service, other > than changing the prefix from UNIversity to the equivalent 864. Actually you are both right! In step-by-step offices the 4 and 9 levels were ofter tied together when all line thousands groups were'nt needed. A non-coin would be assigned the number -4xxx and a coin -9xxx, in fact it didn't matter whether you dialed a 4 or nine, you get the same number. BTW, Operators have listings by area code showing all the NNXs (actualy NXXs) that have coin stations. Usually only 1 code per CO has coin lines. If a number (for 3rd number or collect calling) is a -9xxx & is in a coin NNX then the Operator checks with Rate & Route for a "coin check" to see if the number is indeed a coin box. Richard Perlman ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jan 88 16:59:14 GMT From: codas!ablnc!maxwell@bikini.cis.ufl.edu (Robert Maxwell) Organization: AT&T, Maitland, Florida Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers >> Coin phones always began with a 9, as in 9xxx. This was universally >> recognized ... > Well, not quite universally. Back in the days before the TSPS operator positions, the operators had an indexed list at their positions that they used for identifying area codes that listed almost every city or exchange in the USA. One of items also listed in this index was the pay phone number series in any exchange that used a special group of numbers. It has been a few years since I last saw one, but I do remember the numbers for pay phones could be anything from an exchange + 1 digit (ie: 321-9) to a group of numbers (ie: 321-7800 to 321-8299). As I remember the instructions with the list, this was a group to be checked for possible pay phone, not necessarily an absolute list. I don't consider myself very old, but I can remember when the phones were so automatic, you didn't have to turn a dial or push buttons, you would just speak the number you wanted into the mouthpiece and the connection would be made. :-) > For that matter, when you make a toll call from a payphone, how does the long > distance company know that it's a payphone? Special trunks? Special bits in > ANI messages? Only AT&T does anything interesting with direct dialed calls > from payphones, but the other LD companies at least know to block them. With ESS offices, the programming takes care of handling special needs for a given line. It is reasonably simple to prevent charging LD calls to a given line, no matter which company you use for LD. The same basic technique that gives you 1+ dialing to your LD company can control how the calls are accepted from a pay phone. Bob Maxwell Maitland, FL ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jan 88 06:43:03 GMT From: portal!cup.portal.com!Patrick_A_Townson@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU Organization: The Portal System (TM) Subject: Re: Enterprise Numbers and other funny phone numbers Perlman points out a method of detecting coin service which is correct. If in fact the receiving number is coin; and if the caller insists on making the call collect, and provided some fool on the receiving end agrees to accept the collect call then he has to deposit the money as if he were making the call. The only problem is, the distant operator cannot supervise the collection properly. The operator tells called party to hang up and wait a minute ... she calls inward in the city in particular, and asks for assistance from a local operator in manipulating the coin collection table; assistance in dumping the coins in the box, collecting for overtime, etc. The local operator calls the coin box, gets the money and connects the parties. Does anyone on here remember when coin phones had on the top for nickles, dimes and quarters AND had no trap door on the coin return AND had regular -- not armored -- cable to the handset? As little kids we rarely paid for calls. We either applied ground to the line through a tiny pin hole in the handset cord (which we put there, of course) or we used a coat hanger bent in a funny way which we stuck up the coin return. We would deposit the money which fell on the table inside. The process was the operator would apply the tip and ring one way to throw the table and toss the money in the box or would apply it in reverse to throw the table in the direction of the return slot, to give the money back if there was no answer, etc. To make long distance calls, we would use the same quarter(s) over and over. The operator would ask for two dollars -- in would go two or three quarters (clung clung clung) ... "just a minute operator, I am looking for more change! ..." and that coat hanger would go up the return slot and trip the table, sending our quarters down the chute and back to us ... "Ok operator, here is the rest of the money ..." and if we were fast enough, or the operator was not suspicious, the coat hanger could be used to retrieve the three quarters . Some operators immediatly collected when there was an answer, especially if they suspected hanky panky on the other end ... some would not wait for the full collection, but grab the coins as they came in, hitting that ring key over and over knowing the brat-child on the other end of the line had been thwarted in the process ... Some of the older exchanges in downtown Chicago years ago had to have the assistance of a special "trunk operator" to return the money if a call was not complete. Your operator would give up on completing the call and tell you to hold on ... after a few seconds and a click, someone would answer "Wabash trunking" ... and your operator would say something like "return on circuit 5096"... and the phone would clatter and your coins would fall back out to you. And there was also (downtown) the Franklin Coin Central Office which handled nothing but pay phones in the downtown area. --------------- [Moderator's Note: And that is something we talked about four and a half years ago in this Digest. Have a nice week ahead. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #724 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18959; 22 Sep 92 23:33 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14243 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 22 Sep 1992 20:55:45 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28998 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 22 Sep 1992 20:55:34 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 20:55:34 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209230155.AA28998@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #725 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Sep 92 20:55:37 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 725 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Bargain COCOT - Flat Rate LD! (Frank Prindle) CFP: IEEE Special Issue on Extending Telecom Systems (Nancy Griffeth) V&H Report 10/92 (David Esan) Stop the Presses, Call the Police! (Risks Digest via David Miller) Static-y Noise on Local Loop (Peter Capek) Telephone System For a Cooperative Residential Development (Steve Gaarder) What Causes This Intercept? (Steven S. Brack) AT&T Announces Encryption Security Device (Willis H. Ware) LD Transmission Quality Comparison (John R. Ruckstuhl, Jr.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Frank.Prindle@lambada.oit.unc.edu (Frank Prindle) Subject: Bargain COCOT - Flat Rate LD! Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 13:26:10 GMT I just happened upon a COCOT in a restaurant the other night which, for any 1+ LD call dialed (at least PA-NJ and PA-CA) would announce "please deposit 45 cents for nine minutes". The phone was very well made and bore a prominent AT&T etched into its chrome front panel - lower right; also it did not exhibit the "second dial tone" bug common among el-cheapo COCOTs. In short, the phone was no dud. How they make a profit on $.45 calls is beyond me (perhaps they didn't have to -- after all, dinner for two was over $80), but it's certainly refreshing to see a COCOT that isn't out to rip you off. Incidentally, no information on who the 0+ carrier and/or AOS was appeared on the phone (thought that was required), nor did I have time to explore this. Frank Prindle Frank.Prindle@bbs.oit.unc.edu The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service. internet: bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80 ------------------------------ From: nancyg@banshee.bellcore.com (Nancy Griffeth) Organization: Morristown Research and Engineering Subject: CFP: IEEE Special Issue on Extending Telecom Systems Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 14:32:50 GMT Call for Papers for Special Issue of IEEE Computer Extending the functionality of telecommunications systems will be the theme of the August 1993 issue of IEEE Computer. Manuscripts surveying or reporting original research, design and development, and applications are sought immediately in: . Classification of the kinds of problems raised by extending the functionality of telecommunications systems; . Modelling, reasoning, and testing techniques for detecting feature interactions between different software components of a telecommunications system; . Techniques for dynamic resolution of conflicts arising because of interactions between users or software components of a telecommunications system; . Software platforms and architectures for preventing or resolving interactions between different software components of a telecommunications system; . Tools and methodologies for promoting software compatibility and extensibility. . Environments and automated tools for related problems in other software systems. . Solution techniques used for actual telecommunication systems. A 300-word abstract should be submitted by October 1, 1992. Fourteen copies of each full manuscript must be submitted by November 15, 1992. Notification of decisions is set for March 1, 1993, and the final version of each manuscript is due April 15, 1993. Direct submissions and questions to Nancy D. Griffeth, Bellcore MRE 2L-237, 445 South Street, Morristown NJ 07962-1910, phone (201)829-4538, e-mail nancyg@bellcore.com, or to Yow-Jian Lin, Bellcore 2Q-277, 445 South Street, Morristown NJ 07962-1910, phone (201)829-4635, e-mail yowjian@bellcore.com. Instructions for submitting manuscripts: Manuscripts should be no more than 32 type-written, double-spaced, single-sided pages including all text, figures, and references. Papers must not have been previously published or currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Each of the 14 copies submitted should have a title page that includes the title of the paper, the full name, affiliation, address, e-mail address, and telephone number of all authors, a 300-word abstract, and a list of keywords. The final manuscript should be approximately 8,000 words in length and contain no more than 12 references. ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: V&H Report 10/92 Date: 22 Sep 92 13:06:11 GMT Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford NY Once a quarter I receive the BellCore V&H tape. Using this information I can total the number of exchanges in each area code. The twenty most populous area codes are listed below. After the written text of this article I have included the count for each of the area codes, one sorted by NPA, the other sorted (in reverse) of the number of exchanges in a given NPA. The tape is dated 15 October 1992. I am not responsible for the information supplied in this tape. I have not included the following in my counts of exchanges: - NXX's that are not dialable by a standard user (ie nxx's that begin with a 1 or 0). - Mexican exchanges in the 52? series of area codes. I've got them, you can dial them with 011, but they're not really NPAs. - Exchanges that are non-dialable in the 88? series of area codes. I've got those also, but you can't dial them, so I'm not including them. This tape includes information for the new NPA's 909 and 210. 905 in Toronto, and 810 in Detroit have not appeared yet. The fields are: ------------ rank last in January, 1992 213: 736 (1, 7) area code --^^^ ^^^ ^------- number of new exchanges |-------------- total number of exchanges 301: 744 (1, 28) 416: 674 (8, 19) 206: 635 (14, 35) 703: 603 (16, 27) 404: 737 (4, 29) 313: 668 (10, 21) 602: 632 (11, 18) 501: 590 (??, ??) 512: 701 (6, 31) 919: 660 (9, 13) 713: 617 (17, 45) 503: 571 (??, ??) 212: 697 (5, 12) 714: 654 (13, 49) 708: 609 (18, 38) 216: 571 (20, 17) 205: 676 (7, 19) 215: 649 (12, 37) 403: 604 (15, 7) 604: 569 (19, 5) Of the top 20 we know: 1. 301 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 2. 404 - split is complete. Number should be reduced in next tape. 3. 512 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 4. 212 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split, and the movement of the Bronx to 718. 6. 416 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 7. 313 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. 9. 714 - split in progress. Number should be reduced by split. Given all of that, the NPA that is largest and is not splitting nor has plans (at this time) to split, is 205 in Alabama. The three smallest NPA's are: 906: 116 - Michigan's Upper Peninsula 807: 105 - Westen Ontario (Just north of the UP) 917: 64 - The new NYC NPA A new statistic that I have added to this report is percentage growth. I have taken the difference between the number of exchanges in January and October, and divided by the number in January and multiplied by 100. In math notation that would be: ((October # - January #)/January #)*100 The top ten are: 706: 57.6% (Growth of new Atlanta NPA) 718: 20.4% (Added the Bronx from 212) 310: 20.1% (Expected growth after 213 split) 510: 11.7% (Expected growth after 415 split) 302: 10.5% (Delaware is among the smallest NPAs.) 708: 9.9% (Chicago suburbs, urban flight?) 714: 9.3% (Orange County. High growth area) 818: 8.9% (Los Angeles. High growth area) 214: 8.9% (Dallas. High growth area) 713: 7.6% (Houston. Must finally be growing again) All the NPAs and the number of nxx's in each are listed below: 301: 744 803: 549 913: 439 502: 358 918: 320 518: 265 404: 737 314: 543 201: 432 406: 358 702: 316 315: 263 512: 701 214: 538 515: 428 701: 357 915: 315 709: 261 212: 697 809: 537 614: 425 605: 356 819: 312 309: 261 205: 676 813: 526 601: 415 914: 354 815: 307 909: 258 416: 674 619: 526 407: 415 519: 354 805: 298 608: 253 313: 668 904: 523 402: 415 801: 351 409: 298 509: 250 919: 660 817: 518 907: 412 704: 350 613: 295 603: 241 714: 654 203: 508 415: 408 204: 350 218: 294 901: 227 215: 649 305: 503 410: 408 504: 349 208: 294 308: 207 206: 635 804: 498 818: 403 207: 347 609: 293 417: 203 602: 632 718: 495 617: 402 908: 344 706: 290 707: 192 713: 617 514: 494 716: 397 419: 343 812: 285 802: 181 708: 609 717: 491 616: 393 510: 342 712: 285 506: 178 403: 604 414: 490 213: 390 304: 342 903: 276 607: 173 703: 603 513: 469 508: 389 912: 340 202: 276 719: 169 501: 590 312: 469 210: 386 318: 339 606: 274 307: 165 503: 571 816: 466 516: 385 319: 338 507: 273 401: 139 216: 571 310: 459 316: 374 618: 334 705: 272 413: 133 604: 569 317: 456 219: 368 517: 331 808: 270 302: 126 405: 562 306: 450 217: 368 408: 331 902: 269 906: 116 615: 555 916: 449 418: 366 505: 325 814: 268 807: 105 612: 554 412: 441 209: 361 715: 323 806: 266 917: 64 303: 552 David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ Subject: Stop the Presses, Call the Police! Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 21:29:30 -0500 From: dmiller@elli.une.edu.au [Moderator's Note: David Miller passed along the following to us which first appeared in RISKS. PAT] From: RISKS Forum Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 17:52:51 PDT Subject: RISKS DIGEST 13.80 Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 07:53:35 GMT From: Frans.Heeman@cwi.nl Subject: Stop the presses, call the police! [From the Dutch national paper "De Volkskrant", September 3, 1992:] On Saturday morning, August 29, the presses at the local newspaper "De Gelderlander" went down, causing delivery to be delayed. Many subscribers called the newspaper at its phone number 650611. The telephone exchange at the newspaper got jammed. One of the consequences was, that when people tried to call the newspaper, often only the last four digits, 0611, came through. Now it happens that 0611 is the national emergency number in the Netherlands. So the police was swamped with calls from people, informing about the delivery of their newspaper, jamming the emergency number. In a reaction, the PTT said that they would be careful with giving numbers ending in 0611 to large companies. Frans Heeman, CWI dept. of Interactive Systems, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ Amsterdam P.O. Box 4079, 1009 AB Amsterdam frans@cwi.nl phone: +31 20 5924164 Best regards, David M Miller Internet: dmiller@elli.une.edu.au PO Box 695 CompuServe: 100032,341 Hornsby NSW 2077 Australia ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 01:30:44 EDT From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: Static-y Noise on Local Loop A few months ago, someone posted here a list of things which might cause static either on the local loop, or on in-house wiring. I think one of the comments involved use of the wrong kind of wire. I'd appreciate a repeat posting, or a private note to me giving this information. Thanks. Peter Capek [Moderator's Note: Will someone please grep the back issues and send this along to Mr. Capek please? Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 02:16:24 -0400 From: anarres!gaarder@TC.Cornell.EDU Subject: Telephone System For a Cooperative Residential Development I am involved with a cooperative housing development project here in Ithaca and, of course, have been starting to think about the telecom possiblities involved. The project is to build five or six co-housing communities on a large parcel of land. This is not the place to discuss the details of what a co-housing community is (email me if you want to know); for this purpose, it suffices to say that it involves a cluster of 20 to 30 townhouses and a "common house." Now we could just put in all the necessary wiring so that each house could have direct lines from the local telco (NY Tel), but I am wondering if there might be some advantages, financial or otherwise, in setting up our own pbx system or systems. I've heard of this being done in apartment buildings, usually as a way for the owner to make a profit (which is NOT something we are interested in). Some basic requirements: 1. A line on such a system needs to be no more expensive than one obtained directly from the telco. Whatever we do, we must maintain getting a telco line or lines as an option for everyone. 2. Full equal access to all LD carriers. 3. Direct inward dialing. We would clearly need a suitable switch or switches (if centralized, we're talking several hundred lines) and a number of DID and outgoing trunks. Would we be better off with one switch for the whole village or one for each neighborhood? Does anyone have a feel for how many trunks we might need (in terms of the number of stations)? Since this is a residential setup, can we get residential rates or are all such trunks automatically classed as businesses? What happens if a few of the stations are in businesses? Also, what about billing -- is there software and such available for this sort of system, or would we have to concoct our own? And then there's the legal angle - are we competing with the telco and/or reselling dialtone? Does it make a difference if each neighborhood, owned cooperatively by the residents, has its own system? I'm interested to hear any comments or ideas. This should be a fun subject! Steve Gaarder gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us ------------------------------ Date: 22 Sep 1992 16:36:53 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: What Causes This Intercept? I dialed a number in 419-537, the university centrex here, and got this intercept: "The number you have dialed, , has been temporarily disconnected. Please try your call again later." Any ideas? [Moderator's Note: Usually, if the phrase 'at the customer's request' is heard before 'the number you have dialed' or following the word 'disconnected' then the temporary disconnection means they have put the phone on suspension while out of town on vacation or similar. This used to be a common arrangement but is not done as often these days. If the phrase 'at the customer's request' is missing then what you are usually looking at is a credit disconnect due to an unpaid bill. The strange part in this case is you mention it being part of the university centrex system. Are you sure the university is the only customer on that exchange? If so, its hard to believe their bill is not paid, so it may be misprogrammed. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: AT&T Announces Encryption Security Device Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 16:05:21 PDT From: Willis H. Ware With a press release dated Sept 10, AT&T announced its "bump in the cord" security device for ordinary phones. The Model 3600 is slightly larger than a hand-held calculator, requires a 115V power connection, and connects between the handset and the phone base. It uses a proprietary analog-digital voice sampling and prediction algorithm [said to provide superior voice quality and probably a linear prediction approach] and also an "advanced encryption alogrithm" to protect the digital stream. It was to be shown publicly first at the American Society for Industrial Security seminar in San Antonio. It is portable and can be used with any analog or digital phone. Current price is $1195 per desk set -- takes two to talk but at $2400 per connection, it's still inexpensive if one really needs encrypted voice. The press kit is very sparse on technical information. It does not say how key is handled, whether the encryption algorithm is proprietary or a variation on DES, etc. Nor does it say whether it is exportable and usable overseas. Another item in the press kit references a line of key generators for stream encryption to two megabits per second and notes that it was developed by the Gretag Data Systems of Regensdorf, Switzerland. Perhaps the encryption algorithm originated in the same place; and if so, it is likely to be proprietary and not related to DES. If all the algorithms are indeed proprietary, then AT&T has a lock on the market for the moment unless it licenses other vendors. Given where the device plugs into the phone set, it would appear not workable for data transmission, although there might be a data port on the device itself. There is one technical issue that is not addressed and some phone users are going to get surprised. An encrypted digital data stream is continuous; it never has gaps even though the underlying conversation does. Thus the gaps in speech which multiplexors exploit to put more than one conversation on a circuit are going to be upset and