Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08803; 4 Mar 93 19:38 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15852 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:58:33 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32380 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:58:01 -0600 Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:58:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303042258.AA32380@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #152 TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Mar 93 16:58:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 152 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cincinnati Bell ISDN Tariff :-( (Ralph Hyres) The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (James Borynec) Potential for Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone (Paul Barnett) Information Wanted on Caller ID (Amy Crowder) Teletype Model ASR/33 Docs Needed (Robert L. McMillin) Format of Cellular Control Channel Signal? (James Gustave) Looking For a T1 Card (Eric Miller) Is There an FAQ? (Janet M. Swisher) Annoyance (Serial) Calls (Morris Galloway Jr.) AT&T Satellite Transmissions (Jason Garner) Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments (Hon Wah Chin) Telecom Toll Data Wanted (Bill Bennett) Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID (Bob Baxter) More Musings About UK "Phoneday" (Bob Goudreau) CLASS Question (Mark Rudholm) Looking For a Device to Handle Three-Way Calling (Chris Faylor) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bears!rhyre@cinpmx.attmail.com Date: 4 Mar 93 18:11:51 GMT Subject: Cincinnati Bell ISDN Tariff :-( I was happy to hear that Ameritech through their Ohio BOC Ohio Bell was agressively marketing ISDN. I was hoping that Cincinnati Bell would offer a similar package. Ohio Bell's package is roughly $50/month for Basic Rate ISDN with two Circuit-Switched voice lines (I presume these offer measured service.) Cincinnati Bell, however, is not with the program. Their offering seems to be priced more like a typical 'Centrex' offering. It isn't National-ISDN-1 compliant, either. The configuration I would want (flat rate service on B-channel line, measured on another B-channel) isn't even available, owing to a general tariff restriction on mixing classes of service unless they are for 'different purposes'. I need flat rate and two lines, which is what I pay $40/month for in analog form now. This tariff requires me to pay nearly $100/month (38.25 + 25 + 25 + .24 (911 charges), + 1 3.50.). When I consider capital costs for new phones or an ISDN terminal adapter, I'm better off buying two V.32bis modems for $450 and waiting for the next generation of digital service. Ohio Bell's tariff is much better. Mitch Kapor must have talked to them :-) Here are the rates:-( Initial Monthly USOC (Install) 1. BRI Line a via Qualified Copper 70 38.25 b via Electronic Facilities 70 229 (presumably if > 18,000 feet away from CO) 2 ISDN Bearer Services a B-chan Circuit Switched 25* 25 Voice or Data (flat rate) b (measured) 25* 5 c B-chan packet switched 25* 125 data d D-chan packet switched 25* 4.50 data * This is a 'subsequent install' charge, it is included in the $70 if you request it all at the initial install. 3 Optional Features Install Charge (initial) 5 Install Charge (subsequent) 15 a Circuit-Switched 1 hunting 3 2 six-party conf. call 12 3 call pickup 2 4 additional DN 5 5 Additional Call references 5 6 Electronic Key Telephone Service 10 (is this 'Centrex'?) b Packet-Switched 1 X.25 hunting 5 2 Closed User Group Member 1 3 Additional Logical Channels 3 4 Permanent Virtual Circuit 4 I disclaim responsibility for errors, though I tried to be accurate in my typing. Contact Cincinnati Bell Telephone if you want real information. Ralph (a disappointed potential ISDN customer) ------------------------------ From: james@cs.ualberta.ca (James Borynec; AGT Researcher) Subject: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 22:19:38 -0700 I just read a startling report: "The Geodesic Network II: 1993 Report on Competition in the Telephone Industry" By P.W. Huber, M.K. Kellogg, and J. Thorne. The Geodisic Company, Washington D.C. The central thesis of this (thick) report is that the economics of fiber and the economics of radio make long distance a "natural" monopoly and that local access is now "inherently competitive". They argue this point long, hard, and (I believe) convincingly. Here are some choice quotes: "... All serious analysts, along with top FCC officials, recognize that the long distance industry is now characterized by umbrella pricing, under a canopy maintained by the FCC and AT&T. The commission spends most of its time making sure that AT&T does not lower its prices too fast. MCI and Sprint appear repeatedly before the Commission and then in Court to challenge any attempt at serious price cutting." "The gap in prices between AT&T and its competitors has steadily narrowed from 10-20 per cent in mid 1984 to about 5 percent in 1987 to still smaller margins today." "In the marketplace, long distance competition is finished." "Although the price of fiber in the loop has dropped to about $1500 per access line (about the same price as copper), radio already appears to be cheaper -- about $1000 plus the cost of subscriber equipment. With relatively modest additional investments in digital technology, the capacity of cellular systems will increase roughly ten-fold, driving the cost down to perhaps as little as a couple of hundred dollars per local circuit." The report is written in an easy-to-read style and should be read by anyone who has an interest in the future of telecommunications. Even if you disagree with their conclusions (for philosophical or fiscal reasons), the sheer volume of relevent industrial information makes it a valuable reference. Copies cost about $100 and are available from the publisher (The Geodisic Company) 1-800-257-0938, or (202) 723 5088. Electronic versions are also available. Jim Borynec james@cs.ualberta.ca Disclaimer: I have no connections to the Geodesic Company, and I won't profit if you buy their book. [Moderator's Note: We have known for a while now that MCI and Sprint have been repeatedly trying to keep AT&T from lowering its prices. My feeling is long distance rates would be at least a cent or two less per minute -- making them actually less expensive in many cases than their two nearest competitors -- if it were not for resistance from MCI and Sprint trying to keep the prices up. After all, their entire fortunes were built on their fraudulent advertising campaigns saying how they could save telephone users money on long distance calls, were they not? You know how that goes ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: barnett@zeppelin.convex.com (Paul Barnett) Subject: Potential For Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 06:43:50 CST I was making a purchase at a trade show, and gave them one of my bank cards. I was nearly struck speechless as I watched him pick up a handheld cellular phone and proceed to call for authorization. Fortunately, I recovered in time, and cut him off just as the call began: Me: "Are you calling for credit card authorization?" Him: "Yes." (puzzled look on his face) Me: "I do not want you to recite my card number over THAT phone." Him: (still looking clueless) Me: "You will broadcast that number to everyone within several miles that has a scanner. You might as well stand up on the table and shout it out to this crowd." Him: "I have to get authorization for this purchase." Me: "Then find a pay phone or borrow a land-line phone." Him: "There's no phone in here, and I can't leave the booth." Me: "I'll go elsewhere, thank you." I went to another vendor, and paid a slightly higher price, after agreeing that he would use a pay phone. He didn't have a cellular phone anyway, but it took him a while to find a phone he could borrow. I was surprised that the credit card companies didn't have some sort of rule against this. So I called American Express and the issuer of my MasterCard, and both customer service reps understood the problem (once I explained it), but neither was aware of any policy to the contrary. I filed a "complaint" or "comment" or whatever they called it, and maybe something will happen as a result. Paul Barnett MPP OS Development (214)-497-4846 Convex Computer Corp. Richardson, TX ------------------------------ From: Amy Crowder Subject: Information Wanted on Caller ID Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1993 21:05:56 GMT Organization: University of Illinois I am doing research on caller ID and the privacy issue. I would greatly appreciate any information about new systems, such as RS-232, that are being used. Thank you! Responses may be sent to acrowder@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu [Moderator's Note: Perhaps Amy means the presence of an RS-232 port on a display to send the information in readable form to a computer or terminal. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 18:52:59 -0800 From: rlm@indigo2.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Teletype Model ASR/33 Docs Needed A friend of mine has a Teletype model ASR/33 and needs docs on the beast. Can anyone in net.land lend a hand? 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: speth@cats.ucsc.edu (James Gustave) Subject: Format of Cellular Control Channel Signal? Date: 04 Mar 1993 20:36:04 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz Could someone please explain the format of the signals used on the cellular control channel? Thanks. james speth email for pgp compatible public-key speth@cats.ucsc.edu ------------------------------ From: eric@microware.com (Eric Miller) Subject: Looking For a T1 Card Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 13:26:06 GMT Hi, I'm looking for a T1 card to plug into a PC. I have found some cards with a VME bus. I am happy with them. Unfortunately, the manufacturer does not make PC (ISA bus) versions. If you know of a manufacturer or supplier of these cards, please send me email. My address is: ericm@mcrware.com Thanks, Eric ------------------------------ From: swisher@cs.utexas.edu (Janet M. Swisher) Subject: Is There an FAQ? Date: 4 Mar 1993 15:38:24 -0600 Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin Is there an FAQ for this group? I have a couple of simple questions that would probably be answered by it, if it existed. 1) Way back when, I heard that you should never tell your local phone company that you use a modem on your phone line, as they could then charge you a much higher rate. I have the impression this is no longer true. What is the status of this? (Note: this is *not* a question about a "modem tax".) 2) I have two phone lines in my house. I want to rewire one of my outlets so that it offers plugs for both lines, not just one. How do I go about doing that? Thanks. [Moderator's Note: The Telecom FAQ is available in the Telecom Archives which can be accessed using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mmgall@hubcap.clemson.edu (Morris Galloway Jr.) Subject: Annoyance (Serial) Calls Organization: Clemson University Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 12:40:54 GMT We've been experiencing an annoying pattern of calls recently. Early in the morning (7-8am), calls are coming in to one or two of our dormitories. When answered, there is silence, then a hangup. Often, the same thing happens to each room on a floor (the numbers are consequtive). Aside from a malicious crackpot, is there any computerized dialing equipment that could produce these symptoms? I've asked the residents about fax tones, but apparently there is just silence. We have reported the problem to Southern Bell, but no solution so far. Any clues? Thanks, Morris Galloway mmgall@presby.edu 1-803-833-8217 Presbyterian College Clinton, SC 29325 [Moderator's Note: The fax or modem on the other end (if that is what it is) might remain silent until it hears one of its own kind from your end. Some are configured that way. Is there dead silence from the other end, or mostly silence with background room noise, ie a person there who is not speaking up? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 02:13:52 -0800 From: jgarner@netcom.com (Jason Garner) Subject: AT&T Satellite Transmissions Perhaps a year ago it was possible to tune one's television satellite dish to channels 21 or 22 while fixed on Telstar 301 and using a shortwave receiver in sideband mode, monitor long distance calls of AT&T. The same was true for Sprint on the same and another satellite. Other satellites for which this was possible include Spacenet 2, Westar 2 and Comstar D4. Does anyone know whether this is still possible? If so, what percentage of my calls go over the airwaves in this fashion? Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are not opinions at all. They are fact. [Moderator's Note: In an earlier message in this issue, the writer was concerned about his credit card number being read over a cell phone. As we all know, *nothing* is secure or private as you point out here. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 10:30:30 PST From: hwc@kalpana.com (Hon Wah Chin) Subject: Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments Reply-To: hwc@kalpana.com While moving from one unit in an apartment building to another, I wanted to have access to my phone line from both places. I did this from the building's side of the demarc. Now that I'm out of the old apartment I called PacBell to get the records changed to reflect the situation. After talking to the rep I get the feeling that they would have done the transfer at the CO and charged me $35. It looks as though my attempt to do the switch "make before break" didn't work. It looks as though I will have to back out my wiring changes and ask for a regular transfer of service. Any hints about how to minimize the no-service window? Hon Wah Chin ------------------------------ From: Bill.Bennett@bbs.actrix.gen.nz Subject: Telecom Toll data wanted Organization: Actrix Information Exchange Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 21:59:34 GMT I'm researching telecom toll charges worldwide for comparision with local rates here in New Zealand. Could someone please email me the following information. 1. Sample toll charges between major US and European towns. eg. New York to Boston, NY to LA, London to Manchester, London to Glasgow. London to Berlin. Etc. 2. Provide some information about discount structures -- ie, do rates fall in off peak period? By how much? 3. Are there usage discounts? For example, if you spend x dollers do you get a volume discount. I'll be posting the results of this non-scientific survey. Thanks. Bill Bennett ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 22:34:33 -0400 From: Bob Baxter Organization: Fraternity of Fun Folks Subject: Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID Hi all, I have had Caller ID for several months now, with good success. It's a wonderful way to screen out telemarketers. :-) Anyhow, I seem to remember reading someplace, whether it was a New York Telephone pamphlet, or perhaps an old Digest, that if you had Caller ID, you could block out either: a) A selected phone number(s); b) A number that is marked private would not even let my phone ring. I'm aware about the CLID info being sent between the first and second ring, but I'm almost positve I read something here last year that this could be done. If it matters, I'm calling from Long Island - (516 NPA). Thanks, Bob Baxter Internet: America Online: [Moderator's Note: Caller-ID by itself blocks nothing. You can purchase or write software to do what you want with the call. Telco does offer a service called "Call Screeing" which (independent of Caller-ID) lets you block calls from numbers specified. If those numbers call, you won't get any ring at all, in fact the call will not even leave the CO. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:09:25 -0500 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: More Musings About UK "Phoneday" One thing I've wondered about is how close to capacity the UK's toll-free number space (0800-XXXXXX) has become. If it is getting full, then the upcoming Phoneday, which will cause all the geographic STD codes to start with "01", offers a unique opporunity to expand the free-phone number space by an order of magnitude in a completely upward-compatible fashion. The key to this plan would be changing the free-phone STD code from 0800 to just 080, and allowing the non-STD-code part of the number to expand from six to seven digits (thus increasing the number pool from one million to ten million). All existing 0800 numbers wouldn't have to change one bit: 0800 XXXXXX would simply become 080 0XX XXXX instead. Nine million new numbers would then be available in the range of 080 100 0000 through 080 999 9999. There would be no problem with collisions with STD codes 0801 through 0809 (if any of them are even in use today), because they will change to 01801 ... 01809 as part of the Phoneday cutover. Any comments from the UK readership? Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 13:27:47 PST From: silver!rudholm@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Rudholm) Subject: CLASS Question This is something that I imagine someone at AT&T or Bellcore can address. Yesterday, March 2, I had Call Return (*69) and Busy Call Forwarding added to my line, a 1AESS (213-930). Busy Call Forwarding is basically useless because it does not work AT ALL unless Call Waiting is explicitly disabled (*70). If I am already using Call Waiting (i.e. talking to party B while party A is on hold) and another call comes in, they get a busy. If my phone is ringing or I am placing a call that hasn't supervised yet, callers will get a busy. Kinda pointless, I think, especially since I got it because of those times when Call Waiting doesn't work (phone ringing, placed call hasn't supervised yet, etc.) Does 5ESS do any better? I'm not interested in switching to DMS but I am curious if it is any different. My next problem is with Call Return (*69). It seems to work (well, if you ignore the fact that half of greater L.A. is GTE who hasn't apparently heard of SS7 yet) O.K. I have a line at my parent's home that I use as an RCF, it isn't a REAL Pacific Bell RCF but just a line with Call Forwarding on it and no sets connected to it. It is set to forward to my home (213-930). This line is also on an SS7 equipped 1AESS (213-261). Anyway, the Distinctive Ringing and Selective Call forwarding at my home work properly (as they should) on calls regardless of whether they dialed me directly or if they went through the 261 forwarding. The problem is that Call Return does not work this way. When I try to return a call that comes through the 261 line, I get the recording "We're sorry, this feature cannot be used to call the number you are calling at this time, please hang up now and try your call again in a few minutes." Thinking it odd that Selective Forwarding and Distinctive Ringing should work properly when Call Return didn't and knowing that the CLASS features shouldn't be affected by forwarding (as opposed to ANI delivery) I called Pacific Bell to ask about it. Well, surprisingly the person who took my call understood what I explained. She said that all CLASS features, including Call Return should work properly on calls forwarded through another SS7 equipped Pacific Bell switch. She agreed then that there was a failure if this was not happening. She transfered me to Repair. I put in an report with a brief description of the problem and basically told them to have someone at the CO call me so I can explain it. What I want to know is if this is just an implementation error on Pacific Bell's part or if this is how it is supposed to work. Mark D. Rudholm Philips Interactive Media of America rudholm@aimla.com 11050 Santa Monica Boulevard +1 213 930 1449 Los Angeles, CA 90025 [Moderator's Note: Regarding 'forward on busy' and call-waiting, it will not work unless the line is 'truely busy' which only occurs when you suspend call-waiting (or when you 'suspend' it permanently by having telco remove the feature from your line.) I think the problem with call return on the 261 line is the switch is trying to place an outgoing call on a line not equipped for outgoing calls. The 261 line is only set up for incoming calls. It thinks 'here is 261-xxxx placing a call to ...' and realizes that is impossible since 261 is for incoming calls only. An interesting bug, to be sure. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cgf@ednor.bbc.com (Chris Faylor) Subject: Looking For a Device to Handle Three-Way Calling Organization: Boston Business Computing, Ltd. Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 22:13:49 GMT I'm looking for a device that will initiate a conference call using the phone company's three-way calling service. I'd like the to call two numbers and connect them together, keeping the phone off-hook until one of the two parties hangs up. This action would ideally be able to be initiated remotely by calling the device and issuing commands to it. Is there anything like this out there anywhere? Chris Faylor Boston Business Computing, Ltd. cgf@ednor.bbc.com "I am not here." ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #152 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15906; 4 Mar 93 23:10 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15609 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 14:30:15 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26619 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 4 Mar 1993 14:29:34 -0600 Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 14:29:34 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303042029.AA26619@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #151 TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Mar 93 14:29:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 151 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Ben Burch) Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Tad Cook) Re: Toll Stations in California (Don Lynn) Re: 1-800 Collect Callbacks (Justin Leavens) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Aninda Dasgupta) Re: WTC Blast (Jeffrey Jonas) NYTel and the Bombing (Dave Niebuhr) News Clips re: WTC (Daniel Burstein) Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Brad Hicks) Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Max J. Rochlin) Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Al Stangenberger) Re: A Little More TWX History (Harold Hallikainen) Address Correction For Moderator's Note (Frank Carey) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ben Burch Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" Organization: Motorola, Inc. Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 17:15:39 GMT In article TELECOM Moderator, telecom@eecs.nwu.edu writes: > The interviews are mastered onto Digital Audio Tape. A typical > 30-minute program occupies 15 Mbytes of disk space. UUNET Just what the internet needs; Hundred of folks FTPing 15 MB files on a regular basis. This is a really nifty concept, but it would be a better idea if it waited for the high bandwidth "superhighway" backbone. Ben Burch Burch_Ben@msmail.wes.mot.com ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1993 19:37:19 GMT Seems that distribution of audio over internet is going to take an awful lot of bandwidth and be real costly. Is it worth it? I keep looking at my phone bill and wish there was an easy way to just pay by the bit (sending ASCII at my relatively slow typing speed) instead of having to pay for a pair of 64 kbps circuits every time I phone someone. Also, what sort of compression is to be used in this audio distribution system? Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: hpubvwa!tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1993 16:23:41 GMT There is an article about internet talk "radio" on the front page of this morning's (3/4/93) {New York Times}. Tad Cook | Phone: 206-527-4089 (home) | MCI Mail: 3288544 Seattle, WA | Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 3288544@mcimail.com | Internet: tad@ssc.com or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 10:50:56 PST From: DLynn.El_Segundo@xerox.com Subject: Re: Toll Stations in California In David Esan's list of all non-dialable California phones, I was surprised to see one that I have actually seen. A few others that I probably was by, but didn't notice. The only phone in Nevada Falls, California (Population Zero), is a phone for use by backpackers with emergencies. The phone was in a weatherproof box on a post a few hundred yards south on the trail from the top of Nevada Falls, which some of you may know is two or three miles, and about 2000 feet climb, out of Yosemite Valley, in the beginning of the back country wilderness of Yosemite National Park. The phone is so incongruous there that you can't miss it. I have never been interested in making a phone call when hiking there, so did not open the box to check it out. Was not clear if non-emergency use was allowed. Should I have called Domino's rather than carrying my lunch ten miles, as I did last time I was there? Probably even get it free for missing the guaranteed delivery time. There are no structures and no tents allowed in the area of this phone, so I guess we could say it is the smallest town served by the phone company. From the report of a friend who was in the area earlier this week, I can tell that the phone is inaccessible now, unless you have snowshoes, so you probably don't want to check out Nevada Falls 1 right now. I must have walked past the phone Vernal Falls 1, about a mile and 1000 feet closer to a road than Nevada Falls 1. There's a restroom and a drinking fountain there, so it's practically a metropolis by comparison. Glen Aulin 1 and Merced Lake 2 are undoubtedly at the High-Sierra Camps of the same names, also in Yosemite Park. These consist of one or two permanent buildings and a bunch of tent buildings erected every summer, to serve backpackers and equestrian campers who wish to eat and sleep in relative comfort, though at least a day's hike away from the nearest road. I will have to try to find and check out one of the numerous non-dialable phones next time I am in Idlewild, a town of cabins in the San Jacinto Mountains, in the Palm Springs vicinity. Gaviota is on a major US highway (101), not all that far from Santa Barbara, a sizable city, so I'm not sure why its fossil phone has not been replaced. Since the phone is Gaviota 43, it implies that they DID get rid of at least 42 of them. This message may seem to wander off the topic of telecom, but let me justify this by saying that it is in understanding the locations that we can see why these anachronisms, non-dialable phones, still exist. Anybody want to start a movement to declare a few of these phones as historical monuments? :-) Don Lynn ------------------------------ From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: Re: 1-800 Collect Callbacks Date: 3 Mar 1993 14:18:04 -0800 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA In article olsen@hing.