possibly not function properly. ------------------------------ From: ruck@zeta.ee.ufl.edu (John R Ruckstuhl Jr) Subject: LD Transmission Quality Comparison Organization: EE Dept at UF Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 23:26:37 GMT Will you please comment? Anecdote 1: A few years ago I had trouble communicating from Colorado Springs to a BBS in Texas. I'd connect at 1200 bps and be online for less than a minute, enough to get the first page or so of login banner, then be mysteriously cut off. After many such attempts, I overrode the default carrier MCI and dialed via AT&T. Viola! Success! I tried MCI and AT&T a few more times to convince myself that MCI was indeed the problem. Anecdote 2: A while back (years?) Mikel Manitius (sp?) posted a technical explanation of quality problems that he'd traced back to MCI. Remember? Anecdote 3: I just saw a posting in another newsgroup -- someone had trouble reaching a BBS somewhere, and had symptoms like I'd had in anecdote 1. I suggested that he try AT&T, and he replied that my suggestion worked! It turns out his default was Sprint. Can I safely extrapolate -- AT&T LD quality is superior ? Well, I'd guess that is too general a statement, but under what conditions are there obvious signal transmission quality differences, and, how often (in time, or in space -- geographically, that is) are these conditions met? Thanks for your comments. Best regards, John R. Ruckstuhl, Jr. ruck@alpha.ee.ufl.edu Dept of Electrical Engineering ruck@cis.ufl.edu, uflorida!ruck University of Florida ruck%sphere@cis.ufl.edu, sphere!ruck ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #725 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22095; 23 Sep 92 1:12 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06797 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 22 Sep 1992 22:25:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31786 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 22 Sep 1992 22:24:57 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 22:24:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209230324.AA31786@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #726 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Sep 92 22:24:30 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 726 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Problems With OP Station Over SLC-96 (Jeff Wasilko) Nigel Allen's List of U.S. Telecom Industry Periodicals (Nigel Allen) Laguna Beach to Replace Operator With Voice Mail (Randy Gellens) CD-ROM Directory Ships (Ken Jongsma) Interesting Old Books (Jim Haynes) Credit Cards Accepted in Hotel Room (Carl Moore) What is the Purpose of the Tri Tones? (Joseph Bergstein) Speech Recognition Added to Telephone Messaging System (Randy Gellens) _The_Round_Table_ (Randy Gellens) Denied Telephone Service (H. Peter Anvin) Short International Calls From USA (Simon Streltsov) Question About TA/TR (Yee-Lee Shyong) Pay Phone on 717-529 (Carl Moore) Postalized Rates For Phone Service (Joseph Bergstein) Storing Phone Numbers (J. Philip Miller) GSM Launch in Sweden (Bill Wicks) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) Subject: Problems With OP Station Over SLC-96 Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 22:25:08 EST Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div. Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com We're trying to get six Off-Premises-Extensions working off of a Northern Norstar. The OPXs are coming off the Norstar via ATAs (analog terminal adaptors) since the Norstar doesn't support analog line cards ... The OPX circuits go thru a SLC-96 in a remote CO. The problem we are seeing is the SLC seems to be eating ring voltage. We get dial-tone and can make calls from the remote phones, and if a call is placed to a remote extention a talk-path is established (it just never rings). SNET (who is now close to GTE in getting stuff done right in my book) tested the circuits from their test center. They can send out ring voltage from the CO to the OPX, and we get it fine (101 volts). Ring voltage sent from our PBX to the CO makes it there (90 volts). When the ATA sends out ring (two short bursts since it's an internal call), nothing happens. SNET is saying it's our problem. I disagree, since it's obvious the SLC is what's eating the ring voltage. I've asked for six copper lines (instead of the SLC-d ones), but they say that they only give copper to alarm companies -- the rest of us must suffer. The only concrete suggestion I've heard from SNET is to try reversing tip and ring going to the CO. They think this might keep the SLC from munching our ring. I'm going to try this tomorrow. After that I'm going to lock WilTel and SNET into the switch room and leave them there until it works (: Any suggestions would probably keep a few hard-working telephone guys from starving. Thanks, Jeff Jeff's Oasis at Home. Jeff can also be reached at work at: jwasilko@airage.com ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Nigel Allen's List of U.S. Telecom Industry Periodicals Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 22:15:18 EDT Here is a list of some U.S. telecommunications industry newspapers and magazines. If your company or organization wants to announce something related to telecommunications, you may want to send a press release to each of the following publications (and you may also want to post a message about it in this newsgroup). Telephony attn: News Editor 55 East Jackson Blvd., Suite 1100 Chicago, Illinois 60604-4188 U.S.A. telephone (312) 922-2435 fax (312) 922-1408 Telephone Engineer & Management attn: Robert E. Stoffels, Editor 233 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 2423 Chicago, IL 60601 telephone (312) 938-4856 fax (312) 938-4854 Telecommunications Directory attn: Mr. John Krol, Editor Gale Research Inc. 835 Penobscot Building Detroit, Michigan 48226-4094, U.S.A. telephone (313) 961-2242 fax (313) 961-6815 CommunicationsWeek attn: News Editor 600 Community Drive Manhasset, N.Y. 11030 U.S.A. telephone (516) 562-5530 fax (516) 562-5055 Telecommunications attn: Editor 685 Canton Street Norwood, MA 02062 U.S.A. telephone (617) 769-9750 fax (617) 762-9071 Communications News attn: Curt Harler, Editor 12936 Falling Water Strongsville, OH 44136 U.S.A. telephone (216) 238-4556 MCI Mail: 489-8359 ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 22 SEP 92 00:02 Subject: Laguna Beach to Replace Operator With Voice Mail The {L.A. Times} reported in Friday, 9/18/92's Orange County Edition that the city of Laguna Beach, California will replace its switchboard operator with a voice mail system to save money. (In response to recent budget shortfalls, the state is keeping a larger percentage of local property tax revenue than before. Laguna Beach will lose about $30 per person.) The article notes that now is a good time, since the city's regular switchboard [I assume they mean PBX -- RCG] operator quit, and currently has a temporary one. The city will spend about $25,000 to install the voice mail system. The article quotes the city's fire services secretary, Carrie Joyce, who supervises the switchboard, as saying that people don't like voice mail systems. The city currently uses a machine to take calls during lunch and breaks. "I've had many complaints about it," Joyce said, "I've had many people say they don't like having to listen to that message and they never know if they're hitting the right button for the right extension. It's confusing to many people." 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: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 10:39:07 EDT From: Ken Jongsma x7702 Reply-To: jongsma@esseye.si.com Subject: CD-ROM Directory Ships According to {Infoworld}, a national business directory on CD-ROM is now available: ProCD Inc. began shipping last week ProPhone-National Directory Edition, a collection of 3 CD-ROMs containing names of 7.5 million businesses that can be searched by name, business type, or Standard Industrial Classification codes. The directory retails for $349, but a special introductory price is set at $179. ProCD's phone number is +1 (617) 631-9200. Kenneth R Jongsma jongsma@esseye.si.com Smiths Industries 73115,1041@compuserve.com Grand Rapids, Michigan +1 616 241 7702 ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: Interesting Old Books Date: 22 Sep 1992 20:35:00 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz Found in the library, among a whole shelf of Bureau of Census tomes on the 1900 U.S. Census, "Special Reports - Telephones and Telegraphs - 1902" Besides statistics there are lots of historical text and pictures, and descriptions of technical developments. Another book I found "The American Telegrapher" by Edwin Gabler is a history of the social/labor relations aspect of telegraphy 1860-1900. There are some pictures of the operating room at Western Union headquarters, 195 Broadway, NY. I know next to nothing of the history of NYC; but 195 Broadway was formerly the site of AT&T headquarters, before they moved to the present Philip Johnson building in the 1960s(?). And Western Union was at 60 Hudson St. Does all this relate to the period when Western Union and AT&T were effectively merged, and then were forced by the courts to separate? haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 17:37:41 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Credit Cards Accepted in Hotel Room At Mechanicsburg, Pa. near Harrisburg: "For your convenience, Sprint handles AT&T calling cards as well as the following cards: Telco Calling Card Visa MasterCard American Express Discover Diners Club International Carte Blanche JCB Cards Bell Canada AT&T" The only emblem appearing on "Telco Calling Card" (not a proper name, just referring to your local phone company) and Bell Canada was that of Bell. But I got the (Sprint?) operator when I tried to use my AT&T card number. ------------------------------ From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 14:41:12 -0500 Subject: What is the Purpose of the Tri Tones? In a message from Andy Jacboson he mentioned "tri-tone" ... > I believe ye olde Bell System did have a specific message for > numbers-to-be. It went something like (This was before the > tri-tone era): > The number you have reached, NNX-XXXX, has not yet been > connected. Please try your call again later. I've been curious for some time. Do the tri-tones on various intercepts serve any special technical purpose? Are they just a distinctive tone much like the Emergency Broadcast System on radio, so that callers will know to listen for a special message? Or is the tri-tone processed or handled in some way be TELCO or IXC switches? If so, for what purpose? ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 22 SEP 92 18:43 Subject: Speech Recognition Added to Telephone Messaging System This is reposted (with permission) from an internal newsletter: UNISYS ADDS SPEECH RECOGNITION TO TELEPHONE MESSAGING SYSTEM Automatic speech recognition is being added to the Unisys telephone messaging system to enable callers who do not have access to Touch-Tone service to speak, rather than key-in commands. ASR will become available through a new technology partnership between Unisys and Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products of Belgium. ASR will enable the advanced services provided by the Unisys Network Applications Platform to be offered in areas where Touch-Tone telephones are not yet in general use. NAP manages voice and data communications, including voice mail and caller-interaction and call- control services such as Touch-Tone credit card validation and call screening for routing 911 emergency calls. The initial ASR implementation with NAP -- voice mail -- will be ready next year and will have a vocabulary of more than 60 words plus continuous number recognition, enabling users to interact naturally with the system. Word spotting, which filters out extraneous words and unwanted sounds, and echo-cancelling, which allows the user to override machine prompts, will provide greater recognition accuracy and ease of use. Unisys will be offering a number of language options to meet the needs of its customers around the world. Unisys chose Lernout & Hauspie as its partner for this project because of the company's experience in advanced speech technologies. The two companies will work together to incorporate ASR into NAP, including the human-to-machine dialogue features. L&H is also a leader in the design and development of text-to-speech and speech-coding systems. - - - - - - - - - - - END OF QUOTED TEXT - - - - - - - - - - - - I've been told that this is currently marketed only in Europe, where the use of touch-tone phones is much lower than in the U.S. 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: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 22 SEP 92 18:07 Subject: _The_Round_Table_ Saw the pilot of the new series _The_Round_Table_ last Friday. In one scene, someone in Georgetown (in the Washington, DC area) makes a call from a pay phone. The pay phone was clearly a GTE style phone, not a Bell type, even though the DC area is served by C&P, a Bell company. 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: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin) Subject: Denied Telephone Service Reply-To: hpa@nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1992 00:39:16 GMT Hello netters, Since sometime between Friday and Saturday (it is now Tuesday night) my telephone service, which is handled through my university by billed by AT&T's ACUS system, has been shut off. Calling ACUS only gives me a recorded message saying they have imposed a credit limit on my account of TWO CENTS (the normal minimum credit limit is $250), and that there are $0.10 outstanding charges (not overdue, or even billed, by the way). Talking to a customer service representative only gives me a "I am sorry, we cannot access your account -- our computer system is unaccessible since we are doing billing on your university.". The first service rep claimed the system would be available in 24 hours -- that was Sunday. Today, another CSR said "call back in a few days". I would like to know if there is anything I can do about this, in terms of complaining to the FCC or similar entity. After all, I am being denied phone service for no reason than an AT&T mistake, which they *refuse to correct* due to circumstances *under their control* (they were the ones who constucted such a brain-damaged system). It should be noted that we are not allowed to choose any other phone company for our telephone service. Any input would be appreciated. H. Peter A, Northwestern University INTERNET: hpa@nwu.edu TALK: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu BITNET: HPA@NUACC IBMNET: 16331@IBMX400 HAM RADIO: N9ITP NeXTMAIL: hpa@lenny.acns.nwu.edu [Moderator's Note: Have you tried asking someone from Northwestern's telecom department to look into the matter and intervene? They'd probably be able to get ahold of their contact at AT&T. PAT] ------------------------------ From: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov) Subject: Short International Calls From USA Date: 23 Sep 92 02:09:15 GMT Reply-To: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov) Organization: Boston University Does anybody know about long-distance carriers, who charge in less than one minute increments for long-distance and international calls? Also, are there companies, who are cheaper for international call than ATT's Reach-Out-World, Sprint-World, etc? Thanks in advance. Simon Streltsov, simon1@bass.bu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 17:50:17 CST From: apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) Subject: Question About TA/TR How can we get the answer when we study the TA or TR from Bellcore? Is there any bulletin board or e_mail address exising for solving the problem of TA/TR? Thanks! Apollo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 10:04:38 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Pay Phone on 717-529 I looked up a pay phone on the Kirkwood, Pa. (717-529) exchange, and found a few interesting things: 970 (no more digits after it) and 596-xxxx (where 596 is far away; it's next door to N.Y. state), got the message "cannot be completed as dialed", with the end of the recording saying "717-786", which is the neighboring Quarryville exchange! 