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen) writes: > Sec. 64.714 No Disconnection for Failure to Remit pay-per-call Service > Charges. > No common carrier shall disconnect, or order the disconnection of, a > telephone subscriber's basic communications service as a result of that > subscriber's failure to pay interstate pay-per-call service charges. The problem that is left is that if a slimy IP charges you for something that legitimately you should not have been charged for, and you cannot get the IP to reverse the charge, the balance stays on your account and then is reported to Equifax as a deliquent balance. Then see if you can get new phone service established in a new residence ... not likely. It still boggles my mind that the second most powerful collection agency (referring to the collective Phone Company) in the country can be used by any patch of slime to do what they wish. I think the whole concept of "putting the charge on the phone bill" for any service other than phone company charges is insane. I can't use $15 worth of stamps on a package to buy a compact disc mail order, I can't put my grocery charges on to my gas bill, and I can't pay for pool maintenance on my water bill. If IPs can use the telco billing procedures, why can't I order Chinese food for delivery and put *that* on my phone bill ... Justin Leavens Microcomputer Specialist University of Southern California ------------------------------ From: add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda Dasgupta) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, New York Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 22:43:09 GMT I'm not sure if anybody mentioned this in the Digest, but the blast at the WTC took most TV stations out in NYC and the vicinity. On the way home from work that day, I couldn't get anything but CBS Radio, coming live from the site. When I reached home, I turned on the TV to see if they were showing any gory sights, but only CBS TV and a (Telemundo?) station from NJ were on the air. My landlady's son, who works for CBS, said that all the other TV stations had their transmitters on top of the WTC. CBS radio reported that the authorities had to actually remove some of the TV and radio antennae in order to make space for a helipad for the rescue helicopters to land on top of the WTC. [Some transmitters may have suffered from the power cutoff.] CBS TV apparently transmits from the Empire State Building. However, CBS radio also reported that one of the first persons to be rescued from the top of the WTC, by helicopter, was a pregnant CBS employee who was up on the WTC roof to repair the transmitter/antenna. CBS probably maintains transmitters on both the WTC and ESB. I couldn't tell if the cable operators were able to get feeds from the TV stations that were off the air, because I don't subscribe to CATV (I refuse to aid any monopoly) and I am also not sure if the rest of the country got to see Peter Jennings or Tom Brokaw for the evening news, but we were able to get only Dan Rather. The CBS people were very good in reporting the developments non stop that night, both on radio and on TV. I was constantly wondering when they would take a commercial break, but hats off to them, they kept their cameras glued to the WTC towers. Even their weather and traffic helicopters were kept hovering around the WTC, reporting on (and possibly aiding in directing) emergency vehicle movements to and from the site. Two days ago, while dropping off my car at a basement parking garage in a high-rise building next to Rockefeller Center in NYC, the attendant jokingly asked me if I had a bomb in my trunk. And yesterday, while driving into Canada from the I-87 border in New York, the customs official kept a straight face and asked us if we were running away from the WTC blast. Then he burst out in a guffaw. Can't blame him, it was 3 in the morning and he probably needed some lighthearted banter for entertainment at the lonely border post, with nothing but the miles of snow-covered landscape for company. But, the blast has certainly affected people, all the way from NYC to a remote border post on the NY-Canada border. Aninda DasGupta (add@philabs.philips.com) Ph:(914)945-6071 Fax:(914)945-6552 Philips Labs\n 345 Scarborough Rd\n Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 11:05:02 EST From: jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) Subject: Re: WTC blast There's a new newsgroup dedicated to the World Trade Center (WTC) blast, but that's on another system so I can't find the name. It was curious that somebody posted that they first learned about the "incident" from the TELECOM Digest, so thanks for the swift turnaround. I just came to work today via the PATH train WTC station. Except for the roped off area, it looks like business as normal on the concourse. Most of the Path tracks are open as are the turnstiles, and most of the stores are open with no apparent damage. Two vacant stores are being used for the police, and for organizing people to visit their offices to retrieve stuff. After all the press coverage, I'm amazed at how much is reopened again. You'd think the place was destroyed, but a lot is really back to normal. I'm glad to have read in TELECOM Digest that Teleport was barely damaged. I guess it's more a RISKS item at how all the backup and emergency systems were knocked out at once. Just as the Hinsdale fire demonstrated how not to build a facility, the WTC bomb demonstrated that we need to protect our infrastructure from un-natural as well as natural disasters. There are many lessons that relate to telecom here, sad to say. Jeffrey Jonas jeffj@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 93 14:04:06 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: NYTel and the Bombing New York Telephone announced in {Newsday} and other papers that they have installed many more lines in wake of the bombing of 2 World Trade Center and limited emergency office space. 1,700 new regular lines and 176 T1/T3's in addition to call-forwarding and other features to 4,083 lines. 150 technicians have been added to the immediate area to expedite whatever else needs to be done. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: dannyb@Panix.Com (Daniel Burstein) Subject: News Clips re: WTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 08:05:33 GMT While not directly related to telecom, the explosion at WTC has lots of interesting ramifications. I've put together a series of news clips from the incident. If anyone would like them, please send me email with something like: "wtc news request" in the subject line. Note that I'm not a listserv, and don't even play one on TV, so it may take a bit till I get it out to you. Also, there are roughly 100K/day, and at this point, I have three days worth online. email address: dannyb@panix.com twice the usual disclaimers apply... [Moderator's Note: Here's the latest news: The White House announced Thursday morning that the FBI has made at least one arrest in the WTC matter. Someone in is custody who was seen on a videotape taken in the garage. The FBI says a search is underway for 'others', but they won't say how many or who, nor will they identify the person they did arrest overnight Wednesday/Thursday morning. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 4 Mar 93 16:35:44 GMT Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards It isn't just old foggies (grin) like Gordon and Pat who remember punched cards; not only did the community college where I took my first computer course (in 1978) still use punched cards (on an IBM 360/30), but as late as when I graduated from college in 1982 the ACM computer programming competition was still using ANSI 66 (?) Fortran, pre-Fortran-IV, and you HAD to punch your own decks and submit them in batch via the official card readers. (How much have things changed?) I'm pretty proud of the teams I was on; Taylor was the only undergraduate school in our region to send a team, and the only school to send a team that had no keypunches for us to practice on, and we still took third place in the region two years in a row. And yes, Gordon's memory is correct; the bottom edge of the card is called the "nine edge," but I thought that the top two rows were labelled "B" and "A", not "11/10" or "X/R". Different card stock? But this all brings back to mind this little ditty that I learned in my youth: THE BALLAD OF THE UNKNOWN PROGRAMMER "No program is perfect," / They said with a shrug. / "The customer is happy, / What's one little bug?" But he was determined. / The others went home. / He dug out the flowcharts, / Deserted, alone. Chain smoking, cold coffee, / Logic, deduction. / "I've got it!" he cried, / "Just change one instruction!" Then two. Then three more. / As year followed year, / New employees would say, / "Is that guy still here?" He died at the keypunch / of hunger and thirst. / Next day, he was buried, / Face down, nine-edge first. His wife, through her tears, / Consoling her fate, / Said, "He's not really gone, / He's just 'working late.'" J. Brad Hicks Internet: mc!Brad_Hicks@mhs.attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTMail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad ------------------------------ From: max@queernet.org (Max J. Rochlin) Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 18:30:21 GMT Organization: QueerNet Ya know, you can still order the ANSI Standards documentation (which just went "FINAL" last year). I've misplaced my copy so I can't give you the order number. The title has the words Holerith Codes in it. max@queernet.org | Max J. Rochlin | {uunet,sgi}!unpc!max ------------------------------ From: forags@smokey.berkeley.edu (Al Stangenberger) Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards Date: 3 Mar 1993 20:11:03 GMT Organization: U.C. Forestry & Resource Mgt. Here at Berkeley, the first successor to the keypunch was a Teletype and paper tape. Editing paper tape was a pain, but bypassing the card reader and saving a half-hour walk to the computer center was worth it. (That was half-hour to submit the deck, and possibly another trip later to pick up the (hopefully correct) output. We really felt great, even at 110 baud! (circa 1967). I have the last surviving card reader at Berkeley. Get to know some interesting people through referrals -- there are still lots of decks hidden away in files. Possibly the last IBM cards punched on campus were done on a 1939-vintage IBM model 01 hand-operated keypunch when I had to make new control cards so my reader could talk to a revised operating system. The cards were alphabetic, so each column had to be multi-punched by hand. Al Stangenberger Dept. of Forestry & Resource Mgt. forags@violet.berkeley.edu 145 Mulford Hall - Univ. of Calif. uucp: ucbvax!ucbviolet!forags Berkeley, CA 94720 BITNET: FORAGS AT UCBVIOLE (510) 642-4424 FAX: (510) 643-5438 ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: A Little More TWX History Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1993 20:00:48 GMT Thanks for the interesting history of Teletypewriters! Back in high school I used a model 15 with model 14 tape "typing reperf" and "transmitter distributor" on amateur radio. A friend and I also set up a local teletype network. We ran about a mile and a half of single conductor wire through the trees of the neigborhood. We then fed this wire against ground, running a 60 mA current loop. We made a motor control circuit for each end. When I wanted to leave a message on his machine, I'd supply loop current, which would start both motors. To shut down, I'd drop my loop power supply which would cause both machines to "run open" for a while, 'til a capacitor across a current sense relay discharged, shutting down the AC to the motor. I also remember the very complicated wiring inside the model 15. There was a huge wiring harness that seemed to allow for infinite options. I finally ripped it all out and brought out six wires. Two for the keyboard, two for the "selector magnets" (series for holding magnets at 60 mA, parallel for pulling magnets at 60 mA, or series for holding magnets at 20 mA), and two for AC power to the motor. The previous article spoke of various codes used on Teletypes. I recall seeing machines that LOOKED like model 15s, but used a six level code. These were used by press wire services. The sixth bit allowed for upper and lower case. At my college newspaper, they had one of these printers and a tape punch running all the time. When the editor found an article of interest, he/she would go searching through the punched tape looking for the article. Articles were identified by a number that was punched to be readable in the holes on the tape (and garbage on the printer). This tape was then sent to mechanical Linotype machine where the article was cast in lead. They'd then pull a proof from the lead type, put it in the paste-up for the page. Then they'd photograph the page, make offset plates and print the paper. Watching that Lintotype cast the type to be used just once was pretty amazing! The previous article also mentioned the use of model 15s in radio and TV station wire service use in the 1950s. Here in SLO Town, they were used through the mid 1970s. These were eventually replaced with Extel dot matrix printers, the first dot matrix printer I ever saw. Finally, I still have a model 33 with tape punch, reader and internal Bell 103 modem sitting back in a corner here. When I got it, I was thinking of taking info out of our old CP/M PC board CAD system and generating drill tapes for the PC house. The machine is still sitting in the corner. We now don't even plot our boards. We just take a disk with the Gerber photoplot file and drill file across town to the PC house. We give them a disk and back come PC boards. Pretty neat! It's amazing to see the changes I've seen in the electronics industry ... but then, I'm getting older ... Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 93 10:23:44 EST From: fec@arch2.att.com Subject: Address Correction Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories > Readers with factual information about schemes like this should > probably write Frank Carey to discuss it; he invited such email at > fec.arch2.att.com. PAT] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Won't work! Should be: f.e.carey@att.com Frank Carey at Bell Labs 908/949-8049 [Moderator's Note: Sorry about that. Frank did include the latter address in the text of his message. When I went back to reference it the next day, I grabbed the 'from' address instead. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #151 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26220; 5 Mar 93 3:50 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06582 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 00:46:44 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22438 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 00:46:02 -0600 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 00:46:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303050646.AA22438@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #153 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 93 00:46:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 153 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Federal Agents Raid Computer Porn Ring in 40 Places / 15 States (J Schmidt) Arrest Made in WTC Bombing (ghadsal@american.edu) Australian Prime Minister on Optical Network to Homes (Tom Worthington) Caller ID in Texas (Charles Mattair) Wiring a Headset to 2500 Set (Maxime Taksar) Fighting the COCOTS (Scott D. Green) Explain This Phenomena (Sandy Kyrish) GSM Question (Steven Shulman) Voice Mail Delays (Peter Bachman) Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Randy Gellens) Access to the Data SuperHighway (Ralph Hyre) Trying to Locate 2600 (Mark Ellis) Request For Info on D.C Loops (Guturu Venkateswar) Telecom Humor (Don Lynn) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1993 00:20:04 EST From: JOHN SCHMIDT Subject: Federal Agents Raid Computer Porn Ring in 40 Places / 15 States The following came over AP this evening: AP v2725 Computer Porn 03-04 7:02 p Customs Agents Break Up Gigantic Computer Porn Ring (Miami) -- Federal agents have staged raids in 40 locations across the US in what's being called the nation's biggest crackdown on child pornography. The investigation -- called "Operation Longarm" -- was based in Miami. US Customs officials say the raids in 15 states targeted an international computer network that allegedly transmits high-quality images through computer bulletin boards. No arrests have yet been made. But if agents verify possession, suspects can be charged with federal counts that could put them in prision for 15 to 20 years. (end) NOTE: WBAU's AP contract allows us to use AP material for broadcast or other educational use, so consider yourselves educated and don't use this posting for commercial purposes ... John H. Schmidt, P.E. Internet: schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu Technical Director, WBAU Phone--Days (212)456-4218 Adelphi University Evenings (516)877-6400 Garden City, New York 11530 Fax-------------(212)456-2424 ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 17:31:44 EST From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Arrest Made in WTC Bombing The FBI has arrested a suspect in the bombing. Apparently the individual was apprehended when he attempted to get his rental deposit back from the rental agency. He had reported the van as stolen the day of the bombing. Links are being made to the radical Muslim group that was credited with the recent assasination of the NYC rabbi last Nov/Dec. For more info ... listen to the TV / Radio. This is just a *byte* Guy [Moderator's Note: Talk about dumb. Here, it seems to me, is a man who was obviously not clear on the concept. As of Thursday evening, there is supposedly a second person under arrest, but the government is not giving out any names or details yet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tomw@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Tom Worthington) Subject: Australian Prime Minister on Optical Network to Homes Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:19:44 GMT "We will establish an expert group which will include representatives from AOTC, OPTUS, industry and unions to develop a technical and commercial blueprint for extending the optical fibre network to the majority of houses, businesses and schools in Australia. Already AOTC has laid over 1 million kilometres of optical fibre cables. Australia is in the forefront of this technology. Extending the optical fibre network to the majority of businesses and residences capitalises on the significant investment we have already made. It will create a platform for the delivery of a large range of services and the development of new industries. Extending the network to our schools and other education institutions will further our efforts to raise standards. "An innovative and vibrant telecommunications industry will be of pivotal importance to the Australian economy in the decades ahead. It will provide jobs directly in the major operators of telecommunications services and in many supporting industries. "But it requires a leadership that supports Australian manufacturing. It requires AOTC to remain in public ownership. Without public ownership, services to consumers will be threatened. And without public ownership the jobs of all those in supporting manufacturing firms will be threatened. This would especially be the case if AOTC were to come under foreign control which would be the inevitable result of the Opposition's desire to sell AOTC quickly." ---------- From page 20 of "Advancing Australia, Building on Strength", Australian Labour Party Document, 1993 Federal Election, presented by Paul Keating, Prime Minister of Australia, at Bankstown on Wednesday 24 February 1993. For further details contact Phillip Tardif, Office of the Minister for Science & Technology, ph: +61 6 2777280, fax: +61 6 2734138 Posted as a community service by: Tom Worthington, Director of the Community Affairs Board, Australian Computer Society Incorporated, e-mail: tomw@adfa.oz.au. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 10:53:05 CST From: mattair@synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Caller ID in Texas Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX Quoting from the {Houston (TX) Chronicle}, 4 March 1993. [] comments are mine. Copyright (c) 1993, Houston Chronicle Publishing Company Reprinted with permission. Bill to allow Caller ID clears its first hurdle Ross Ramsey Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau Austin - Legislation that would legalize Caller ID was approved by a Senate committee Wednesday, after a way was worked out to accommodate, at no charge, those who don't want their identities revealed to the people they're calling. Caller ID allows a person to see the name [unlike most states, SWBs tariff included the name. PUC said this would be interpreted as listing name] and number of the caller before picking up the phone. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. [SWB] sought to offer the service in Texas but was turned down last year when the Public Utility Commission [PUC] decided the service would violate the states wiretapping statutes [they actually decided SWB could offer CNID on a business to business basis but SWB wasn't interested]. The legislation that was approved by the Senate's State Affairs Committee ammends the wiretapping law to allow the service. But phone companies would have to offer free "per-call blocking" to customers who want to make calls without broadcasting their names and numbers. Those customer would dial in a special code before dialing the number of the person they're trying to call. Phone companies also would have to offer free "per-line blocking," which would prevent the broadcast of a person's name and number on all calls. Customers who want that second option would have to send a letter to the PUC saying they have a "compelling need" for it. Those customers would not have to prove their cases or even say what their compelling needs are. "I just want somebody to think before they sign a document and send it in," said Sen. Teel Bivins, R-Amarillo, the bill's sponsor. Another provision of the compromise prevents companies from capturing the names and numbers of people calling them and selling the lists they generate, unless they have permission from every single person on the list [yeah, right]. In addition, the bill's sponsors plan to add an ammendment that would prevent the public from learning the name of the people who have requested per-line blocking. Without that ammendment, the letters Texans send to the PUC stating a compelling need would be public documents [and subject to retrieval under the Texas Open Records Act]. Bivins' bill was originally opposed by Sen. Peggy Rosson, D-El Paso, a former utility commissioner. But after changes were made to allow free per-line blocking, Rosson signed on as a co-sponser. She remains unenthusiastic about the service, but some of her constituents want it, she said. "They think that it is going to stop the Sears siding salesmen from calling at 5 p.m. while they're eating dinner, and it's not," she said. "But if they think it's going to help, and we can make it so it's not going to hurt, then I think we should go ahead." Charles Mattair mattair@synercom.hounix.org Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer. ------------------------------ Subject: Wiring a Headset to 2500 Set Date: Thu, 04 Mar 93 14:45:05 PST From: Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS Heres what I have: Functional headset (Plantronics StarSet) with 1/4" phone plugs Functional WECo 2500 set Functional Plantorics "JackSet" Appropriate connection technology to hook 'em all together. What I'd like to do: Hook 'em all together, so I can use my headset. (Preferably such that I can use the headset while the handset is on hook. I can probably figure this out anyway, since the JackSet is pretty straighforward in its switching capability). Is there anyone who's familiar enough with a 2500 set to tell me where I should connect which wires from the JackSet? In fact, if there's a good text geared toward someone with only slight basic electronics knowledge on how and what the network inside one of these does, I'd much appreciate hearing about it. Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS mmt@RedBrick.COM ------------------------------ From: green@wilma.wharton.upenn.edu (Scott D. Green) Subject: Fighting the COCOTS Date: 4 Mar 93 16:04:34 GMT So what is the best strategy for dealing with COCOTS that block 10xxx, or 800 numbers (or time them out after a ridiculously short time), or won't let you reach the LEC operator? I have, at various times: - spoken with the proprietor. Result: "I don't know what you're talking about". - spoken with AT&T. Result: "There isn't much we can do. Try the 800 number. If that doesn't work, find another phone." - spoken with BellAtlantic's Private PayPhone Service (sic) Center. Result: "We can't do much. Have you filed a complaint with the PUC?" - dialed the offending phone with modem, but I couldn't break carrier tone (at a variety of baud settings). Anyone want to divulge a good hack for these bandits? My expectation was that AT&T or Bell would have an active interest in seeing to it that I could reach their services. I was surprised that there was so little concern. Anybody have a proven method for encouraging equal access compliance? scott ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 19:02 GMT From: Sandy Kyrish <0003209613@mcimail.com> Subject: Explain This Phenomena My kitchen phone's DTMF keypad is intermittently on the blink. One morning I decided to see if I could dial a number by flashing the switch-hook (trying to emulate rotary dialing). I decided to dial my other number, which begins with 886. Well, I pressed the switch-hook eight times, then waited and pressed it eight times again ... just then, I heard the ring tone, and a female voice, sounding very "residential", said "Hello?" O.K., I admit, I panicked and hung up the phone. And I did not try redial or anything. I waited for the phone bill, to see if I would be charged with any special service I'd inadvertently tripped, but none. So -- what happened and why? Sorry, no prizes given. [Moderator's Note: What happened was your 'pressing the hook eight times' was not properly synchronized, and the eight probably got taken as four 2s, or two 3s and a 2, or maybe a 3 and two 2s and a 1, or similar. You could have wound up calling 332-1133 or any number where a total of 16 pulses would be used. Pressing the hook rapidly is not a very reliable way to dial unless you are really coordinated and good at it. The taps of your finger were probably not precise. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shulman2@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (Steven Shulman) Subject: GSM Question Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads). Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 12:43:38 GMT I know that this is really general, but if ANYONE has got info for me on what GSM is and how it works, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE mail me. Thanks in advance, Steve ------------------------------ From: pbachman@skidmore.EDU (peter bachman) Subject: Voice Mail Delays Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 15:06:50 GMT Has anyone ever experience voice mail dealys of over three days? I signed up for NYTEL's free offer and have been using the service for month or so. I periodically check to see if messages that I know have been left are on the voice mail mailbox. Suddenly they have been delayed, and the record is now three days! Perhaps the system crashed and they had to back it up? Of course I am used to people leaving messages in the wrong mailbox, so I usually check them all. I thought this was a real good thing until this happened. Peter Bachman usual disclaimers. [Moderator's Note: What do you mean you 'check them all'? How do you have access to the mailboxes of other users? I had something strange happen today: when calling to check my voicemail, I dialed my number and the phone rang three times in the usual way, then there was the usual click indicating the call was being transferred to voicemail, It then came a busy signal! It is very rare for all incoming DID ports into voicemail to be busy. PAT] ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 04 MAR 93 18:39 Subject: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls I know this has been discussed before, and I thought it was a switch-settable option, but GTE only permits one call at a time to be in processes through a normal Call Forwarded ("Programmable Call Forwarding") line. This is really annoying, as I intended for people to continue using my old (GTE) number, even though I am receiving calls at my new (PacBell) number. The new number has Call Waiting, but it is no good since GTE is single-threading the calls. When I complained, I was told that business class service permits multiple calls, but residence class only permits one. Nasty! Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com A Series System Software if mail bounces, forward to Unisys Mission Viejo, CA rgellens@mcimail.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself [Moderator's Note: The same service from Illinois Bell allows multiple call forwarding to the extent the receiving phone can handle the calls, ie. three lines in hunt can get three forwarded calls. But the version called 'remote call forwarding' which is a permanently config- ured arrangement in the CO will only forward as many calls as you have 'paths' you are paying for. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bears!rhyre@cinpmx.attmail.com Date: 5 Mar 93 00:34:45 GMT Subject: Access to the Data SuperHighway > As the project is outlined, however, the Administration would spend > money primarily on developing advanced supercomputers and software > that would link them over a high-speed fiber optic network, and on > demonstration projects at hospitals, schools and libraries. For the > most part, the actual construction of a network that is widely > available to the public would be left to private companies. I am willing to donate my money to ensure univeral access, but I have no interest in 'investing' into prototypes and demonstrator projects at places where the general public will not be involved. My model of this is more akin to Usenet (with better user interfaces, and maybe even better content ;-). Everybody else seems to want to build to the 'telephone' model -- the circuit-switched, one-user-at-a-time or per-connection model of the other online services. Broadcast medium, like packet radio, are inherently suited to sharing information that has a wide community of interest. Television, whatever it's other faults, serves this purpose. Users already probably own personal computers, so local processing is feasible and desirable. I worked on a project TEN YEARS ago that proved this. We used an FM subcarrier to broadcast digital information throughout the Boston area. We limited the subscriber base not because of technical considerations (we could serve one million users as easily as ten), but because we had to obtain a license for our digital information sources. Users would filter out information they didn't want, and store what they wanted on their PC's local disk drive. The schools I attended were fortunate to have good ARPAnet/Internet links -- universal access should be what we're are spending public money for. We should harness the educational capabilities of these networks on a massive scale. Disclaimer: I'm REALLY speaking for myself now. Ralph Hyre (rhyre@attmail.com) Alumni: Boston Community Information System Project ('bits for the people') ------------------------------ From: mcellis@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark Ellis) Subject: Trying to Locate 2600 Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 02:15:53 GMT Would someone let me know if the magazine 2600 is available anywhere? Is something like it available at an FTP site? Mark Ellis % MegadethPearlJamLynchMob % Happy, Happy, Happy mcellis@nyx.cs.du.edu % AliceInChainsQueensryche % Joy, Joy, Joy [Moderator's Note: You bet. The editor is a regular participant here and I suspect you will hear from him soon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: guturu@a.cs.okstate.edu (GUTURU VENKATESWAR) Subject: Request For Info on D.C. Loops Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 18:50:09 GMT I would like to know how the DC loop is maintained in the telephone line with the subscriber? The above question is based on my understanding that there is codec and T1 multiplexer between the subscriber and the cental office (CO) and more so we cannot get a physical wire connection as it would not justify the codec and T1. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 10:46:39 PST From: DLynn.El_Segundo@xerox.com Subject: Telecom Humor Single Slices, a comic strip dealing with boyfriend/girlfriend topics, had this a few days ago: First panel: he is talking on cordless phone, he says, "Hey Ralph, you should see this new cordless phone Corine bought me. She's so thoughtful ..." Second panel: she is listening to radio that is saying, "... she's so thoughtful." Caption: Thoughtful Corine bought herself a scanner. Thought this group would enjoy that. Don Lynn ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #153 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28494; 5 Mar 93 5:03 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07896 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 02:19:21 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28368 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 02:18:53 -0600 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 02:18:53 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303050818.AA28368@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada Paper forwarded by to telecom by Sid Shniad, Burnaby BC : THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS WORKERS' UNION, FEBRUARY 1993 THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY IN CANADA "A TRADE DEAL SIMPLY LIMITS THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE U.S. OR OTHER SIGNATORY GOVERNMENT MAY RESPOND TO PRESSURE FROM THEIR CITIZENS." --Michael Walker, Executive Director of the Fraser Institute INTRODUCTION The North American Free Trade Agreement will have a potentially devastating effect on major sections of the Canadian economy, including the telecommunications industry. Yet neither our political leaders nor the members of the general public have been given sufficient substantive information on which to base a reasoned assessment of the agreement's contents. What is shaping up instead is yet another public relations exercise on the part of the federal government, designed to overwhelm popular opposition that is based on concerns about the agreement and the detrimental effects it is likely to have on our society. It has been our experience that the federal government's secretive, selective airing of issues related to NAFTA is entirely consistent with its handling of other policy matters, including those affecting the Canadian telephone industry. In this area, as in so many others, the federal government is taking its lead from the corporate sector, ignoring arguments raised by people who point to the disastrous effects that telephone deregulation has had south of the border. What are those effects? Since the early 1980s, as deregulation tore apart the American phone system, the US experienced an unprecedented series of local price increases, cutbacks in service, and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs as competing telephone companies narrowed their focus to satisfy large corporate customers located in major urban centres. Aware of the disastrous effects of telephone deregulation in the States, an alliance of Canadian unions, consumers, community groups, antipoverty organizations, and provincial governments has attempted to stave off similar developments in this country. Instead of taking the concerns expressed by members of this alliance to heart, however, the Conservative government has chosen to go through the pro forma motions of consultation before proceeding with its predetermined agenda. The handling of Bill C-62, the federal government's draft telecommunications legislation, illustrates what it is that we are talking about. The government chose a period in late February 1992, when the country was preoccupied by debate on the constitution and the federal budget, to table Bill C-62. If passed, this sweeping piece of legislation would effectively deregulate this country's telephone system. It would be difficult for the public to participate in a full airing of this comprehensive piece of legislation under the best of circumstances. But the fact that the government tabled it in the midst of the turmoil over these other matters forces us to conclude that the goal was to sneak the legislation through Parliament with a minimum of debate. This was not the government's first dubious venture into the field of telecommunications deregulation. Even before Bill C-62 was tabled, the Cabinet put enormous pressure on the CRTC to allow a new class of companies, known in the industry as resellers, to function without regulatory supervision. The Commission ultimately succumbed to this pressure, liberalizing the terms it applies to resellers. As a result, resellers' operations are having a devastating effect on the industry's regulated rate structure. If their operations expand even faster as a result of being deregulated, it will be a matter of time until the existing regulatory regime unravels and it becomes impossible for government to exercise meaningful control over Canada's telephone industry. Given the text of Chapter 13 in NAFTA, we conclude that this is exactly what the government intended. A HISTORY OF THE GOVERNMENT'S PROMOTION OF TELEPHONE DEREGULATION: The Canadian law governing telecommunications is the Railway Act. It requires all companies to file tariffs with the CRTC and have these tariffs approved before a new service can be offered. In the mid- 1980s, the CRTC chose to disregard this part of the law when it allowed CNCP to sell certain services without filing tariffs. The CRTC and CNCP were taken to court over this matter, on the grounds that the regulators violated the Railway Act. The court challenge was successful; CNCP was required to file tariffs and the CRTC was instructed that it could not exempt the company from this requirement. A unanimous decision of a three-judge panel of the Federal Court of Canada, written by Justice Louis Marceau, stated the issue clearly: [T]he very scheme of the Act is at stake and a reconsideration of the scheme must come from Parliament, not from this Court or the Commission's own conception of how the statute should be rewritten in light of changed circumstances. Justice Marceau's statement captures the essence of the issue. Opponents of telephone deregulation do not believe that it is in the public interest. It is our position that if the government deems it desirable for Canadian telecommunications to be deregulated, then such a change should be made through legislation that has been subjected to the scrutiny of full Parliamentary hearings and passed by the House of Commons. We were not pleased when the government brought forth Bill C-62. But the fact that it was before Parliament gave us and other opponents of telephone deregulation the opportunity to analyze its weaknesses and organize opposition to it. We have pointed out that this draft legislation was designed to enshrine telecommunications deregulation in legislation and to reduce the status of the CRTC to that of a rubber stamp for federal Cabinet decisions. While we believe that such sweeping changes to the regulatory framework governing Canadian telecommunications should be subject to the scrutiny of the Parliament, the manner in which the federal government has handled the bill has made a full debate of its merits impossible. Despite the federal government's attempts to ram the legislation through, the Parliamentary committee on communications and culture, which is reviewing Bill C-62, received such a volume of substantive criticism of the draft legislation that to date, the legislation has not been brought for second reading. The promotion of telephone deregulation in Canada has taken many forms. In Telecom Decision 1985-19, which turned thumbs down to long distance telephone competition, the CRTC ruled that the above- mentioned resellers were not "companies" under the Railway Act and that they were not, therefore, obliged to file tariffs for regulatory approval. In 1991, following on the earlier Federal Court decision in the CNCP case, application was made to the CRTC, asking it to review and vary this part of its 1985 decision. In June of last year, the CRTC issued Telecom Decision CRTC 1992-11, which reversed the earlier finding. In this latest decision, the Commission found that resellers are "companies" under the terms of the Railway Act after all. It ordered them to file tariffs. These challenges to the actions of the government and the CRTC were part of the ongoing campaign to prevent the introduction of American- style telecommunications deregulation in Canada. Given the degradation of service, the increase in the cost of service, and the massive loss of employment that has rocked the US phone industry over the past 10 years, Canadians have been anxious to avoid a repetition of that experience in this country. The federal government's promotion of telephone deregulation are clearly opposed to the popular effort to ensure that the development of our world class telecommunications industry continues to reflect the needs of Canadians in all walks of life and in every part of the country. Instead, the Conservative government has repeatedly intervened to compromise what little independence the CRTC has exhibited, in order to speed the introduction of telephone deregulation that will benefit the largest corporate users of telecommunications services. Order in Council P.C. 1988-265 illustrates the singlemindedness with which the current government has promoted the deregulation of Canada's telecommunications sector. In that order, the Governor in Council overturned a CRTC decision against the Call-Net company, in which Call-Net's operations had been found to be in violation of Commission regulations. The fact that Call-Net was operating illegally was not in dispute. In fact, the Regulatory Impact Statement written by the Department of Communications and appended to the Cabinet decision acknowledged as much, stating that "It is considered in the public interest to allow Call-Net to continue operating in contravention of existing regulatory policy." In short, despite the fact that both the CRTC and the federal Cabinet have chosen to ignore the spirit of Justice Marceau's enjoinder, the TWU continues to believe that if it is deemed desirable for the Canadian telecommunications system to be deregulated, this should occur through legislative changes deliberated and passed by Parliament. NAFTA: ENSHRINING TELEPHONE DEREGULATION IN AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY The text of NAFTA shows that while Bill C-62 was being deliberated in Parliament and while a range of matters related to telecommunications were still before the CRTC and the courts, the Conservative government's trade representatives were signing off clauses in NAFTA that will introduce de facto telecommunications deregulation in Canada regardless of what Parliament decides. Chapter 13 in the new North American Free Trade Agreement deals with telecommunications. Paragraph 2 (c) of Article 1303 in the new deal specifies that "A Party [i.e. Canada, the US, or Mexico] shall not require a person providing enhanced or value-added services [i.e. telecommunications companies] to file a tariff." This passage makes it illegal for the Canadian government to require resellers providing enhanced or value-added services to file tariffs. So if NAFTA comes into effect in its present form, any company that adds a technical bell or whistle to its services and then labels them "enhanced" or "value-added" will place itself beyond the regulatory scrutiny of the CRTC. This provision of NAFTA complements what the Cabinet was doing by issuing unilateral deregulatory decisions and promoting Bill C-62. Clearly a major purpose of agreements like the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA is to tie the hands of our courts and our elected representatives in the manner described by Michael Walker of the Fraser Institute. The purpose of provisions like those contained in Chapter 13 is to make it impossible for our elected governments to ensure that Canada's telecommunications industry continues to operate in the public interest. This section of NAFTA grants foreign companies access to or use of Canadian telecommunications networks and services on "reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and conditions." In other words, these terms and conditions can be no less favourable than those accorded to Canadian companies. This neutral-sounding terminology establishes formal equality between the mouse and the elephant--Canada's telephone companies and American giants like AT&T. But sections of Chapter 13 go even further, limiting the terms and conditions that Canadian governments can impose on telecommunications companies in the future. While cross-subsidization between transport services will still be allowed under NAFTA, our legislators will be required to ensure that prices charged for telephone services are based on the economic costs "directly related to providing such services." Read together, these two passages mean that while our government can still require our phone companies to cross-subsidize certain services, our governments will not be able to require foreign-owned resellers to make the same kind of contribution payments that are so necessary to support universal service. Since the category of reseller includes foreign subsidiaries of giants like Cable & Wireless and AT&T, the threat posed by this clause is clear. Paragraph 6 in this Chapter goes further, preventing Canada from imposing any condition on foreign resellers' access to the use of Canadian networks unless such a condition is necessary to safeguard the technical integrity of the network or phone companies' ability to provide service to the public. In other words, Canada will not be able to restrict foreign resellers' operations or their ability to connect to our private and public networks unless we can demonstrate that such connections would pose a technical threat to Canada's phone companies or impair their ability of to provide service! Now that wide open resale of virtually all services has been permitted by the CRTC, this part of NAFTA will give foreign companies like AT&T and Cable & Wireless the right to demand the same regulatory treatment that is currently enjoyed by Canadian companies like Call-Net and Cam-Net. Consider that fact in light of the following. In June of 1992, the CRTC gave Unitel permission to compete in the sale of long distance voice service in Canada. During a telecommunications conference that was held in Toronto in the fall of 1992, Unitel president George Harvey and other industry executives were asked what they planned to do in the event that foreign companies were given access to the Canadian telecommunications market on the same terms as those that the CRTC granted Unitel. The atmosphere at the conference immediately changed from jovial to somber. "That's a very worrying scenario," Harvey admitted, explaining that foreign companies like AT&T could price phone service at levels below cost as part of a strategy designed to gain market share in Canada. "Taken to an extreme," he stated, "it's a scenario in nobody's interest." Harvey was referring to the fact that the existing American telecommunications industry has more than enough spare network capacity to handle all Canadian traffic right now. All it needs is the authority to proceed. And it appears that NAFTA will provide just such authority. In January 1993, it was announced that AT&T was going to purchase a 20% share in Unitel. This move seems to have quieted Mr. Harvey's fears. But the question remains: what will happen to other Canadian carriers when foreign telecommunications companies have the same status in Canada that Unitel has? Canada's courts have found that the Railway Act requires resellers to be regulated. Will giant foreign companies be able to circumvent regulation in Canada simply by adding "enhancements" to their basic service package? These NAFTA provisions appear to grant foreign telecommunications companies the right to compete in Canada as resellers, free from regulation and contribution payments, with no responsibility to file any tariffs and no need to cost-justify rates. In short, if NAFTA is signed, it will be open season on the Canadian telecommunications industry for powerful foreign telecommunications giants. These corporations will be free to do their thing in this country. And future Canadian governments will be prevented from applying the kind of policies which ensure that this all-important industry meets this country's communications needs. CONCLUSION There has been a great deal of news lately about the disaster that has befallen the Canadian airline industry. Recently, as the federal government was confronted by the impending collapse of Canadian Airlines, it agreed to put up $50 million in loan guarantees for cash- strapped PWA, Canadian's parent company. There are several aspects of this crisis in Canada's airline industry that are of relevance to us here. First of all, the trouble in that sector stems from the same ideologically-driven deregulation agenda that is being followed in the telephone industry. Not long ago, Canada enjoyed some of the best airline service in the world at prices that were generally affordable. This was a major accomplishment, given the size of the country and its relatively small population. Now, after the industry has been ravaged by the effects of deregulation, service has been cut back sharply, thousands of jobs have been lost, the government is being forced to bail out one of the two major survivors, and one of the conditions of the bailout is that CAI will cut back further on service and raise its prices still more. The situation is so grave that there is serious talk, at long last, of reregulating the industry. Clearly, there is something fundamentally flawed in the deregulation model. Yet the federal government continues to pursue it as if the evidence of flaws did not exist. Which brings us to the subject of telecommunications. Canada's telephone system and the services related to it are world class. NAFTA will enshrine the deregulation of Canadian telecommunications in an international trade agreement, making it impossible for our future lawmakers to draft laws and regulations that conflict with the provisions of this agreement. Before this key sector is put at risk by the application of the same deregulatory ideology that has destroyed our airline system, our legislators should do everything in their power to prevent NAFTA from being passed. A POINT-BY-POINT ANALYSIS OF NAFTA CHAPTER 13: Article 1302: Access to and Use of Public Telecommunications Transport Networks and Services: -- Paragraph 1 obliges each Party to guarantee that companies have access to and use of public networks, including private line circuits, for the conduct of their business on a "nondiscriminatory" basis. -- Paragraph 3(a) requires that the services offered by operators of public networks be priced in a manner that "reflects economic costs directly related to providing such services." -- Paragraph 3 also says that "Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prevent cross-subsidization between public telecommunications transport services." ANALYSIS: Paragraph 3 allows Canadian telephone companies to set prices for some services (e.g. long distance) higher than the cost of providing them in order to subsidize the provision of services (e.g. local) that lose money. But if American resellers want access to Canadian public networks, Canada can't charge them prices that contribute to this cross-subsidization. The end result will be that foreign companies will be able to use our network to bleed off business from Canada's phone companies, undermining their ability to cross-subsidize. -- Paragraph 4 says that companies must be allowed to use public networks for the movement of information within or across borders, including intracorporate communications, and to have access to information in data bases located in any of the three countries. ANALYSIS: Taken together, Article 1302 Paragraphs 1 and 4, and Article 1310 (Definitions) mean that American companies must be allowed access to information in Canadian data bases from south of the border. This poses a direct threat to data processing jobs in Canada, to say nothing of Canadian sovereignty. Furthermore, if American companies ship this data across the border and then change its "format, content, code, or protocol," they will be able to turn around and claim status as enhanced service providers whose operations cannot be regulated. This poses a threat to the Canadian telecommunications industry and to tens of thousands of related jobs. -- Paragraph 6 says that aside from technical considerations, no condition can be imposed on access to and use of public networks unless this is necessary to safeguard companies' ability to comply with their responsibility to make service available to the public. -- Paragraph 7(a) says that restrictions on resellers can only be made if these restrictions are necessary to protect access by the general public to telephone networks and services. ANALYSIS: No conditions can be imposed on access to or use of our networks or services unless it can be established that such access poses a technical threat to our network or that it would threaten the provision of service to the public. Outside of these narrow considerations, there can be no restriction on resale and sharing or on the interconnection of privately leased or owned circuits. In other words, under NAFTA, transnational corporations will be able to provide their own data and enhanced service needs and to offer public telecommunications services! -- Paragraph 8 says that "nondiscriminatory" access (see Article 1302, Paragraph 1) shall be "on terms and conditions no less favorable than those accorded to any other customer or user" of similar services. ANALYSIS: Paragraphs 6 and 7(a) permit Canada to restrict resellers in certain limited circumstances. But Paragraph 8 requires that such restrictions be applied to all companies equally. Since Canada has opened up its long distance voice market to domestic resellers like Call-Net, Paragraph 8 prevents us from imposing different conditions on foreign resellers, like Cable & Wireless or AT&T. Article 1303: Conditions for the Provision of Enhanced or Value-Added Services: -- Paragraph 2(b) says that none of the three countries can require a company providing enhanced or value-added services to cost-justify its rates. ANALYSIS: Article 1302, Paragraph 3(a) requires that the services offered by operators of public networks be priced in a manner that "reflects economic costs." In other words, their prices must be cost-based. But Article 1303 Paragraph 2(b) says that countries cannot require resellers to base their prices on their actual costs. So while the members of Telecom Canada must justify the price of their services by proving that they are cost-based, Cable & Wireless -- a subsidiary of the giant British Telecom -- would be free to charge whatever it wants for its services. This provision of NAFTA offers international competitors the opportunity to pursue a ruthless, price-cutting, money-losing strategy in the Canadian market. In case there is any doubt where all this could lead, just think of what has happened in our deregulated airline industry. -- Article 1303, Paragraph 2(c) says that resellers providing enhanced service cannot be required to file tariffs. ANALYSIS: Again, this part of NAFTA could be directly at odds with Canadian law. It could prevent the TWU from forcing the likes of Call-Net and Cable & Wireless to be regulated. This will give these companies a tremendous advantage over Canada's telephone companies, which are obliged to file tariffs and have them approved. END text of TWU paper   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29356; 5 Mar 93 5:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16420 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:47:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03057 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:47:01 -0600 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 01:47:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303050747.AA03057@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #154 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 93 01:47:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 154 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Terence Cross) Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Bernard Rupe) Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Dale Farmer) Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Paul Gatker) Re: OSPS and ANI Failures (Al Varney) Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (John Higdon) Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (Randy Gellens) Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator (Dave Ptasnik) Re: The Future of Videophones (Robert L. McMillin) Re: National Data Superhighways - Access? (Dan J. Declerck) Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Jack Lowry) Re: Mini PBX on PC Card? (Steve Forrette) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 08:55:45 GMT From: eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se (Terence Cross) Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever Daniel E. Ganek wrote: > In article eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se > (Terence Cross) writes: >> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a >> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong >> province, China. > Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it > to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement? I don't think US phones will work. I think there are two issues here: there must be a billing arrangement with the foreign roamer (e.g. an on-line transaction system (VLR) between Chinese PTT and US mobile carrier or perhaps the visitor could become a Chinese PTT subscriber) and the foreign roamers phone must be compatible with the system in use. The system in Guangdong will be the sophisticated digital GSM (Global System forMobile communication). If the foreign man has a GSM phone then he is half way there. I don't think GSM is used in the US, yet. rgs, Terence Cross ------------------------------ From: rupe@rtsg.mot.com (Bernard Rupe) Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:05:22 GMT Daniel E. Ganek writes: > In article eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se > (Terence Cross) writes: >> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a >> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong >> province, China. > Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it > to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement? No. China uses the TACS system while the US uses AMPS. By the way, Motorola has around 70 cellular systems going in to China this year alone, worth more than the Ericsson contact listed above. Bernie Rupe 1501 W. Shure Drive Room 1315 Motorola, Inc. Arlington Heights, IL 60004 Cellular Infrastructure Group +1 708 632 2814 rupe@rtsg.mot.com ------------------------------ From: dale@access.digex.com (Dale Farmer) Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings Date: 4 Mar 1993 17:48:13 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA John Castaldi (castaldi@heroes.rowan.edu) wrote: > Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of > all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our > Vax to try to save money on 411 calls. Any info would help. There is a vendor that markets something called PhoneDisk USA (your spelling may vary) What it is is a list of all published phone numbers for the USA. There is a eastern disk, western disk, business disk, and I believe a Canada disk. It is a subscription service and you get new ones every so often. (it is a CD-ROM) If you want to try one out, outdated ones are featured in Drew Allen Kaplans wonderful catalog of neat gizmos. I believe it has name, number, address, and business catagory for the business listings. It includes a database search engine on the disk also. Dale Farmer ------------------------------ From: paul@Panix.Com (Paul Gatker) Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 04:10:22 GMT In castaldi@heroes.rowan.edu (John Castaldi) writes: > Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of > all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our > Vax to try to save money on 411 calls. Any info would help. > [Moderator's Note: *All* white pages listings? ... > The reason 411 and/or 555-1212 is as cheap as it is is because > everyone is sharing the costs of a lookup clerk, the hardware, etc in > common. PAT] In NYC 555-1212 is free information for out of NYC information. But 411 is not cheap! Just to find out a local number they charge $.45 per lookup whether they find a number for you or not. The solution is to make a list of every possible area you may need to get a number for and order the entire book from NYTel. I'm pretty sure they send it for no charge. Of course it would be nicer if they sent a CD-ROM! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 11:41:21 CST From: varney@ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) writes: > In article John Higdon ati.com> writes: >> On Mar 1 at 23:23, Andy Sherman writes: >>> could show up on [an OSPS] screen with an incoming call were >>> the messages ONI FAILURE and ANI FAILURE. In those cases you hand to >>> ask the customer for the number and then complete the call. But did you then ask "YOUR number, please?", which is confusing on Operator-assisted 0- calls. What is the sequence of questions when the caller says "I want to make a collect call", for example? >> So my question is this: What happens when it is my Trailblazer or fax >> automatic devices is increasing exponentially, feeble attempts to >> "rescue" a call via operator intervention would seem to be a complete >> waste of time and resources. >> I guess what I am trying to say is, "why bother?" Just let the call >> die; why take up more time? As pointed out earlier, YOUR calling habits are not typical. There are entire NXXs out there that might see one modem call per week. (OK, maybe only 200 DNs are assigned to the whole NXX, but still ...) And towns where a FAX only exists at the local service (gas) station, for public use at cheap rates. And these are the old switches that are most prone to ANI failure (assuming ANI was ever installed). You seem to assume that ANI is available everywhere. There are still (very few) CDO and independents that use LEC/AT&T Operator Services to do all the work, including identifying the calling party. This is also needed for calls from (non-GTE anyway) eight-party lines. While ANI failures (or mutilated ANI digits) might not be worth saving, there are still lots of calls from stations that don't do ANI. So the ability to do ONI is still needed. To complete a FAX or modem call over such lines (they are usually not allowed on two-party or eight-party lines, for other reasons), the modem typically provides a way for one to MANUALLY dial calls, and force a connection (via "ato" on some), while the FAX typically allows for the same MANUAL dialing and connection completion. The modem capability is also useful (thanks, Hayes) from hotel rooms where the "bong" for calling cards is very unpredictable or where only Real Operators(tm?) collect the card numbers (as for some Toronto airport coin phones). > Routing ANI failures to an operator doesn't just result in a call > completion, it also generates 1) better customer relations, and 2) > trouble tickets which should lead to corrective action. > And, in fact there are ONI only exchanges still out there. We > (the Fairbanks Toll Center) had a trouble ticket opened by an upset > customer last week because he kept getting an operator ... and in > our most pleasant manner someone (NOT me) explained that in Clear, > Alaska you get an operator every time because it is the last known > place in the world where the telephone company won't put in modern > equipment, and we expect it to always be that way ... I wouldn't bet on Clear being the ONLY place. There's around 1500 non-RBOC TELCOs in the continental USA, and most are just (rightly) trying to use cheapest equipment that does the job. Maybe that's some old SXS CDO, or a cheap PBX-like box. If the number of toll calls is a few dozen/day, why put in that ANI stuff? In article tim gorman <71336.1270@C ompuServe.COM> writes: > 1. For regular direct dialed calls there are two types of AMA > recording offices, Local Automatic Message Accounting (LAMA) and > Centralized Automatic Message Accounting (CAMA). CAMA offices, as the > name denotes, provide billing for a number of subtending offices. It > does this by having the subtending offices forward ANI as well as the > called number. Please note that this type of operation is not > compatible with SS7. Tim, I'd like more info on this SS7 "compatibility" issue. Bellcore has certainly provided for CAMA AMI interfaces in the SSP 800 service requirements and in the LEC and IXC SS7 Interconnection requirements. SSP 800 also supported ONI directly, and I thought ONI POTS calls were also covered. The Operator Services SS7 interface isn't well defined (yet), but that's not how I read your statement. If you meant that Caller-ID wouldn't work with CAMA (in spite of those that wanted it as an alternative to SS7), then I concur. > The other case where these CAMA operators are used is in providing > toll service for four-party and eight-party customers. We, in Kansas, > still have some four-party customers even out of some of our digital > offices. There are CAMA Operator Number Identification (ONI) trunks > from these four or eight party serving offices to our CAMA toll > offices. But when you replaced the CDO in my home town, you forgot to activate the "four-digit local calling" feature on the new switch (grin). And my dad's impression was that it was SWBT, not the PUC, that forced him to private line service from 8-party. Of course, since the other parties all got their overhead lines replaced with buried cable, he was (and is) the only party on the remaining pair of overhead wires. Kinda weird to see almost a mile of telephone poles with one pair of wires on them (but arms for many more), and directly below is a cable. Almost the same as the natural gas pipeline that runs down one side of the road to the farm. He doesn't own any property where the pipeline is buried, so the gas company won't give him service. But his neighbors that own land on the pipeline-side of the road can get service, even if their houses are on the opposite side of the road. (Guess profits are better on out-of-state sales ...) Al Varney - just my opinion, of course ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 11:39 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com writes: > In PacBell CW and 3W, hanging up on either virtual line disconnects > everybody! On my Pac*Bell service (5ESS) hanging up on either party in a CW situation results in the remaining party ringing you back. This is true on both Commstar and vanilla CW. And are you telling us that once you have a 3W in progress, you can separate the callers and hang up on EITHER one of your choice? My experience with 3W throughout history is that a flash during the 3W call disconnects the third party. Does GTE do this differently? > [Moderator's Note: I don't know about PacBell, but IBT does it just > the way you say GTE does: we can hang up on the party we were talking > to and the one left on hold is rung back to us as a reminder that we > left him on hold. PAT] That is exactly the way Pac*Bell does it as well. Always has been. I have GTD-5 service at a mountaintop location. Except for the complete sluggishness of the switch, the features work pretty much like those at my home. And of course, three-way calling on a GTD-5 is unusable. The only reason I have it is because it is part of a "smart" package. I am sure that is the only way GTE could sell 3W. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 04 MAR 93 16:40 Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back I wrote: > In PacBell CW and 3W, hanging up on either virtual line disconnects > everybody! John Higdon replied: > On my Pac*Bell service (5ESS) hanging up on either party in a CW > situation results in the remaining party ringing you back. This is tru > on both Commstar and vanilla CW. And are you telling us that once you > have a 3W in progress, you can separate the callers and hang up on > EITHER one of your choice? My experience with 3W throughout history is > that a flash during the 3W call disconnects the third party. Does GTE > do this differently? Sorry. PacBell CW does indeed work as expected. It is PacBell 3W that works differently from GTE 3W. I had gotten used to having both work the same in GTE land, and really liked being able to "transfer" a call from one phone to another by flashing for a 3W stutter dialtone, then hanging up. My phone would ring, and the caller would hear ringback. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com A Series System Software if mail bounces, forward to Unisys Mission Viejo, CA rgellens@mcimail.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ From: davep@carson.u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) Subject: Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator Date: 4 Mar 1993 17:39:31 GMT Organization: University of Washington greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter) writes: > I subscribe to the distinctive ring service from my telco. Does anyone > know of a device that can identify these different rings and separate > the calls? I'd like to have a separate line for incoming calls to my > computer; the traffic doesn't warrant another line. Any help is > appreciated. I recently surveyed several manufacturers of this equipment. By far the unit that I preferred was the SR2/SR3 by Multi-Link (606) 233-0223. While it only recognizes a maximum of three ring patterns, US West offers us four, I found it exceptionally reliable, and very smart when dealing with unusual circumstances. It also sorted out the rings more quickly than competitors products, actually learning how our telco sent the patterns, and adapting to the telco. No association with the company, other than as a satisfied customer. davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 17:22:16 -0800 From: rlm@indigo2.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: The Future of Videophones >> I am working on a research project concerning the future of videophones >> and videoconferencing. Is there a future at all? > I'll give you a future: ... my pretty, and your little dog, too! > Vice President Ozone Boy gets his "didn't inhale" associate and > their Junketeers on Capital Hill to pass an energy tax so stiff that > the fares on plane trips have to rise substantially. ROFL! Hey, is Ozone Boy any relation to Devo's General Boy? :-) Funny, isn't it, that Mr. Clinton just a couple days ago promised to help the aerospace companies. I don't get it: clobber the airlines with a fuel tax. The airlines pass this on in the form of higher prices to their customers, who will then fly less frequently. Fewer travelers means more airplanes parked out in the desert, and little need for new airplanes. Fewer new airplanes means big layoffs at DAC and Boeing. Did I miss something here? Coming Up Next: Gee, the airlines are having trouble again. I guess we'd better re-regulate them -- it's for their own good. Back to two kilobuck fares for the El Lay to Noo Yawk run ... > And then there's the sleaze applications which currently can be left > to the imagination. :) The 900 Area Code and 976 dial-up telephone > services are a $1 billion a year business, of which I'm sure that a > nice chunk of this is in the "X Rated" class (and I don't mean stuff > running under X-Windows!) Anyone want to guess how much this stuff is > worth with full video and sound? A CE friend of mine who works for SGI tells me that the companies spending the biggest bucks in Virtual Reality (tm) are the virtual sex outfits. It's hard to believe, but then again ... Hey, tell you what -- I want a job in Quality Assurance! Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@indigo2.hac.com After June 25 : rlm@mcgort.com or rlm@surfcty.com ------------------------------ From: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com (Dan J. Declerck) Subject: Re: National Data Superhighways - Access? Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 15:48:55 GMT In article jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) writes: >> I think it is clear that the access problem will get cleared up. The >> question then becomes what do you do with all the information and get >> it into a usable form; > Why, Mr and Mrs. John Q. Public will use their wide screen digital > HDTV surround sound Sear's/IBM TV connected to Prodigy! (Remember > AT&T Sceptre, the TV terminal?) > Jeesh -- just what I needed -- a combination Sega/Nintendo/Mac/PC > compatible color high resolution surround sound stereophonic > multimedia system with CD-ROM, keyboard, mouse, joysticks and power > pad! If you look at the hardware requirements for HDTV, you'd see a computer (Multimedia) without a: Keyboard (input device) Disk Drive (semi-permanent storage device) Adding the computer part shouldn't add more than a couple hundred using today's prices. In five years, it'll probably be a wash. The hope I have, if this scenario were played out, is that television would then become an interactive media, and thus, more educational. Presently, its "talking heads". Dan DeClerck EMAIL: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com Motorola Cellular APD Phone: (708) 632-4596 ------------------------------ From: jackl@pribal.uucp (jack lowry) Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager Organization: Prism Medical Systems Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1993 01:22:52 GMT Molly Geiger (geigermk@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu) wrote: > I am looking for information on radio pagers. > Would you rather use another form of communication than the pager? I live and work in the Baltimor/Washington area. I've had a sky pager and a local Baltimore/Washington pager. The worst thing about a pager is finding a phone to answer the page. I used to do rather critical support of a software product. I hated the pressure I felt to respond when the pager went off. The skypager had a few advantages over the local pagers I have had: 1. possibilty of retrieving missed pages. (upto 100 hours ago) 2. Blocking pages. (Don't bother me I'm...) 3. future pages. (page you at some time in the future) 4. The newer sky pagers can also tell you when you are out of range. All of these functions where accessed through a 800 number and you PIN. If you travel between markets (The baltimore/Washington market includes Phily and southern New Jersey with METROMEDIA) a sky page may be the best bet. > Would cellular phones be better? Having had just a pager for about five years I just recently changed jobs and now have a portion of my cellular phone access and all business related phone bills covered I have found the phone to be a great asset. I purchased a handheld phone and I also carry a beeper. Each has it's place; there are some area the beeper does not reach and the phone does, and the beeper battery is not dead as often as the phone battery is. If this is business item (you'll get remiburshed for it) get both. Then keep the phone number to youself and be free with the pager number. jack wb3ffv!pribal!jackl ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Mini PBX on PC Card? Date: 5 Mar 1993 05:13:03 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article st@bbl.be (Simon Townsend) writes: > I've searched the FAQ, the archive index and my press clippings to no > avail. > I'm looking for a PC (ISA) based card that would provide a mini PBX - > say 1/2 external and four internal lines, preferably with some added > functionality / programmability via the PC. There is a product called PCBX that does this, although they may not have a published API. It is made by a company in Orange County, CA, also called PCBX. I thin they may be in Tustin, but I don't have the specific reference in front of me. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #154 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18614; 6 Mar 93 3:45 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06402 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 01:25:43 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27086 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 01:25:03 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 01:25:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303060725.AA27086@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #155 TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Mar 93 01:25:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 155 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Foster Schucker) Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Ron Bean) Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier (Stephen Friedl) Re: Toll Stations in California (Scott D. Fybush) Re: Potential For Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone (Justin Leavens) Re: "Aggregator" Experience Sought (Steve Howard) Re: Access to the Data SuperHighway (Gary W. Sanders) Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (J. Philip Miller) Re: OSPS and ANI Failures (Floyd Davidson) Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan (John Levine & Stefan Zingg) Re: Annoyance (Serial) Calls (Brad Houser) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill From: tredysvr!nzkites!foster@gvls1.VFL.Paramax.COM (Foster Schucker) Date: Sat, 06 Mar 93 07:01:02 NZT Organization: Kiteflyers Roost TELECOM Moderator noted: > If the Information Provider chooses to place you with a collection > agency (which is doubtful in my opinion, but it has been done), only a > feeble attempt at collection will be made. There is a bottom line to > be considered after all. Despite threats which may be made, this will > not reflect on your credit in any way. Pat, this is wrong and I'm living proof. We had insurance that covered medical type stuff, the agreements the providers had were that they would accept the insurance payments as full payment. In the process of a two year period we racked up three providers that decided to continue to bill the overage. ($16, $11 and $800). After a few months they went into collection. They now appear on my TRW credit report. I am in the process of refinancing and was told that I would not be able to close until these bills were out of collection. (This means paid, since the collection companies want the money). I was also informed that my credit history will also show these accounts as closed. but will carry the collections notation on them. All in all the provider will get some money, no matter what is the "correct" thing. Thanks!! Foster Schucker === nzkites.uucp === 215-458-8354 (voice) [Moderator's Note: You are comparing apples and oranges here. First off, a bill for $800 is a bit more worthy of collection activity than a bill for $15. You mentioned the two bills for $11 and $16, but those by themselves would be of no importance. It is the $800 item which has your potential lender concerned. Second, an information provider on a 900 line has no signature on file; no written contract of any sort. Not that written contracts are needed to make things legal -- they are not -- but the lack of anything in writing along with the tiny amount of the disputed item combine to make collection very difficult and unprofitable at best. Your medical provider(s) on the other hand have written, binding contracts with you. These may be in dispute; there may have been verbal agreements contrary to some provisions otherwise in the written agreement; there may be a dispute regards the method and amount of payment, etc ... and certainly your credit bureau report should contain a consumer statement from you giving your side of the dispute which may or may not influence the decision made by your lender. I still maintain a $15 item from a *telephone* information provider with nothing written to bind either party is of no concern to credit grantors except possibly telemarket- ers selling magazine subscriptions; bill collectors for the Columbia Record Club (talk about a depressing job -- "did you mail in your dollar ninety-eight for the fifteen records we sent you?" !) and the like. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 18:25:30 -0600 (CST) From: Ron Bean john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Recall that I had month after month of bogus calls to the UK on my bill > not long ago. AT&T would not even consider the possiblity that I did > not dial the calls, even though I DO maintain a 100% complete computer > log of every single incoming and out going call on every one of sixteen > lines in the house. This idea of keeping your own records brings up a couple of (unrelated) questions: If you're being billed for calls that don't show up on your computerized record, could you take AT&T to small-claims court? (Who has jurisdiction on an interstate call?) If your recording device sits between the demark and your inside wiring, can it listen for tones (or pulses) on *both* sides of the line and distinguish between calls dialed from inside your building and those dialed from some other point between you and the CO? If such a device does not exist, could one be built with available components (possibly using a PeeCee)? zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 07:43:53 -0800 From: rlm@indigo2.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn Jeff Hibbard writes about having to compromise for the preservation of both his and his fiancee's financial solvency (not to mention sanity). Ready to move halfway between their jobsites, in Normal, Il, he made a tragic discovery: > This sounded like a fine idea until I discovered that Normal is in GTE > territory! Both Peoria and Decatur are served by Illinois Bell, and I > have never lived in an area that wasn't served by Illinois Bell. All you have to do is ask yourself, which is more important? Your fiancee? Or your telephone service? Now that you've made that decision, let's hope she'll give you the ring back ... :-) Seriously -- GTE provides (barely) adequate service for residential customers. If you run a business out of your home that has specialized telecom needs, get an office elsewhere. If you need to make a call during a riot, find a pay phone. Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@indigo2.hac.com After June 25 : rlm@mcgort.com or rlm@surfcty.com [Moderator's Note: They don't have riots in Peoria. I guess he is going to have accept the fact that phone service in Normal is abnormal. In the long ago days of exchange names, we had an exchange here called NORmal (312-667). It was thus named because of its proximity to Chicago State University (not to be confused with University of Chicago) which we used to call Chicago Normal School. Does that go back a few eons or not? :) The town of Normal also is home to a Normal School. PAT] ------------------------------ From: friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US (Stephen Friedl) Subject: Re: Ohio Bell Making Your Life Easier Date: 5 Mar 93 16:45:46 GMT Organization: Software Consulting, Tustin, CA > If you conduct business from your home phone but do not solicit > business calls there (i.e. yellow pages advertising or business name > listed in directory) then there is no big deal, and very few telcos > will make an issue of it. They certainly will not listen in on the > line to determine the nature of the calls, so they have no way of > proving it either way. Actually, they can use how you answer the phone as an indicator of this. If you say "XYZ Computer Company", then they can decide you should be be a business line. That's why I answer the phone "Hello, this is Steve" on my main voice line. Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA | +1 714 544-6561 3b2-kind-of-guy | I speak for me ONLY | KA8CMY | uunet!mtndew!friedl ------------------------------ From: fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) Subject: Re: Toll Stations in California Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 05:32:32 GMT I was surprised to see one toll station gone from the list: Deep Springs #1. DS 1 was a State of California highway maintenance station in the Deep Springs Valley, some 30 miles east of Bishop CA, and a few miles west of the Nevada border. The only other thing in the valley is one of my alma maters, Deep Springs College. Deep Springs College was Deep Springs Toll Station #2, served by the same wireline as DS 1 out of Bishop from the '20s until about 1985, when they cut over to a privately-owned UHF radio system. Deep Springs is now served out of Contel's Bishop switch (619-872), and the sound quality on the single phone line is generally pathetic once it's made the two UHF radio hops. I was last at Deep Springs in June 1989, and the highway maintenance depot was still at Deep Springs #1 back then. Perhaps they've closed, or perhaps they've just taken the phone out. The other toll station missing from the list is (or was) at the intersection of Nevada 266 and US 95, about 40 miles east of Deep Springs. This was Lida Junction 3, a pay phone with no dial in the parking lot of the, er, "Cottontail Ranch," a whorehouse (yes, they're legal in rural Nevada!). I think LJ 1 and 2 were inside, but I never went in to check. The Nevada Bell phone book (there's only one) had as recently as 1990 several pages of toll station listings. Scott Fybush -- fybush@world.std.com -- Deep Springs '88 ------------------------------ From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: Re: Potential For Credit Card Fraud Using Cellular Phone Date: 5 Mar 1993 15:53:28 -0800 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA In article barnett@zeppelin.convex.com (Paul Barnett) writes: [story deleted about how a merchant was going to verify a credit card over a cellular phone] > I was surprised that the credit card companies didn't have some sort > of rule against this. So I called American Express and the issuer of > my MasterCard, and both customer service reps understood the problem > (once I explained it), but neither was aware of any policy to the > contrary. I filed a "complaint" or "comment" or whatever they called > it, and maybe something will happen as a result. I get that same queasy feeling when I take airport shuttle vans back and forth and hear them calling the card in over their dispatch radios. And that's for a $15 fare ... ------------------------------ From: Steve Howard Subject: Re: "Aggregater" Experience Sought Date: 5 Mar 93 16:13:22 MST (Fri) > eap@ora.com (Eric Pearce) writes: >> I'm supposed to meet with a salesperson from First Federated >> Communications later this week. >> My concern is adding another party to the "soup". > A very real concern, indeed. What you lose is the ability to deal > directly with the entity providing your service. You are no longer the > customer of a long distance carrier, but that of a third party who has > no technical knowledge of or other interest in the quality of your > service. The aggregator's sole purpose is to literally get between you > and the carrier and collect money. We have done business with somebody like an aggregator but with a nice twist that gets around some of these problems ... The Broker. The Broker negotiates contracts with many of the IXCs. I think that they promise $X of business in exchange for price of $Y. (I'm not sure on this -- it is just a guess). When you sign up with the broker they set you up directly with the IXC(s). The IXC then pays a cut to the broker. This worked out well for us ... the Broker gave us a list of several possible IXCs and pricing combinations. We selected one that was close to what we were looking for. He then went to that IXC and "pushed" them for some final goodies. We ended up paying ~$.14/min 8AM-5PM for switched calls in all 50 states with no commitments. The real advantage is when you have problems with the IXC -- You can call the IXC directly or you can call the broker (this could have advantages -- I suspect that the brokers problems get resolved quickly -- the IXC knows that the broker could easily sell one of his other IXC if things don't get worked out! :-) ). We haven't had any problems with our IXC, so I haven't had push the broker on them. If anybody would like the name/number of the broker I have been working with, feel free to send e-mail or if there is enough interest, I'll ask Pat to post it. Steve Howard Breckenridge Ski Resort steveh@paradise.breck.com Disclaimer=The opinions above do not necessarily represent those of my employer ------------------------------ From: gary.w.sanders@att.com Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 14:08:40 GMT Subject: Re: Access to the Data SuperHighway Organization: AT&T In article bears!rhyre@cinpmx.attmail. com writes: > I am willing to donate my money to ensure univeral access, but I have > no interest in 'investing' into prototypes and demonstrator projects > at places where the general public will not be involved. My model of > this is more akin to Usenet (with better user interfaces, and maybe > even better content ;-). This super-highway networking is getting fun to watch on the news. Everyone is trying to make sure that it has univeral access and will be cost effective. Most articles seem to throw around $50 as the top end and 20-30 as an average cost for access. No one however has taken into account you still need to get your bits and bytes to the network. So now I have access to everything under the sun for $20 month, but its costing me per-minute to connect. Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR) gary.w.sanders@att.com AT&T Bell Labs 614-860-5965 ------------------------------ From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 08:14:51 -0600 (CST) jackl@pribal.uucp (jack lowry) writes: > If this is business item (you'll get remiburshed for it) get both. > Then keep the phone number to youself and be free with the pager > number. I certainly agree with this advice. The cellular phone is great for returning a page when you are wandering. A phone is not always easy to find, and even when it is, it still may be easier to just use your cellular than to try to figure out how to make a toll charge with many corporations intricate billing arrangements. In addition, the pager generally allows you to screen calls based on the calling number and prioritize whether you should interrupt your meeting to respond to the call. In most of my arrangments it would be disruptive to answer a cellular call, but receiving a page is no big deal. If you put it on vibrate, no one will even notice. I suppose that the next thing will be to have caller-id and vibrating ring for cellular, but I am unaware of those features being currently available. J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)] ------------------------------ From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 15:06:56 GMT In article varney@ihlpl.att.com writes: > In article floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu > (Floyd Davidson) writes: >> Routing ANI failures to an operator doesn't just result in a call >> completion, it also generates 1) better customer relations, and 2) >> trouble tickets which should lead to corrective action. >> And, in fact there are ONI only exchanges still out there. We Note that here I'm saying there are multiple ONI exchanges ... >> (the Fairbanks Toll Center) had a trouble ticket opened by an upset >> customer last week because he kept getting an operator ... and in >> our most pleasant manner someone (NOT me) explained that in Clear, >> Alaska you get an operator every time because it is the last known >> place in the world where the telephone company won't put in modern >> equipment, and we expect it to always be that way ... > I wouldn't bet on Clear being the ONLY place. There's around 1500 Hi Al. Nahhh, we just told the customer that to put a little emphisis on the point of it all. > non-RBOC TELCOs in the continental USA, and most are just (rightly) > trying to use cheapest equipment that does the job. Maybe that's some > old SXS CDO, or a cheap PBX-like box. If the number of toll calls is > a few dozen/day, why put in that ANI stuff? Actually the telco in Clear (and for that matter a small telco anywhere else that doesn't upgrade to a digital switch) isn't doing it the easy way. The economics, for the telco, of installing one of the little Redcom (or even a Harris, though those are a pain ...) switches is too good to miss. They are cheap, reliable, and almost totally maintenance free. And most admin stuff can be done long distance with a modem. And in the case of Clear, which has an Air Force BMEWS radar station located in "town", the number of LD calls is substantial! floyd@ims.alaska.edu A guest on the Institute of Marine Science computer Salcha, Alaska system at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan From: stefan@stefan.imp.com Date: Fri, 05 Mar 93 14:27:55 +0100 A couple of days ago, I asked: > Why can't you just add another digit to the phone number? Thanks to all who answered. While I don't accept "convention" or "required reprogramming" as a valid reason, John Levine pointed me to a fact I didn't know. I think his reply is interesting enough to be posted. ---------- In case nobody else has pointed it out, North American switching systems have evolved a different switching protocol than is used elsewhere in the world. The CCITT standard used everywhere else passes a digit at at time with per-digit handshakes. The North American standard buffers up a full ten digit number and transmits it in a block. (Before you ask, at the time this convention was invented in the early 1950s there were probably more dial phones in North America than in the entire rest of the world.) So making phone numbers longer than the current ten digits would require immense changes to every phone switch we've got. Newer switches use SS7 which could probably be changed with a software upgrade, but there is still a lot of crossbar which would require soldering in hundreds of new relays. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------- Internet: or UUCP-net: ...gator!ixgch!stefan!stefan Voicenet: +41 61 - 261 28 90 Papernet: Stefan Zingg, St.Johanns-Vorstadt 19, 4056 Basel, Switzerland ------------------------------ From: bhouser@sc9.intel.com Subject: Re: Annoyance (Serial) Calls Organization: Intel CTD Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 14:37:00 GMT In article , mmgall@hubcap.clemson.edu (Morris Galloway Jr.) writes: > We've been experiencing an annoying pattern of calls recently. Early > in the morning (7-8am), calls are coming in to one or two of our > dormitories. > When answered, there is silence, then a hangup. > Often, the same thing happens to each room on a floor (the numbers are > consequtive). > Aside from a malicious crackpot, is there any computerized dialing > equipment that could produce these symptoms? I've asked the residents > about fax tones, but apparently there is just silence. Ever see the movie "War Games"? It is fairly simple to write a program that has a modem dial every number in a range and logs all calls that answer as a modem. A malicious person might then try to break into that system later. Since you say it happens consecutively, that is probably what is happening. Brad Houser bhouser@sc9.intel.com +1-408-765-0494 Fax: +1-408-765-0513 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #155 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21959; 6 Mar 93 5:11 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25916 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 02:48:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16362 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 02:48:00 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 02:48:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303060848.AA16362@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #156 TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Mar 93 02:48:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 156 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Gary W. Sanders) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Roy Smith) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Carl Moore) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Scott D. Brenner) Re: WTC Blast (Darrell Broughton) Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (Mark Brader) Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (rogue@ccs.northeastern.edu) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Randy Gellens) Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial (Vance Shipley) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: news@cbnews.att.com Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 13:57:05 GMT Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: AT&T In article add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda Dasgupta) writes: > couldn't tell if the cable operators were able to get feeds from the > TV stations that were off the air, because I don't subscribe to CATV > (I refuse to aid any monopoly) and I am also not sure if the rest of > the country got to see Peter Jennings or Tom Brokaw for the evening > news, but we were able to get only Dan Rather. I was home that day and was scanning the skies and found local NYC TV station on the satellite with news and information. I caught them about 1pm shortly after the explosion and they were still on at 8pm when I checked back. Since there transmitters were off the air for over the air transmissions the station uplinked on satellite. Then they contacted the local cable companys and had them pick up the signal from satellite and resdistribute the signal to subscribers. Many CATV people may not have even known that transmitter were offline. Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR) gary.w.sanders@att.com AT&T Bell Labs 614-860-5965 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 10:46:23 -0500 From: roy@mchip00.med.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: New York University, School of Medicine In article is written: > However, CBS radio also reported that one of the first persons to be > rescued from the top of the WTC, by helicopter, was a pregnant CBS > employee who was up on the WTC roof to repair the transmitter/antenna. I know the dangers of electric fields is an open question, but if I were a pregnant woman, I don't think I would want to be working around a live high-power TV transmitter! Roy Smith Hippocrates Project, Department of Microbiology, Coles 202 NYU School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 11:44:06 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News I don't know either about the rest of the country being able to receive ABC or NBC at that time. I wouldn't be surprised if they set up alternate outlets if they were affected by the WTC. The great Nov.(?) 1965 blackout forced some news media to alternate outlets. By the way, I notice the jokes from a parking attendant and a border guard about a bomb and/or the WTC blast. Please don't joke TO such people about such matters, because the remark can be taken seriously and you can get in trouble as a result. There are signs in some airports warning of this near the checkpoints for their terminal concourses; and a few years back, a young man remarked (apparently a joke) on a plane about a bomb, and the result was that the plane made an unscheduled landing in Philadelphia and he was arrested. ------------------------------ From: sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: AT&T Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 23:17:59 GMT In article add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda Dasgupta) writes: > I'm not sure if anybody mentioned this in the Digest, but the blast at > the WTC took most TV stations out in NYC and the vicinity. On the way > home from work that day, I couldn't get anything but CBS Radio, coming > live from the site. When I reached home, I turned on the TV to see if > they were showing any gory sights, but only CBS TV and a (Telemundo?) > station from NJ were on the air. My landlady's son, who works for CBS, > said that all the other TV stations had their transmitters on top of > the WTC. CBS radio reported that the authorities had to actually > remove some of the TV and radio antennae in order to make space for a > helipad for the rescue helicopters to land on top of the WTC. [Some > transmitters may have suffered from the power cutoff.] CBS TV > apparently transmits from the Empire State Building. I usually watch the NBC affiliate in NYC, WNBC -- channel 4. Although I worked late last Friday, and didn't get home until about 9 PM (listening to WCBS radio all the way!), channel 4 *was* on the air when I got home. Then, periodically over the weekend, they'd run a banner message at the bottom of the screen thanking local cable operators who picked up their feed and rebroadcast (cablecast?) it to their subscribers. The message also said that the feed would termin- ate on Monday morning. A newspaper article I read earlier this week implied that the station (and other local stations) was able to provide their signal to other stations out in Long Island, who were then able to uplink the signal to the satellite, from which the cable systems could pick up the signal. I don't care how they did it, but I was really pleased that they were able to continue broadcasting. It's amazing that they were able to get it all set up so quickly. I know it's not *really* related to telecom, but if anyone can give a more detailed (but understandable) explanation of the setup these stations used, I be interested. Scott D. Brenner AT&T Consumer Communications Services sbrenner@attmail.com Basking Ridge, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: broughton@lambda.usask.ca Subject: Re: WTC blast Date: 5 Mar 1993 22:50:56 GMT Organization: University of Saskatchewan Reply-To: broughton@lambda.usask.ca In article , jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) writes: > There's a new newsgroup dedicated to the World Trade Center (WTC) > blast, but that's on another system so I can't find the name. It was It is alt.current-events.wtc-explosion. Darrell ------------------------------ From: msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM! Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada Date: Sat, 6 Mar 93 06:54:10 GMT > PATH has an 800 number for information. Of course, it's always busy > during a crisis like this. This is the TELECOM issue that steams me. TELECOM Moderator noted: > [Regards traffic jams on the 800 number, it has been suggested the > City of Chicago is considering a 900 number with no charge attached to > calling it to be used for announcements to the citizens on a > mass-calling basis. That night be a very good idea for the public > transit system also. PAT] Well, it would keep the overload down, since people whose office phones are blocked from calling 900 wouldn't be able to use it. Somehow I don't think that was what Pat had in mind. What technical advantage would a 900 number give, as opposed to an 800 or just a plain telephone number? Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com [Moderator's Note: They realized people with 900 blocks on their phone would not be able to use it, but the idea was to be able to service a huge volume of callers at the same time with emergency reports. Many 900 services are set up to take thousands of calls at the same time. I think they want to be able to send a message to television and radio stations saying (something like) "there is a serious emergency affecting residents of Chicago. Please dial 900-xxx-xxxx at no charge to hear an emergency announcement by the mayor". Of course, someone suggested why not just make the announcement on the radio/television in that case ... it was an idea they've tossed around while building our new, very modern, very high tech police communications center. PAT] ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 03:37:40 GMT In article , james@cs.ualberta.ca (James Borynec; AGT Researcher) writes: > I just read a startling report: "The Geodesic Network II: 1993 Report > on Competition in the Telephone Industry" By P.W. Huber, M.K. Kellogg, > and J. Thorne. The Geodisic Company, Washington D.C. > The central thesis of this (thick) report is that the economics of > fiber and the economics of radio make long distance a "natural" > monopoly and that local access is now "inherently competitive". Well here's an opposing viewpoint! Personally I think Huber is way way out in right field, little more than a stooge of "Mad Monk Mark" Fowler, Reagan's nuttiest FCC head. He has an Agenda and won't let reality get in the way. As any regular reader of the EFF newsgroup would know by now, a "natural monopoly" is a fairly clear concept which applies when the economy of scale never maxes out, so a small vendor can never be competitive with a big one. Long distance, even per Huber's quote, is almost exactly the opposite, a competitive commodity. In economics, a commodity has many vendors entering and exiting, and the price is always near "cost", and nobody makes "economic profit" (greater than required rate of return on capital invested). That's just what LD telecom is doing now, save AT&T's slipping umbrella. Local wireline is a natural monopoly because it would cost too much to string a second set of wires. Indeed I foresee CATV and telephone eventually sharing, not competiing over, optical fiber to the home. Radio, however, is subject to a different constraint: Bandwidth. Economics cannot create spectrum space, just determine how it's allocated. Radio bandwidth is orders of magnitude too low to handle wireline applications in urban areas. It's best for applications that really benefit by it: Mobile, hand-held and rural. The impact of MCI upon the industry was to bring economic reality to an over-regulated (grant of "unnatural" monopoly) industry. All the posturing was just regulatory fiction; the reality was and is that long distance subsidizes local service, and competition leads to less cross-subsidy and more economically efficient allocation of resources. 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. ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 03:27:08 GMT In article , castaldi@heroes.rowan.edu (John Castaldi) writes: > Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of > all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our > Vax to try to save money on 411 calls. Any info would help. From my "Crazy Bob" flier from ERM Electronic Liquidators, Melrose MA (orders 800 776 5865, otherwise +1 617 662 9363): USA 1993 Yellow and White Pages. The complete 7-CD [ROM] set. DOS. ProPhone 1993. 90 million residential listings, 10 million business listings, available 1 Feb '93. A 7-disc set; contains 90 million names, addresses and phone numbers for every one listed in every white pages in the USA, plus zip code! Search can be narrowed by city, state, street, phone number, or zip. Contains the SUA Yellow Page listings - over 10 million businesses on one CD-ROM. Information can be searched by company name or telephone number, and narrowed down by geographic location to find a business in seconds. Includes the full address with zipcode and "SIC" code. New Spring '93. $222. The 1992 edition is also available on a 3-disk "starter set" for $77. Now all it takes is a DOS server with a CD-ROM jukebox ... I know nothing about this set than what I've seen in the flier. I'm just a customer; I bought my CD-ROM drive from them. Cheap. 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. ------------------------------ From: davep@carson.u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) Subject: Re: Telecom Advice For the Lovelorn Date: 6 Mar 1993 08:24:35 GMT Organization: University of Washington jeff@bradley.bradley.edu (Jeff Hibbard) writes: > This sounded like a fine idea until I discovered that Normal is in GTE > territory! Both Peoria and Decatur are served by Illinois Bell, and I > have never lived in an area that wasn't served by Illinois Bell. > I only have one friend who lives in Normal, and talking to him hasn't > been encouraging. His stories of dealing with GTE repair service > (something he's had to do fairly often) bear an amazing resemblance to Having lived for 20 years in Peoria and two years in Normal, there is absolutely no question what you should do. GET THE H*** OUT OF THERE!! Downstate Illinois is a terrible mind sucking cesspool! Go anywhere but Seattle. I love it, but I don't want any more people out here. Find your own nice place. By the way, GTE owns Normal. They used every dirty trick in the book when I lived there selling telephone systems. Messing with customer service when a new (non-GTE) system went in, losing orders, etc. I can't even think about the games they played with local government bids. It's their way or no way. A long distance company I worked for had a switch in an Illinois Bell area, with FX's to Normal. GTE messed with us all the time. Plus the FX's dropped out with great regularity. Not infrequently on Friday afternoon. Even for residences, their service was a joke. Feature availability and reliability was woefully inadequate. Modem links at 1200 baud to local boards were a joke. At one time they had a BIG service center in Normal. Is it still there? I was wondering if they consolidated it out of business. It was a major employer in town, and losing it would have been quite a blow. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 08:27:55 -0500 From: rogue@damon.ccs.northeastern.edu (Free Radical) Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls Organization: College of CS, Northeastern U > [Moderator's Note: The same service from Illinois Bell allows multiple > call forwarding to the extent the receiving phone can handle the > calls, ie. three lines in hunt can get three forwarded calls. But the > version called 'remote call forwarding' which is a permanently config- > ured arrangement in the CO will only forward as many calls as you have > 'paths' you are paying for. PAT] Wasn't there some trouble several years back with a variant of this, Busy Call Forwarding? Seems someone set up three payphones to have this feature, each set to the next, and then had all three call the next at the same time. Ate up every trunk in the area, almost. It happened in Texas I think. rogue@damon.ccs.northeastern.edu (Rogue Agent) [Moderator's Note: Are we talking about how many links there can be in the forwarding chain or how many calls can arrive at a number being forwarded ONE LINK and handled at the same time? I don't think IBT lets you keep forwarding calls around and around forever if that is what you mean. Curiously, on a couple of exchanges here, if A forwards to B and B forwards to C then a call directly dialed to B goes on to C while a call reaching B via A stops at B and rings through right there regardless of what B wants done with *his* calls. On other (maybe most) exchanges here, under those circumstances, a call to A would go right on through to C. But they seem to be clever about it; the first time a previously 'passed through' point is found in the link again, the forwarding stops and a busy signal is returned to the caller. In other words, you cannot go A > B > C > D > A > B > C > D just to have the equipment running around in circles. As soon as D is instructed to go to A, that's it. Trip's over. All electrons have to get off the bus; the bus driver is at the end of the line! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 05 MAR 93 17:21 Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls I kept complaining about only one call being forwarded at a time, and finally they gave me to the GTE Consumer Action Group. Someone there took the information, and said I'd get a call back. A few hours later, a rep called me to say what I wanted should work, and they would open a trouble ticket. They just needed the PacBell number to which the GTE line was forwarded (as if it had anything to do with it). The next day I got a call from GTE repair, telling me the problem had been fixed. When I asked what the limit was on simultaneous forwarded calls, she said there was no limit. I said there had to be some limit for loop prevention, didn't there? but she didn't understand. I tested it, and it still failed. So I called the GTE CAG rep back, and said it was still broken, and suggested she contact someone at the CO who understood how to operate a GTD-5. Well, today I received a call from someone at the CO, who had been given a totally incorrect description of the problem. When I explained it, he punched in my GTE number, verified that the customer call forwarding queue was set to 1, and changed it to 2. He said the service office could have done the same thing. I thanked him, and before I could test it, I received a call from the GTE CAG rep, who told me that she had contacted GTD-5 analyst, and was told that what I wanted was possible, but not tariffed, so I would have to live with only one call at a time. She said I could order multiple numbers with hunting and it would work. I said that didn't make sense, and asked to speak to the CO person who had called me earlier. They said they'd have him call me. Finally, I got a chance to test it, and it works! The CO guy did what he said. So I called the GTE CAG rep back and said everything was fine, please don't do anything else. She wanted to know what the CO guy had done. I was vague, saying he had changed the CCF parameters for my line, because I was afraid she might be right about it not being tariffed and would reset it to one. She said she'd call him and find out, because she needed to update my records to indicate what was done. Anyway, for now it works and I am happy. Now, if only I could get PacBell to make their three-way calling let me hang up on a vacant side and get ring-back everything would be great. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com| A Series System Software if mail bounces, forward to| Unisys Mission Viejo, CA rgellens@mcimail.com| Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself| [Moderator's Note: Again, are we talking about the number of calls which can be forwarded at one time from A > B or are we talking about the extent to which A can be chained linked to B then to C and D, etc? If the former, there is no problem with the number of circuits which are available. As soon as the place to which calls are being forwarded runs out of places to put them (i.e. two, three or how many lines in the hunt group) then subsequent callers to the first number will get a busy signal. If we are talking about chains that run forever, then the important thing is to stop the process when a previously visited number is found again in the chain. If this were not the case, then any call forwarding could be a potential problem because what would happen if A forwarded calls to himself, ie *72 ? Would an incoming call hit the CO and run in circles forever? No -- we know it sees a place where it has already been (original pass through A) and gives up, returning busy to the caller. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Vance Shipley Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 1:50:17 EST From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial Organization: Xenitec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1993 06:50:12 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Much of the additional cost would come from the > expense of having certain common equipment in the central office > unavailable for other customer's use. With dialup, telco is gambling This is the assumption I have been making; that telco is somehow worse off if you elect to have endless calls as opposed to just jumpering copper. I am beginning to suspect that they might just prefer to keep everything on the switch. Witness the following quote from the DMS Feature Planning Guide describing ENET, Northern's current switching fabric and the heart of their central office switch: "As the switching platform for the DMS SuperNode system. ENET is a key hardware element for implementing high-capacity, bandwidth-intensive services, such as Dialable Wideband Service. The Enhanced Network (ENET) decreases expenses through network simplification and increasing revenues by enabling a range of future wideband services." Network simplification has to be important to the telco, their manpower costs are a high percentage of operating costs. Also, as another poster pointed out automated loop testing, etc. are not possible (or more costly and difficult) on special service facilities. "With BCS34, the single-cabinet ENET, with a capacity of 64,000 fully duplicated channels, will become the standard ENET configuration. However, the dual-cabinet ENET (128,000 channels) will continue to be available for offices requiring higher capacity" "As a junctorless, non-blocking switching matrix, ENET does not require complicated engineering. Unconstrained by traffic and load balancing, its provisioning is based only on peripheral link terminations. ENET provides the platform for circuit-switched, channel-switched, or nailed-up digital service." So the switch is non-blocking. So if it's not taking up common resources in the switch the telco shouldn't care how long your calls are. Now the other thing here is that if you live in area which has unmeasured local service, as I do, and one day they change to measured, odds are many of these dialup circuits will remain for a while generating more revenue. Vance Shipley, vances@xenitec.on.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #156 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00757; 8 Mar 93 1:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23987 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Mar 1993 23:01:18 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24610 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Mar 1993 23:00:45 -0600 Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 23:00:45 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303080500.AA24610@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #157 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Mar 93 23:00:45 CST Volume 13 : Issue 157 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: WTC Blast (John Schmidt) Re: Arrest Made in WTC Bombing (Graham Toal) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Brent Whitlock) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (and Unrelated Topics) (Bob Frankston) Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Timothy E. Buchanan) Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (Roy Smith) Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards (David A. Fiske) Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1993 18:22:07 EST From: JOHN SCHMIDT Subject: Re: WTC Blast Since my daytime (paying) job is as a design engineer for ABC, I think I can comment on the effects of the WTC blast on the networks. The first area of confusion for many, particularly New Yorkers, is the difference between the network, ie ABC, and the local station, ie WABC. ABC produces and/or distributes programs, such as One Life to Live, World News Tonight, Roseanne, Nightline, etc. to its "affiliates" There are about 220 affiliates who broadcast ABC programs in the USA. Eight of these affiliates are owned by ABC (including WABC) and are often referred to as "owned and operated stations, (or "O&O's"). The rest of our affiliates are independently owned. The ABC network provides programming for part, but not all, of the day. For instance, on weekdays, there is no network programming from 9AM until, I think, 11:00 am, none from 4 until World News Tonight (either 6:30 or 7:00 pm, depending on which of the two feeds an affiliate takes) and then none until 8:00 pm. There is no programming from 11:00 until 11:30 pm. (etc.) Affiliates may broadcast most or all of the programming ABC provides, either live or delayed on tape. While ABC cannot, by law, require an affiliate to broadcast a particular program or programs, it can, and will, look to change affiliated stations (when the affiliation contract is up, in most cases) if it feels the station is not "clearing" enough network programming. The local affiliate station, whether WABC in New York, or KSWO in Lawton OK, fills the remaining time with either its own programming, such as "Eyewitness News"; or "syndicated" programs it buys from a distributor, such as "Jeopardy" or "Oprah". All three networks transmit their programs to the affiliates by satellite. ABC uplinks on C band from the roof of its Network Operations building in Manhattan. NBC is on KU band, also with an uplink in Manhattan, and CBS is on C band. The last I knew, they contracted with AT&T to uplink their programs from a site on Long Island. Their signals get to the uplink via AT&T coax and microwave video circuits. (Note, this all refers to the eastern/central time zone distribution, west coast delayed programming is handled differently.) None of this was directly affected by the WTC blast, so anyone watching an affiliate other than the New York City stations did not lose their signal. Chicago saw Peter Jennings just fine. WABC, and the other six New York City VHF TV Stations, as well as several of the UHF sations, and a few FM stations, has its transmitter facilities at the top of the World Trade Center. These facilities were moved there from the Empire State Building in the late '70s, I believe. When the bomb went off, WNBC (ch.4) and, I believe WNET (ch 13, PBS) dumped immediately, apparently due to loss of power. Reports say 5 of the 8 13KV feeders from Con Edison to the complex tripped at the time of the initial explosion. There are emergency generators, jointly owned by all the broadcasters, but these did not function. The generators are in the sub-basement near the bomb site. Some reports indicate they were flooded, others indicate the cooling water lines were severed, causing them to immediately shut down, still others say the power and control lines were run through the blast area. I haven't heard a specific answer yet. Some time later, the Fire Department asked Con Edison to open the remaining feeders, as they were concerned that the initial blast might have been electrical in nature, and they were afraid that firefighters might be injured by the live electrical systems. This forced the remaining stations off the air. When power was restored, around 11:30 pm, all except WNBC and WNET were able to resume broadcasting (transmitters operate by remote control, and, as the WABC chief engineer told me, much to his relief, it came back on when they pushed the button on the remote control.) WNBC and WNET were on the next day, so I guess they were able to switch their feeders around. Incidentally, Con Ed reported it had all 8 feeders back in service by Monday morning, so I guess none of them were in the immediate blast area. While ABC, CBS and NBC transmissions were not directly affected by the blast, all three networks have microwave ENG relay receivers and transmitters there, as well as 440 Mhz transmitters used for "IFB" communications (feeds the earpiece the talent wears, which allows them to hear what's on the air, and directions from the control room), and News Room communications two way radios. When these died, it made a mess of news department communications. (We all have other microwave relays, and the two ways are a "voting" system with multiple repeaters, but WTC is the best site, because of its height, and obviously it was right where all the action was. WCBS still maintained their old transmitter, as a backup, at Empire State, so signed on from there, capturing most of the non-cable New York audience. Most of the FM stations broadcast from Empire State, not World Trade, and were not affected. A couple of those who were have alternate, low power backup transmitters at other sites, and so were able to resume broadcasting from those sites. Contrary to someone else's post, there are no plans to move other FM stations to WTC, in fact they are installing a new FM master antenna at Empire State to replace the current one which was installed in the '60s and does not meet current FCC RF radiation standards, particularly on the 102nd floor observation area. All the New York TV stations have direct video circuits to Manhattan Cable, so the Manhattan Cable customers never lost signals. Shortly after WABC went off, the ABC Network took a copy of WABC's feed, and put it up on one of the Network satellite transponders. This non-scrambled feed was made available for other cable systems to downlink and feed to their subscribers. CBS and NBC made similar arrangements. WOR (ch 9) and WPIX (ch 11) are already on satellite as "super stations", so all they had to do was run their signals "in the clear". Also, the various stations made other arrangements with unaffected broadcasters. WNBC got WLIW, ch 21 on long island (normally a PBS station) to pick up their signal. I believe WABC was on Channel 68 (and 67, translator), normally a Home Shopping Network station, whose transmitter is at Empire State Building. WNET got WNYE, channel 25, owned by the New York City Board of Education, transmitting from Brooklyn, to take their feed. As an interesting sidelight, someone told me that B-Q cable (Brooklyn-Queens) took the satellite feed of WNBC, but never switched back. When WNBC killed the satellite feed later in the weekend, they were off BQ cable for some hours until someone pulled the patch and restored the normal receiver. Most cable systems rate right in there with GTE when it comes to service ... I hope this gives people a better idea of what went on in TV land. By the way, where was I when all this went on? I had been on vacation in Trinidad (at Carnival) and got back home at 9:30 Friday morning, after taking a "red eye" charter flight. I went to bed, and woke up about 3PM.. spent the rest of the afternoon and evening watching TV and listening to the radio. John H. Schmidt, P.E. Internet: schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu Technical Director, WBAU Phone--Days (212)456-4218 Adelphi University Evenings (516)877-6400 Garden City, New York 11530 Fax-------------(212)456-2424 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 17:16:50 GMT From: Graham Toal Subject: Re: Arrest Made in WTC Bombing > [Moderator's Note: Talk about dumb. Here, it seems to me, is a man who > was obviously not clear on the concept. As of Thursday evening, there > is supposedly a second person under arrest, but the government is not > giving out any names or details yet. PAT] Perhaps, PAT, it's just *too* stupid to be believed. What are the chances that if the FBI followed up on *everyone* who had a vehicle in that basement (some thousands I'm sure), they'd find *somebody* with a dubious past. At which point it becomes a post hoc ergo propter hoc insinuation of guilt ... Graham (remembering how many quick arrests under public pressure in Britain have led to gross miscarriages of justice). ------------------------------ From: bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 21:22:25 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) writes: > I don't know either about the rest of the country being able to > receive ABC or NBC at that time. I wouldn't be surprised if they set > up alternate outlets if they were affected by the WTC. The great > Nov.(?) 