529-xxxx and 932-xxxx (932 being Oxford, Pa., in the 215 area) got fast busy signals, as I had not deposited money. ------------------------------ From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 00:21:30 -0500 Subject: Postalized Rates For Phone Calls In a message of 19Sep92, Richard Cox writes: > Telcos in many countries are now serving most customers from > switches that are outside their local calling areas, by providing > local concentrator muxes. The cost to the telco of a local call has > become exactly the same as the cost of a (shorter) long distance call. > It is only a matter of time for customers to forget which "codes" > are charged at the local rate, and which are long-distance ... and for > the "local" charge rate to be gradually subsumed into a standard call > charge irrespective of the distance of the connect ! (I think this > benefits the telco !) AT&T and Sprint (and I assume MCI) have introduced business billing plans with "postalized" rate structures, i.e. distance insensitive. Typically there is one rate for regional calls (e.g. all states surrounding origination point), and another rate for all calls to 48-states + D.C. I'm curious what TELECOM Digest readers think of "postalized" rates, and whether they should/will be established for residential as well as business customers. [Moderator's Note: I imagine like all attempts at averaging out fees, those folks whose calls normally cost more will like it and those whose calls normally cost less will not appreciate the arrangement. PAT] ------------------------------ From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) Subject: Storing Phone Numbers Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 23:58:46 CDT A question which was raised the other day while "blue skying" about all the neat new features that the phone company offers that requires the switch to store a list of phone numbers (e.g. quick call, call blocker, priority call). How is the list of numbers physically stored by the switch? Is it stored as a string of ASCII characters (one character per digit) or is some more efficient storage utilized? Is the area code always stored, or not? You get the idea. Perhaps the SS7 standard has a cannonical form that is used for interswitch communications and thus is a natural format for phone number storage. Perhaps it is propriatary and each switch vendor does it differently and how they do it is a secret :-* In any case, if I wondered about it, I expect others have as well and I cannot recall it being discussed here. J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)] ------------------------------ From: wicksbl@orwell.rtsg.mot.com (Bill Wicks) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 12:47:31 -0500 Subject: GSM Launch in Sweden Motorola, Siemens and Comviq commercially launched the first GSM cellular system in Sweden on the 1st of September. Motorola providing the BSS equipment and OMC and Siemens the switching equipment. The service covers the three major cities of Stockholm, Goteborg, and Malmo. Bill Wicks Motorola, Inc. Cellular Infrastructure Group System Integration and Test ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #726 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25604; 23 Sep 92 2:56 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07635 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 22 Sep 1992 23:58:56 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15403 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 22 Sep 1992 23:58:45 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 23:58:45 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209230458.AA15403@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #727 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Sep 92 23:58:49 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 727 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Wants $3 For International DA (Gabe M. Wiener) Telcos in Carolina (Philippa Morrissey) Wanted: Device to Record Keypad Numbers as ASCII File (James Deibele) Modem <-> Digital Telephone System (Eric Jacksch) Where is Country Code 952? (Jan Richert) Looking For Public USENET/Mail Sites (Robert L. McMillin) Please Suggest a Good Voice Mail System (B.G. Mahesh) Some Questions About Telecom Service (Yee-Lee Shyong) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Ed Greenberg) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Bill Sohl) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (John Gilbert) Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation (Richard Nash) Re: 711 Reaches E911 Center (Mike Morris) Re: 711 Reaches E911 center (John Desmond) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: AT&T Wants $3 For International DA Organization: Columbia University Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1992 02:46:59 GMT I called AT&T for Vienna directory assistance tonight and got a shock when I was told it would be a $3 charge. I always remember international DA being a free service (after all, chances are that you're gonna place the call after you get the number). A quick 10777-0, and over to Sprint who gladly put it through gratis. Only difference was that the Sprint operator not only had to look up the country code for Vienna, but also the *country*. I guess AT&T must use the $3 to pay for their operators' geography lessons. Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ [Moderator's Note: The three dollar charge for international directory assistance has been in effect for about a year, maybe longer. The main reason the charge was implemented was because both Sprint and MCI were never interested in providing the service -- only in skimming the cream on expensive and well-traveled international routes. It was very customary for both Sprint and MCI to advise their international callers to 'dial 10288-0 to make the enquiry ... it is free ... then use Sprint (MCI) to make the call itself.' International DA has always been a loser. A five minute holding time waiting for the foreign operator to respond, take the details, look up the number, then reply is not uncommon in Middle East/Far East countries, fifteen minutes spent connecting to the other end and getting the information is not unheard of during busy periods like late Sunday night in the USA which is Monday morning and the start of the business week over there. They are not, shall we say, as rigid in their service requirements as AT&T or even GTE :) Once AT&T started charging, it got rid of lots of the non-revenue traffic from people who were going to use Sprint (MCI) anyway to place the call, and forced those two companies to either pay the freight via AT&T or start their own money-losing international directory services. PAT] ------------------------------ From: philippa@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Philippa Morrissey) Subject: Telcos in Carolina Organization: AOTC - CSSC Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1992 00:12:11 GMT Can anyone help with information about local telcos in Carolina. In particular I need to know names and what the specialty of the Telcos are. I really want to know what it is that the telcos have a reputation for doing well -- whather it be quality of service or innovation in the Intelligent Network arena. Hope someone can help. Philippa Morrissey - AOTC |MHSnet: philippa@cssc-syd.tansu.oz.au Advanced Network Products |Snail : 320 Pitt St, Sydney 2000. Customised Software Solutions | or PO Box A226, Sydney South 2000, Australia. Centre - Sydney |Phone : +61 (0)2 395 3467 Fax: +61 2 395 3225 [Moderator's Note: Well, there are two Carolinas: North and South. They are separate states; each has a number of small independent telcos operating in them. Which did you have in mind, or both? PAT] ------------------------------ From: jamesd@techbook.com (James Deibele) Subject: WANTED: Device to Record Keypad Numbers as ASCII File Organization: TECHbooks of Beaverton Oregon - Public Access Unix Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 20:29:26 GMT I'm looking for something to do the following: User calls, enters one number (account number), enters a "#" sign or waits a few seconds, enters another number, enters a "#" sign or waits a few seconds or hangs up. If they don't hang up, they will repeat the cycle as many times as needed. What I want from this: an ASCII file with each number on a separate line. It would be nice if the device could be "scaled" to handle more than one phone line. It would be fabulous if there was some sort of programming language so that numbers could be validated against a list of valid numbers. Application is sending information to clients. First number is their account number, then report numbers. I want to use ASCII file to mail-merge reports. Each page can be marked "prepared specially for ..." with the database supplying the account information. It would be nice if the client was told right away that the report number was invalid (either because they screwed up or because that report is out-of-date). Device needs to give voice prompt --- "Hello. Please enter account number" -- take number, then prompt "Please enter report number". It would be nice if the device could read back the number and report that it was valid or not. Device should handle hangups gracefully. Voice mail would be a nice addition, but not a requirement. "Device" could be just about anything. Price is a consideration to some degree at this point. I've sent away for info on different boards that I've heard of, like Watson and Big Mouth, but would like to hear what people think would be the best solution. Thanks for your help. ------------------------------ Subject: Modem <-> Digital Telephone System From: jacksch@insom.eastern.com (Eric Jacksch) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 12:30:37 -0400 Organization: Insomniacs' Guild, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Thanks for the number of replies I received. For anyone else who may be doing the same, I got it working. We have electronic key set telephones; the four wire ones which plug into RJ-11 jacks and allow you to select from a set of lines, an intercom, etc. After playing around trying to build an acoustic coupler, I connected a small audio amp to the line and found that the black and yellow were used for digital communication between the telephone and our switch, while the red and green carried analog audio. I bought a modular splitter (plug into wall and you have two jacks), a modular-to-modular cable, and a 1:1 audio transformer, all availible from radio shack for aprox $15. I cut the cable and spliced the audio transformer into the red and green lines and left the black and yellow disconnected. Plug the phone into one side of the splitter, and connect the modem using the modular cable with the audio transformer in it. Select a phone line on the keyset phone, tell the modem to dial, and you're in business. It didn't seem too great at 14.4 kbps, but it seemed completely reliable at 2400 bps. You could probably connect the modem direct without the audio isolation transformer, but I didn't want to risk it. My full time job is not in the computer field; my boss wouldn't understand if I blew something up! Eric Jacksch jacksch@insom.eastern.com ------------------------------ From: jrichert@krefcom.ish.de (Jan Richert) Subject: Where is Country Code 952? Date: 22 Sep 92 12:02:31 GMT Reply-To: jrichert@krefcom.ish.de (Jan Richert) Organization: Krefcom UUCP Server, Krefeld, FRG Hi! Could anyone check which country I reach by dialing +952? This country code is not on my list, but I know a number within +952. Greets, Jan Richert (NIC-ID: JR482) | Internet: jrichert@krefcom.ish.de Krefeld, FRG | BTX: 02151399843-0001 Voice & FAX: +49 2151 313124 | IRC-Nick: jrichert [Moderator's Note: The nine series is generally in the Middle East region of the world. There is no '952', however '95' is assigned to the Union of Myanmar, which was formerly known as Burma. Within '95', city code '2' is assigned to Mandalay. So you would dial 011-952-local number which may be where your confusion arises. According to the AT&T International Communications Guide, the point is not dialable, but in another source, it is listed as available through direct dial. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 06:41:15 -0700 From: rlm@indigo2.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Public USENET/Mail Sites Wanted Can anyone get me information on public access USENET/mail sites, preferably in Southern California? [Moiderator's Note: Well, in central California, Portal Communications is avazilable. It is located in San Jose. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mahesh@amnese.eng.uab.edu (B.G. Mahesh) Subject: Please Suggest a Good Voice Mail System Reply-To: mahesh@evb.com Organization: SETT, Inc. Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 01:18:50 GMT Please suggest me a good voice mail system (cost*performance). Please respond by email only. Thanks. B.G. MAHESH Email : mahesh@evb.com Software Engineer Frederick, MD SETT Inc. (Affiliated to EVB Software Engineering, Inc.) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 16:11:38 CST From: apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) Subject: Some Questions About Telecom Service What's the difference of telephone service (such as POTS, UVG, etc) between North America and Europe standard? The DLC standard in North America is BellCore Transmission System Generic Requirements, What's the System Requirements in Europe? What's On-Hook Transmission in telephone service ? Can a pair of CEPT/E1 DLC (COT & RT) connect with 5ESS in North America? Does anyone know the signalling type of "Transmission Only Mode"? Why does the DLC need the Pulse Metering Detection (12kHz, 16kHz)? What's the "Direct Inward Dialing" capability? Why does not the DLC system use the ADPCM technique to improve the pair gain in subscriber loop? Thanks! Apollo [Moderator's Note: Perhaps readers with expertise in the topics mentioned above will correspond direct with our reader in Taiwan. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 10:57:09 PDT From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Nope. John, the FCC's PRB-1 decision forbids laws from prohibiting ham antennas, but there is nothing the FCC can do about covenents, which, despite being inescapable, are considered voluntary agreements. Ed Greenberg Home: +1 408 283 0511 edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 Work: +1 408 764 5305 DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 Fax: +1 408 764 5003 KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ From: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET (22501-sohl) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 18:30:56 GMT In reference to FCC pre-emption of deeded restrictions, Mike Covington wrote: > The FCC, in its PRB-1 ruling, forbade _local governments_ from > banning ham antennas. But covenants are (supposedly) _voluntary > contracts_ and the FCC is not presently empowered to overturn them. > This question comes up repeatedly in rec.radio.amateur.policy. And Moderator PAT noted: > [Moderator's Note: But even with the 'voluntary' nature of covenants, > there are still some things we cannot 'voluntarily' agree to do. We > cannot agree among ourselves to exclude blacks or Jews as an earlier > message noted. I think courts will consider public policy in deciding > which 'voluntary' agreements can be upheld. But as the earlier message > pointed out, ham radio operators are not a legally protected category, > however public policy may be that ham radio operators provide valuable > services and should be permitted to have antennas as needed. I think > most of these things get settled case by case in court don't they? PAT] While I, as a ham, would applaud the courts if they followed PAT's logic, the reality is that they have not. At this time, I am unaware of any court case which has thrown out an antenna deed restriction because it was in the best interest/public policy area regarding ham radio operators as providing a valuable service. Almost every case that has eliminated a deeded restriction has been based on other factors such as: (1) Selective enforcement by the home owner's association or a neighbor, (2) Abandonment of enforcement, etc. If anyone knows of a case where the court threw out a deed restriction on the basis suggested by PAT, please let us know. Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below. 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: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 22:34:54 GMT I saw the ad from the cable industry on tv and called the 800 number that they listed. A guy answered and asked me for my name, etc to be put on their petition. I asked him for more information, and he read me the script that was just on TV telling me nothing of substance. I asked if he could send me more information and he said NO. It sounds like they don't want to answer any questions -- just sign up people who believe what they are told. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ From: rickie@trickie.UUCP (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: U.S. Cable Television Re-Regulation Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 23:00:00 GMT > mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: > And regarding this "lack of competition" nonsense, Kevin Mitchell > writes: >> If I want CNN and the Weather Channel, I have to deal with the one >> cable company that handles my town. > No, you are perfectly free to do what many have done and buy a TVRO > dish and have access to those and all the other "cable" channels. And > you will be dealing directly with the program service providers who > typically charge less than your cable company does. No, you are perfectly free to do what many have done and buy a long distance telephone company and have access to all the inter-carrier benefits. You will be dealing directly with all the other carriers who typically charge less than your PIC does. > TVRO too expensive? Then maybe cable is not such a bad deal after all. > But do not say there is no competition. Maybe the problem is that you > do not feel that you should have to pay for the things you enjoy. Telephone company too expensive? Then maybe using the services of one of the existing carriers is not such a bad deal after all. But do not say that there is no competition. Maybe the problem is that you do not feel that you should pay for the things you enjoy. Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: 711 Reaches E911 Center Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 07:55:51 GMT jjs@ihlpf.att.com (James J Sowa) writes: > We just had a strange experience at home that I thought is worth > mentioning. (Story about child misdialing 713-xxxx as 711 and getting 911 dispatch) > I began to wonder and then I tried dialing 711 ... well it started to > connect and then it was answered by the 911 center. I informed them > that I had dialed 711 and the dispatcher informed me that Illinois > Bell has turned up 711 to test the 911 routing since we have/are going > from basic 911 to enhanced 911. When 911 was installed in Los Angeles it was implemented as 811. But that won't happen again -- 811 is now a reserved prefix for Pacific Smell state-wide -- for example 811-2000 gets you the same Customer Disservice from anywhere in the state. But it's better than GTE - the Great Telephone Experiment. Mike Morris WA6ILQ 818-447-7052 evenings PO Box 1130 Arcadia, CA. 91077 All opinions must be my own since nobody pays me enough to be their mouthpiece ... ------------------------------ From: John.Desmond@tdkt.kksys.com (John Desmond) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1992 00:40:19 -0600 Subject: Re: 711 Reaches E911 Center > I began to wonder and then I tried dialing 711 ... well it started to > connect and then it was answered by the 911 center. I informed them > that I had dialed 711 and the dispatcher informed me that Illinois > Bell has turned up 711 to test the 911 routing since we have/are going > from basic 911 to enhanced 911. > Well, I still don't think my daughter believes me the call was not her > fault. > [Moderator's Note: I just now dialed 711. It started ringing > immediatly and after a few rings an intercept came on and said the > area code of the number dialed had been changed to 708 ... please > hang up, dial 1-708 and the number again. ??? PAT] It is not uncommon to grab a code for temporary testing use. What probably happened in this case was that the telco is testing from one of the CO's and not the other at the moment. When Illinois Bell is done testing the E911 features they will probably shut off the 711 code there and go on to the next CO. This of course could be happening in more than one CO at a time too. It is rare that these test codes are used for testing. Most new services and new office codes are pretty routine to add so you are not to likely to see this a lot. Probably only for "special projects" where the telco has some extensive testing to do will you see codes installed like this. It would probably be pretty disruptive to test this on the regular 911 system. :) John Desmond K0TG jdesmon@nwnt07.mnet.uswest.com or John.Desmond@f100.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com * SLMR 2.1a * * Origin: HAM>link< RBBS 612/HAM-0000 Saint Paul, MN (K0TG) (1:282/100) The Dark Knight's Table BBS +1 612 938 8924 9600 V32bis V42bis HST Minnetonka, Minnesota Domain: [username]@tdkt.kksys.com UUCP: ...!umn-cs!kksys!tdkt![username] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #727 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26732; 23 Sep 92 3:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19558 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.