1965 blackout forced some news media to alternate outlets. > By the way, I notice the jokes from a parking attendant and a border > guard about a bomb and/or the WTC blast. Please don't joke TO such > people about such matters, because the remark can be taken seriously > and you can get in trouble as a result. There are signs in some > airports warning of this near the checkpoints for their terminal > concourses; and a few years back, a young man remarked (apparently a > joke) on a plane about a bomb, and the result was that the plane made > an unscheduled landing in Philadelphia and he was arrested. Indeed, joking about guns, bombs, and such at airport security checkpoints is illegal, even if you are joking to your friends and family, and not to the security people. They have a relatively small sign on the baggage X-ray machine which informs people of this. My father, someone who tends to crack jokes a lot and not having seen or read this sign when he was with me at the airport once, made a joking comment to me after the metal detector alarm went off that it must be his gun. Of course, I knew it was a joke, but the policeman who overheard him doesn't take jokes lightly there. My father was almost arrested and taken down to the station for questioning, but he was able to convince the cop that he didn't know it was illegal to mention guns, bombs, etc. in conversation at the airport and that he didn't see the sign, so the cop just took down his ID information from the driver's license and told him to not leave town real soon. Isn't it wonderful that our constitution guarantees us freedom of speech? roy@mchip00.med.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes: > I know the dangers of electric fields is an open question, but > if I were a pregnant woman, I don't think I would want to be working > around a live high-power TV transmitter! Neither would I. My brother, who is also an avid reader of this digest, told me that at an AM radio station for which he used to be a part time DJ, they could not use IBM PC's because the broadcast tower interfered with the keyboard preventing it from working properly. I also recall a comment about feeling the hair on the back of one's neck stick out from the electric field as one approached the tower. * * * * * * --> DISCLAIMER: I speak only for myself. <-- * * * * * * Brent Whitlock Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology bwhitlock@uiuc.edu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 07:28:26 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 156 sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner) writes: > In article add@philabs.philips.com > (Aninda Dasgupta) writes: >> I usually watch the NBC affiliate in NYC, WNBC -- channel 4. Although >> I worked late last Friday, and didn't get home until about 9 PM >> (listening to WCBS radio all the way!), channel 4 *was* on the air >> when I got home. >> A newspaper article I read earlier this week implied that the station >> (and other local stations) was able to provide their signal to other >> stations out in Long Island, who were then able to uplink the signal >> to the satellite, from which the cable systems could pick up the >> signal. What happened on Long Island is that WNBC uplinked to a satellite and the local PBS station, WLIW - Channel 21, picked up the signals and retransmitted them over the air and the two cable companies (Cablevision of Long Island and TCI) sent the signals to their subscribers. In this way, all TV viewers could receive the news "as it happened." In addition to the cable companies, the radio stations kept their listeners very up to date, especially WALK - 97.5 FM. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (and unrelated topics) Date: Sun 7 Mar 1993 20:34 -0400 Why use a free 900 number instead of an 800 number? The reason, I presume, is that one class of 900 number supports locally provided prerecorded message that reduce network congestion. But this is simply an artifact of the translation tables. Once 800 numbers are portable, why should one have to use a different "area" code to specify a property? The place where a number implies a property is still useful in PBX'es to make blocking simple. Of course, this isn't perfect as in using "1" as a charge flag. But for 900/800 it should be mandated to work -- at least for the next five years till the network can provide property information via a protocoled interchange. Thus, in a case like the Chicago information, an 800 number with locally provided messages would seem to be the right service. As to "area" code, I guess that will stick with us just like "dialing" a touch-tone [notTM] phone. BTW, I was in a hotel last week which seemed to have smart 0-700 processing. It would allow me to place a callee pays 700 number call but not a caller pays. On the same trip I did find the redirectability of the 700 number useful for avoiding a long and problematic credit card string. 800 numbers can also be reprogrammable but the 700 number process was much simpler and more flexible including an automatic expiration feature so that I didn't have to worry about having given out a proprietary number. ------------------------------ From: buchanan@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (BUCHANAN TIMOTHY E) Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:41:06 GMT While stationed in San Juan, PR, and working for the FAA, I was writing simulator problems for radar controller students. It was simple batch language, but my first attempt bombed. I was told to start commands in certain columns because the computer simulated the punch card reader it replaced! My question was whether the computer also made a card flipping sound. Speaking of backward compatiblity, I understand that Herman Hollerith based the size of his card on the size of the dollar in the 1890's, in order to use stock material. So the length of the line of the terminals we type on is descended from the size of our money in the last century! Timothy ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 11:04:24 -0500 From: roy@mchip00.med.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards Organization: New York University, School of Medicine In article is written: > Ya know, you can still order the ANSI Standards documentation (which > just went "FINAL" last year). I've misplaced my copy so I can't give > you the order number. The title has the words Holerith Codes in it. OH MY GOD! He's right. It's still in the catalog! Everything you ever wanted to know about punch cards can be found out from: ANSI X3.11-1990 General Purpose Paper Cards for Information Processing, $20.00 ANSI X3.21-1967 Rectangular Holes in Twelve-Row Punched Cards, $13.00 ANSI X3.26-1980 (R1991) Hollerith Punched Card Code, $13.00. Actually, I suspect you can't learn *everything* you ever wanted to know; ANSI standards tend to be pretty dry reading. Probably nothing in there about the uses of chad as confetti for ticker-tape parades (not that there's any more ticker tape left anymore than there is punch chad). BTW, just in case anybody has delusions of ANSI being somebody that sets computer standards, you should be aware that the 200+ page 1993 ANSI catalog has only a very small section of it devoted to computer standards. It's chock full of things having to do with machine tools, concrete, aviation fuel, chemicals, textiles, saftey devices, building codes, hydraulic fluid, you name it. I noticed one title in there that had to do with fabrics used in book binding. ------------------------------ From: davef@shell.portal.com (David A Fiske) Subject: Re: Remembering the Old Punch Cards Organization: Portal Communications Company Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:46:42 GMT In article , gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) writes: > [Moderator's Note: So you remember when programmers used to write > their programs via punch cards. They'd then turn these cards in to the > computer room, the cards would be run through the computer, and as you And there was always that smell of freshly punched cards. Nothing else ever seemed to have that same odor. Dave Fiske davef@shell.portal.com Ballston Spa, NY david_a_fiske@portal.com 75415.163@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 20:52 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back On Mar 4 at 16:40, apple!TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com!MPA15AB!RANDY writes: > Sorry. PacBell CW does indeed work as expected. It is PacBell 3W that > works differently from GTE 3W. I had gotten used to having both work > the same in GTE land, and really liked being able to "transfer" a call > from one phone to another by flashing for a 3W stutter dialtone, then > hanging up. My phone would ring, and the caller would hear ringback. I have taken advantage of the Pac*Bell mode. The way to positively get rid of a caller who refused to hang up (and release my called line) was to flash, then hang up. When immediately lifting the receiver, I got dial tone, but the caller got reorder. This was how it worked on my 1ESS. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #157 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03071; 8 Mar 93 2:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12344 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:06:38 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12346 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:06:04 -0600 Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 00:06:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303080606.AA12346@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #158 TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Mar 93 00:06:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 158 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Paul Robinson) Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Ang Peng Hwa) Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Dave Levenson) Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (rduta@nyx.cs.du.edu) Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (John Higdon) Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Graham Toal) Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Tim Russell) Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Albert Crosby) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 14:46:55 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > In article , james@cs.ualberta.ca (James > Borynec; AGT Researcher) writes: >> I just read a startling report: "The Geodesic Network II: 1993 Report >> on Competition in the Telephone Industry" By P.W. Huber, M.K. Kellogg, >> and J. Thorne. The Geodisic Company, Washington D.C. >> The central thesis of this (thick) report is that the economics of >> fiber and the economics of radio make long distance a "natural" >> monopoly and that local access is now "inherently competitive". > Well here's an opposing viewpoint! Personally I think Huber is way > out in right field ... > As any regular reader of the EFF newsgroup would know by now, a >"natural monopoly" is a fairly clear concept which applies when the > economy of scale never maxes out, so a small vendor can never be > competitive with a big one. Long distance, even per Huber's quote, is > almost exactly the opposite, a competitive commodity. > Local wireline is a natural monopoly because it would cost too > much to string a second set of wires. How about if I claim you are both incorrect. Let me look at this a moment. It's too expensive to run a second set of wires in a city where people pay a monthly charge whether or not they use them, but not too expensive for MCI and Sprint to run thousands of miles of wire or fiber from city-to-city where the only time people pay for them are when someone uses the lines? Why wasn't it "too expensive" back in the days when there were two companies competing for local phone service back in the early part of this century, and often getting two phones (one each from two different companies) was cheaper than the price for one phone from a monopoly supplier of dial tone in other cities of comparable size? The wire isn't that expensive; the equipment isn't that expensive, otherwise companies wouldn't turn around and install a PBX on top of buying phone service from the local company. What is expensive are recurring costs: maintenance, salaries, royalties and so on. When you have to pay a monthly charge for every pole your wire sits on, you start burying wire so you can stop paying rent to the electric company. When you have to pay taxes on every facility site, you reduce the number of facilities used to the absolute minimum needed. This is where GTE is having so much trouble: they are not making their lines and equipment reliable so that they require less maintenance, and thus reducing the amount of people needed to support it. No, apparently because the stuff is so bad, that making it correct would be expensive, they started consolidating offices to decrease the overhead. This doesn't work when the problem isn't the amount of overhead, it's the amount of maintenance needed. This could be the reason why American Telephone companies had much better service and equipment than foreign countries: These companies had to pay dividends to stockholders; therefore they had to make money. You make money by getting more people to use the system. You allow maximum use of the system by making it as reliable as possible. Since, in general the local telephone company owned everything connected to the phone system and you paid a monthly fee for it, it was to their advantage to keep that stuff in good working order and because you don't know the conditions in customer premises, make it as rugged as possible. In countries where the telephone company was government owned, there's no profit incentive to make stuff better, or to think up new ideas. People will get their government paychecks whether the phone system works or not, so why bother worrying about service, or why bother to care. Once they have to fight for business as the private companies, then service improves. I have a message to John Higdon: do you want to see an immediate improvement in service: find the money to run a fictional ad in the local paper indicating that a new company is looking for investors and potential customers to compete with GTE in providing local service. Come to think of it, you already have a PBX in your home, so ... :) Fact of the matter is there is no such thing as a 'natural monopoly' in telephone service. There are always alternatives to service. Radio spectrum can be used in new and different ways to increase capacity; people can make different uses of the radio spectrum involving things like lower-power and unused channel spectrum. For example, one TV channel has 6MHZ of space. This is the equivalent of perhaps 300 simultaneous 12KHZ voice channels with separations. The UHF television band in the U.S. has LOTS of empty space; and in areas where it is not being used, it can be converted to other places. Realize that the people developing equipment can always use different systems; for example, you use a microwave tower to deliver signals into each region of a six-block area. In each area you have a microwave receiver on top of a house, apartment or building, that transmits calls for its local area on the radio into a very short, three block range. The only requirment you have to have is the number of people in the local area that no more than 300 people want to simultaneously use the system. This idea is the same as cellular; you can then make the cells smaller and reduce the power of the transmitter. Or another idea. You use a microwave tower to send across blocks at a time, where on the top of the tallest house or building in the area who happens to be a subscriber, is a microwave unit that receives signals from the next block, and passes distant signals on to the distant site, local signals can be carried to a telephone wire on that block. Since you are only having to send a signal across a street or a couple of blocks, you don't need a huge amount of power. You're not boosting the signal 20 miles. (PS: Does anyone know how many voice/data channels can fit on, say a two- or three-foot microwave horn (both ways) and how much they cost?) Or, if you can rent a channel space not used by a cable company, the wiring is already there, you just use subscriber carrier and GSM scrambling techniques to carry your signals back to the phone system processor. Some cable companies have extra channel space that because of technical reasons they don't use; there is another idea. The problem is not necessarily cost of installing wire: it's the cost of overcoming inertia and figuring out how to market a new service. I speculated on this earlier as an example of what someone could do to provide competitive dial tone in the Washington DC metro area. Someone else gave a suggestion: provide larger long-distance calling areas. And one possibility is for a service number to be able to reach anywhere in Maryland or Virginia for no more than a local call. Call all the way from DC to the VA side of the State Line in North Carolina and the cost is a local call. For some people, this might be considerably cheaper, even at twice or three-times the price of a regular telephone line. (AT&T's rate from DC to Richmond is only 3c less than the rate from DC to Los Angeles.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Mar 93 11:09:50 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review Long-distance a natural monopoly and local access inherently competitive? I have not read the (thick) report but to call LD a natural monopoly seems to me to be overstated, even if it is by Peter Huber. I have made the point on the digest that the LD business seems like a "natural oligopoly." Market share concentration inthe industry has fallen after the ATT divestiture but is now on the rise again. My argument is simply that you need both business and residential diversity to make it in the LD business. And you also need geographical diversity. To describe LD as natural monopoly, you would have to explain the rise of regional LD companies. As for the economics of radio, I wonder how well that will do with the scare about ELF, EMF, etc. Would people want local access via some death beam? Put it this way: Ma'am, you have the choice of access via radio which is cheaper but has sometimes been shown to be carcinogenic and sometimes not. It is not conclusive, you understand. On the other hand, for just 50% more, we can offer you the same quality of service on fiber optic. It is 50% more you understand. I expect the local phone companies to exploit whatever scare there is already out there. ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 18:51:03 GMT Our Moderator notes, as a follow-on to James Borynec's article on the Geodesic Report: > [Moderator's Note: We have known for a while now that MCI and Sprint > have been repeatedly trying to keep AT&T from lowering its prices. > MCI and Sprint trying to keep the prices up. After all, their entire > fortunes were built on their fraudulent advertising campaigns saying > how they could save telephone users money on long distance calls, were > they not? You know how that goes ... PAT] So how are these fraudulent claims different from those made by Orange Communications and one of its sales agents who frequents these parts? Just kidding, Pat! Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 [Moderator's Note: In the early days of MCI, they were fond of showing unsophisticated (telecom-wise) business executives how they could 'save money' by using MCI. And sure enough, a comparison of their long distance rates ONLY versus AT&T showed the cost for the *long distance* part of the call was less. But they conveniently neglected to mention that AT&T's higher rates included (admittedly due to their connection with the local telcos at that time) as well the local part of the connection from the local CO to the long distance switch. So business pplaces signed up with MCI and saw a decrease in the long distance side of their bill but a substantial increase in their local message unit charges. The 'savings' was a wash at best and in many cases, the total monthly outlay for telecommunications (local bill from telco plus long distance bill from MCI versus a single bill from telco which included long distance charges from AT&T) was actually higher than it had been before. MCI conveniently failed to mention that if you called via their switch somewhere and the distant end was busy or did not answer on five attempts, you still wound up paying for five local message units to the local telco, which in those days was understandably not about to give a free ride to the long distance switch of AT&T's competitor. After several complaints to the FCC and getting sued, MCI finally began mentioning this 'slight additional expense' over and above their published rates. As Charles Brown, former Chairman of AT&T said at the time, " ... they have no investment in outside plant, they have no local loops or switches, they only handle (this was in the middle 1970's) the high traffic, very profitable east-coast corridor stuff ... of course their prices will be cheaper. If I could get away with the stuff they are allowed to pull off, my prices would still be less than theirs ..." Regards the Orange Card, I make no claims that it is anything other than 25 cents per minute with no surcharge. I do not claim you will spend less or more than before. It is strictly an applications thing: you decide if weekday daytime hours calls using some other calling card at a payphone or in a hotel room would cost more or less than my offering. More on the Orange Card in an issue of the Digest on Monday with some comments sent to me recenty by readers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rduta@nyx.cs.du.edu Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 15:17:04 GMT In article nicmad!madnix!zaphod% astroatc.UUCP@cs.wisc.edu (Ron Bean) writes: > If your recording device sits between the demark and your inside > wiring, can it listen for tones (or pulses) on *both* sides of the > line and distinguish between calls dialed from inside your building > and those dialed from some other point between you and the CO? If such > a device does not exist, could one be built with available components > possibly using a PeeCee)? The only way I can see protecting your line from unwanted phone calls is to set up a system between the main phone lines, and the building phone lines that will require a access code to dial a number, or even better, it will require a code on any call whose number is longer than 8 digits, and doesn't start with 1800. Calling up the phone company and turning off 1900 calls isn't that bad of a idea (I can't see a business needing to use 1-900 number). As for interception between the main phone lines, and the telco (such as someone going in a sewer and tapping the lines, I can't see how you can protect against that, unless you can get the telco to put a lock on your line, which (I just thought of that) is a good idea, but I'm not sure the telco offers such a security system, and even then, if someone tapped the line, they can get the number. You'd have to set up a preety complex system to be 100% foolproof, which for most applications is way too expensive. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 13:24 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article nicmad!madnix!zaphod% astroatc.UUCP@cs.wisc.edu (Ron Bean) writes: > If you're being billed for calls that don't show up on your > computerized record, could you take AT&T to small-claims court? (Who > has jurisdiction on an interstate call?) I think it works the other way around. I can always refuse to pay (which I did), but AT&T can if it so chooses take me to court to enforce payment. We were a long way from that, I feel. > If your recording device sits between the demark and your inside > wiring, can it listen for tones (or pulses) on *both* sides of the > line and distinguish between calls dialed from inside your building > and those dialed from some other point between you and the CO? My "recording device" is the SMDR output of the PBX. It does not listen for tones on the line but rather records the calls placed through it. Since I have sixteen lines, the PBX is the only practical method for logging the calls. For various reasons, my demark is secure. If calls are made from my residence on any phone whatsoever, the calls will appear on the SMDR record. Period. > If such a device does not exist, could one be built with available > components possibly using a PeeCee)? That is fine for one line. But what if you have multiple lines billed under the same account? My billing does not differentiate between the lines, so all lines in the billing must be monitored for fraud usage. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 16:39:23 GMT From: Graham Toal Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" Brian Erwin wrote: > The interviews are mastered onto Digital Audio Tape. A typical > 30-minute program occupies 15 Mbytes of disk space. UUNET > Communications in Virginia serves as the initial spool area with > several gigabytes. From there, the data moves to the IIJ network in > Japan and EUnet in Europe. These three sites -- UUNET, EUnet, and IIJ > -- serve as the primary distribution points for the world. From > there, regional and national networks move the data closer to the > users. Eventually, a network manager takes the files and broadcasts > them on a local area network or stores them on a file server. I hope none of the sites that store these 15Mb files have previously chopped a.b.p.e feeds on the grounds of 'waste of resources'... A Mb per minute is ridiculous for speech. That should be brought down a *lot*. Still, even at the best rate possible - say some very crackly zero crossing scheme, fitting the data into a 14.4K modem's bandwidth - you're never going to be able to download speech by phone at much better than real time. Who's going to spend 30 minutes downloading this over their SLIP line? And without the compression, 15Mb just isn't worth the bother for anyone, who isn't already on a T1. G ------------------------------ From: trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1993 20:08:40 GMT hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > Seems that distribution of audio over internet is going to > take an awful lot of bandwidth and be real costly. Is it worth it? I Well, firstly, my understanding is that the only transmissions of ITR allowed on the backbone itself will be to the regional networks. Thus the total backbone bandwidth used per episode will be at most (15M * (# of regional nets)), which is rather small compared to the amount of traffic flowing on the backbone daily. Further, these transmissions can be scheduled to occur during the wee hours when a lot of bandwidth goes wasted anyway. As for the transmissions being "real costly", I don't quite under- stand. Unless I'm very mistaken, the backbone is not paid for by the byte, it is paid for by the phone line. The only way I see this costing anything at all is if it impacts the backbone so much that additional lines need to be installed. That won't happen with this scheme. Personally, I think this sounds like a really nifty idea. I just hope that player software is available for as many machine types as possible to facilitate a large listenership and make it all worthwhile. That includes PC's with sound cards as well. Tim Russell Omaha, NE trussell@unomaha.edu PGP public key available, finger trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 93 17:50:42 -0600 From: Albert Crosby Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" PAT: When I first heard of Internet Talk Radio, my second thought (seriously!) was, "I hope they make text transcripts available". (My first thought was that it was likely to be some special version of Internet Relay Chat (IRC).) I personally don't have access to truly capable sound hardware, and besides, I'd just as soon read it! And as someone else pointed out, the idea of thousands of 'listeners' ftp'ing 15+Mbytes of soundfiles regularly is going to add a lot of network load. Hopefully the implementors have arranged about 50 or 100 mirror sites around the globe ... For myself, I'll continue to hear MY "Geek of the Week" right here, you guessed it, in TELECOM Digest land. (Or are you going to start offering an audio version too?) Albert Crosby [Moderator's Note: I *may* -- just may -- start a voice BBS one of these days for telecommers ... with voicemail boxes for private mail and some bulletin boards to post messages to the group. Depends on if anyone is interested. I'll decide before long. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #158 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01826; 9 Mar 93 3:43 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20413 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:00:07 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31991 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 00:59:19 -0600 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 00:59:19 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303090659.AA31991@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #159 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Mar 93 00:59:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 159 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer (Koos van den Hout) DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question (Ken Stone) Hacked Cellular Phones (RISKS via Ron Dippold) International Connectivity Data Available (Rick Broadhead) Information on "Direct-Link Sought (Daniel M. Greenberg) AT&T Easy Reach 700 Number Hints and Tips Wanted (Gregory Youngblood) Wristwatch Pagers (Chris Taylor) FCC Versus Bell Atlantic? (Yue-shun E. Ho) Southern Bell Acknowledges Modems (Jack Dominey) Telephone Express/Penny Express (Stephen Wolfson) Typical GTE (John Higdon) Gotta Love GTE -- One Better (Mike Newton) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: koos@kzdoos.hacktic.nl Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 22:05:16 +0100 Subject: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer Friday (3-5) there was a short item on the news that the Dutch PTT (the national telecommunications provider which has a monopoly at this moment) is studying the possibility of charging for not-completed calls that get a busy tone or don't get answered. I was wondering, is this charging of not-completed calls done in any other country in the world? Technically there are very limited costs with not-completed calls. Calls to numbers that are busy don't even occupy line capacity (the exchange from which you'r calling asks the other exchange if the number is available and if it's not the local exchange handles the generation of the busy tone). By the way, a representative of the Dutch consumer organisation ('Consumentenbond') said when interviewed 'I wonder if there is a wire loose with them'. (This remark is also connected to the recent raise in the local tariffs). Grtx. KH Koos van den Hout Student Computer Science (AKA HIO) BBS Koos z'n Doos (+31-3402-36647) Inter-: koos@kzdoos.hacktic.nl 300..14400 MNP2-5,10,V42bis) net : kvdhout@hut.nl | Use PGP for | Fido: Sysop @ 2:500/101.11012 Schurftnet : KILL !!! | private mail! | Give us a call !! ------------------------------ Subject: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1993 18:02:50 -0800 From: Ken Stone I appear to have dug into a rats nest on this one and I'm just not sure why :-). In trying to look at getting a T3 to an offsite building a while back, we noticed that tariffs for buying at the optical vs buying at the electrical interface were considerably different. Now I would expect some difference as you have to pay for the shelf that does the conversion ... but this seemed like too much of a difference for that. As it was, we ended up going microwave for delivery time reasons and the issue was never resolved. Now I have another shot at it and I want to understand. It is to my advantage to buy at the optical interface on at least one end since the existing DS3 mux equip is "microwave located" and not "demarc located". I'd also like the idea of the lower tariffs. In what little research I have done so far (talking to my DS3 mux vendor), the only thing I have come up with is that it would appear that optical DS3 is not necessarily optical DS3 ... in that it may be that PacBell REQUIRES the optical/electrical interface be done with this nifty super do-all $bucks$ mux gadget from NT which can do MUCH more than just the E/O conversion. That would explain the tariff difference. The inability to use some of the simpler gear I have heard of, having to deal with a rack full of PacBell gear onsite AT THE DEMARC, and being length limited by DS3/coax from said PacBell rack really stinks!! What I'm interested in is what's available as far as DS3 optical termination equipment (the simpler the better) and what other's experiences with buying DS3 point to point from the RBOC's are. What I would like to see is something like: PacBell DS3 fiber house fiber -> E/O -> DL3000 -> data/voice on each end of the link. Ken ------------------------------ From: rdippold@qualcomm.com (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold) Subject: Hacked Cellular Phones Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 21:49:23 GMT From comp.risks: Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 18:15:08 -0500 From: John Stoffel Subject: Cellular Phreaks & Code Dudes I picked up the premiere issue of a new magazine called "Wired" which is trying to spread the word about the Digital Revolution. And editorial blurb from the inside page is repeated here: ------------ WHY WIRED? Because the Digital Revolution is whipping though our lives like a Bengali typhoon -- while the mainstream media is still groping for the snooze button. And because the computer "press" is too busy churning out the latest PCInfoComputingCorporateWorld iteration of its ad sales formula cum parts catalog to discuss the meaning or context of SOCIAL CHANGES SO PROFOUND their only parallel is probably the discovery of fire. There are a lot of magazines about technology. "Wired" is not one of them. "Wired" is about the most powerful people on the planet today -- THE DIGITAL GENERATION. These are the people who not only foresaw how the merger of computers, telecommunications and the media is transforming life at the cusp of the millennium, they are making it happen. OUR FIRST INSTRUCTION TO OUR WRITERS: AMAZE US. Our second: We know a lot about digital technology, and we are bored with it. Tell us something we've never heard before, in a way we've never seen before. If it challenges our assumptions, so much the better. So why not now? Why "Wired"? Because in the age of information overload, THE ULTIMATE LUXURY IS MEANING AND CONTEXT. Or put another way, if you're looking for the soul of our new society in wild metamorphosis, our advice is simple. Get "Wired". -LR [jfs: Louis Rossetto] You can reach me at 415-904-0664 or lr@wired.com ================ Along with this they had an interesting article on "Cellular Phreaks and Code Dudes" by John Markoff (markoff@nyt.com), which discusses how the latest rage of Silicon Valley hackers is cellular phones. He gives an example of how two phreaks hacked into an OKI 900 cellular phone and some of the features they discovered: o how to use it as a cellular scanner. o the manufacturer's interface so you can attach the phone to a portable computer. o one of the phreaks wrote some software to track other portable phones as they move from cell to cell, this allows him to display the approximate locations of each phone since he knows the geographical locations of each cell. o having the phone watch a specific number, and when that number is used, pick up and by using a simple sound activated recorder, you've made an instant bugging device! Maybe all the spies in Common Market who were worried about having point to point encryption on cellular phones didn't think of this trick? I found this article to be worth the cost of the magazine, as it ties in directly with RISKS readers here have been talking about. Now if it is this easy to hack this phone, how hard would it be to hack into the general cellular phone service machines, those that handle the passing of phones from cell to cell? The down side was the really annoying format, which seems to be "Techno-babble-obnoxious" with arbitrary changes in typeface, orientation, etc as you flip through pages. I felt that this detracted from the overall look of the information they were trying to present, making it harder to assimilate. I'd be interested in talking to anyone else who has read this magazine too. John ------ end quote ------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 00:18:01 EST Reply-To: Rick Broadhead From: Rick Broadhead Subject: International Connectivity Data Available Larry Landweber of the Internet Society recently released Version 7 of his ever-popular International Connectivity List. For _every_ country in the world, the document will tell you if the country has links to any of the major computer networks. The networks covered in the table are Internet, Bitnet, UUCP, and Fidonet. The list is authoritative -- all links are verified prior to inclusion in the table. It is the most definitive and comprehensive compilation of its kind, and it is a must-have for anyone who wants to know what countries are connected to each of the networks. Over 50% of the countries and dependencies listed in the table are now reachable by e-mail through at least one of the international computer networks. The International Connectivity List will be a useful reference for anyone at York who has a need to correspond internationally, and who uses e-mail in the course of his/her work. If you would like a copy of this document, please send an e-mail message to ysar1111@VM1.YorkU.CA. Rick Broadhead ysar1111@VM1.YorkU.CA ------------------------------ Subject: Information on "Direct-Link sought Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 01:43:01 -0500 From: Daniel M. Greenberg I recently discovered a brochure on-campus for Direct-Link 800 and calling card service. The brochure indicates that the program is presented by On Campus Marketing Concepts in conjunction with Direct-Link (Houston TX) yet the mailing address is in Cherry Hill, NJ. Suspiciously, there is no contact phone number and the address is, of course, a P.O. Box. Here are the two plans they offer: 1. 25 cents a minute calling card from anywhere to anywhere in the US. (It does not mention continental US restrictions, but I'm assuming that is merely an oversight). The calling card has no service charges or minimum usage requirements. As an option, they offer a "customized" card design with school name and colors, etc. for $2. 2. They offer personal 800 service at the following rates: 23.9 cents per minute (8am-8pm) and 19.9 cents per minute (8pm-8am). There are no surcharges, no monthly charges, and no setup charges. Further, they offer a "multi-link service" which (where available) allows one to add 5 other locations anywhere in the US which can "ring in with simple extensions added to your 800 number." The application requests credit references and offers as a "bonus" chances to receive specials, discounts, gifts, giveaways, contents, and more if you choose direct credit card billing as opposed to direct billing. So ... my questions are: 1) Anyone know about these companies, and 2) how do these deals stack up for someone looking for no volume commitment or monthly fees. Thanks in advance for your help. Daniel M. Greenberg Syracuse University dgreenbe@mailbox.syr.edu School of Management, MBA Program [Moderator's Note: I am also going to be offering 1+ service and 800 service probably starting in the next few days. Watch for a message here. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: AT&T Easy Reach 700 Number Hints and Tips Wanted From: tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com (Gregory Youngblood) Reply-To: zeta%tcscs@src.honeywell.com Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 22:28:15 CST Organization: TCS Consulting Services Please reply to me via e-mail, and I will summarize the response, if there is interest in the summary. I just ordered an AT&T Easy Reach 700 number today ... I should have it in a week. I went ahead and paid the 25 dollar fee and selected my own 'personalized' number as well. While I am waiting for the packet telling me how to use it and for it to be activated, I was hoping I could find out some interesting tips, tricks, or hints on how to get the most out of this number. I'd be interested in hearing any experiences, limitations, joys or annoyances, and especially if anyone has used the easy reach number in an unusual way. I know this sounds like an odd request, I am just curious as to how others were using this service so that I can make sure to get the most of it. Thanks for your time and replies in advance. Greg TCS Consulting Services P.O. Box 600008 St. Paul, MN 55106-0008 ****** PLEASE REPLY VIA E-MAIL as my news feed is temporarily down ****** zeta%tcscs@src.honeywell.com or zeta%tcscs@idss.nwa.com ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta or ..!guppy!tcscs!zeta ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 02:00:44 -0500 (EST) From: Chris Taylor Subject: Wristwatch Pagers Does anybody out there have tales to tell of the Motorola wrist pager? I recall seeing some advertising for it, but haven't seen any for a while. Are any other manufacturers making wrist pagers? Chris Taylor cht@panix.com ------------------------------ From: yho@netcom.com (Yue-shun E. Ho) Subject: FCC Versus Bell Atlantic? Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 9:45:36 PST I read about Bell Atlantic filing a lawsuit against FCC for its ban on telephone companies owning cable tv companies. Could someone tell me about the results, if any, please? Southwestern Bell's recent purchase of two cable tv companies seem suggest that the ban is no longer in force, but I'd like to know a bit more. Thanks much in advance. yue-shun e ho +1 416 272 1322 (home) +1 416 452 4934 (work) yho@utcs.utoronto.ca or yho@netcom.com (personal) yho@bnr.ca (business) ------------------------------ From: jdominey@nesca.attmail.com Date: 8 Mar 93 16:06:28 GMT Subject: Southern Bell Acknowledges Modems This showed up on my Feb. bill from Southern Bell: "To temporarily cancel Call Waiting before making a call, dial *70 [stuff deleted]. Customers with personal computers can use the service to avoid transmission interruptions during dial-up calls. [more deleted] (This service not available in all areas.)" I find it noteworthy that this telco, at least, seems to believe a significant number of residential customers are placing modem calls. Jack Dominey AT&T Network Planning, Atlanta GA 404-810-6936 AT&T Mail: !dominey or !nesca!jdominey ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 12:24:44 -0700 From: Stephen Wolfson Subject: Telephone Express/Penny Express I've recently received an ad for Telephone Express' Penny Express deal. First ten minute phone call is a penny, and then if you use them every tenth call is the same deal. They don't want to be a 1+ carrier. They give you some stickers with their 10xxx code (10465?) and you access it only that way. Any one know anything about them, who's lines do they use? They claim to be the offshoot of a business LD provider that's older than MCI/Sprint. Are their rates any good? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 21:06 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Typical GTE Organization: Green Hills and Cows Browsing through the new San Jose/Santa Clara phone directory has reminded me of a typical ploy of GTE: maximization of toll revenue. The company sets up these little islands of toll to wring the last dime out of customers. While this is commonplace in southern California, we have a little mini-version right here in the south Bay Area. The two communities "served" by GTE are Los Gatos and Morgan Hill. Just south of San Jose is a cluster of mountain communities: Felton, Boulder Creek, and Ben Lomond. Los Gatos is adjacent to each of these communities, plus Scotts Valley (in the Santa Cruz exchange). While Pac*Bell's policy is to make any adjacent community or rate area a local call, GTE goes out of its way to justify making a similar route a toll call. Hence, while Pac*Bell's Saratoga exchange is local to all of those communities mentioned (and is farther away), Los Gatos is toll. The Morgan Hill situation is no better. Morgan Hill is a small farming town which shares a border with San Jose to the south. Under the usual Pac*Bell zoning methods, it would at least be a local call to San Jose Three (the southern rate area). But GTE, in its toll maximizing wisdom, keeps it a very expensive toll call. I could show you two places, one in the Morgan Hill exchange and one in the San Jose South exchange that are close enough to each other that you can see the smile on a person's face standing at the other location as well as hear him yell. Yet, due to GTE's pettiness, it is a twenty-five cent a minute call. There has got to be a vaccine for GTE. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 22:36:59 -0800 From: Mike Newton Subject: Gotta Love GTE -- One Better GTE .. wait 'till you see Citibank Visa... I started to write a check; wrote the 'numeric amount'; thought I made an error; 'X'-ed out the check, wrote 'VOID' on it and wrote a new one ... and sent in both. No payee, no signature, no written (longhand) amount, just the numbers and a VERY large X. Oh, and the word 'VOID'. Citibank cashed it. My bank paid it. And paid the correct one too. Then started bouncing my checks (an extra $1000 makes a big difference!) ... real embarassing. Now, if you're evil minded you can think of amazing ways of getting Citibank (or GTE, or ...) to commit fraud for you. Eg: take a check from someone, write in a number and 'VOID', send it in. You haven't signed it or ... A little creativity and you can come up with more exotic schemes where you're very unlikely to get caught. It took weeks, three visits to the bank (which I rarely do), numerous phone calls ... but the bank took back all the extra fees, etc. Grrrrr ... Mike ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #159 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02956; 9 Mar 93 4:14 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04990 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:35:31 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30515 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:34:42 -0600 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 01:34:42 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303090734.AA30515@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #160 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Mar 93 01:34:40 CST Volume 13 : Issue 160 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (John Higdon) Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Marc T. Kaufman) Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" (Ron Dippold) Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan (Al Varney) Re: Toll Stations in California (Ed Greenberg) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (John Higdon) Re: Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments (Carl Oppedahl) Re: OSPS and ANI Failure (Tim Gorman) Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (jgeorge@whiffer.atl.ga.us) Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial (Pat Turner) Re: A Little More TWX History (Dave Levenson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 11:35 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article <03.05.93.1@eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Moderator writes: > Paper forwarded by to telecom by Sid Shniad, Burnaby BC > : > What are those effects? Since the early 1980s, as deregulation > tore apart the American phone system, the US experienced an > unprecedented series of local price increases, cutbacks in service, > and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs as competing telephone > companies narrowed their focus to satisfy large corporate customers > located in major urban centres. The only thing true in the above paragraph is the "loss of ... jobs". They were lost in the telcos as those companies were forced to become more efficient. However, what was not mentioned was the creation of MANY more jobs in the non-telco sector. Of the many tens of people that I personally know in the telecommunications business, few are working for a telco such as Pacific Bell. None of these jobs would exist today without deregulation and divestiture. [all the usual garbage about the evils of competition and deregulation, deleted] > These challenges to the actions of the government and the CRTC were > part of the ongoing campaign to prevent the introduction of American- > style telecommunications deregulation in Canada. Given the > degradation of service, the increase in the cost of service, and the > massive loss of employment that has rocked the US phone industry over > the past 10 years, Canadians have been anxious to avoid a repetition > of that experience in this country. More outright lies. It is amazing that such nonsense can be thrust at the Canadian people with a straight face. Of course, the opposite is true. Service has improved remarkably, it is cheaper, and there are more jobs than ever before available in the telecommunications industry. But naturally this self-serving union propaganda is addressing the cushy, non-productive jobs that would be lost in Bell Canada should that entity be forced to provide real marketplace service. [The usual moaning and groaning about the affront to nationalistic concerns, deleted.] > Which brings us to the subject of telecommunications. Canada's > telephone system and the services related to it are world class. From correspondence with Canadians, I have determined that the US has benefitted greatly for deregulation and divestiture. While Canada still has step equipment and multi-party lines in rural areas, that equipment and facility arrangement has all but disappeared in this country. Bell Canada has no technical superiority with regard to the typical service provided in the US; and frequently the reverse is actually the case. I hope all who read this paper will realize that every single argument contained therein was used at the time of the US divestiture. History discredits it all. My only comment is that if Bell Canada has to start making its own way in the marketplace, there should be better provisions concerning COCOTs than here in the US. Other than that, I would put the world-class US telephone system up against any, including Canada. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: kaufman@xenon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" Reply-To: kaufman@cs.stanford.edu Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA Date: 8 Mar 93 16:09:28 GMT Graham Toal writes: > Brian Erwin wrote: >> The interviews are mastered onto Digital Audio Tape. A typical >> 30-minute program occupies 15 Mbytes of disk space. > A Mb per minute is ridiculous for speech. That should be brought down > a *lot*. Still, even at the best rate possible - say some very > crackly zero crossing scheme, fitting the data into a 14.4K modem's > bandwidth - you're never going to be able to download speech by phone > at much better than real time. The rate is 0.5MB per minute, or 64KBPS, which is just straight audio. I expect that it would be possible to easily get another factor of 2 by delta coding, 3-4 bit cvsd. If you don't mind compute cycles, and you are willing to restrict the information to speech (not music), a Linear Predictive Coding system can further reduce the required bit rate to about 2.4KBPS, which would bring a 30 minute interview down to about 4 MB. Thats only 4500 punched cards. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@CS.Stanford.EDU) ------------------------------ From: rdippold@qualcomm.com (Ron "Asbestos" Dippold) Subject: Re: Internet Radio Program, "Geek of the Week" Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 21:04:03 GMT Graham Toal writes: > A Mb per minute is ridiculous for speech. That should be brought down > a *lot*. Still, even at the best rate possible - say some very > crackly zero crossing scheme, fitting the data into a 14.4K modem's > bandwidth - you're never going to be able to download speech by phone > at much better than real time. Who's going to spend 30 minutes It's not quite that bad ... our vocoder, using a variation of CELP (QCELP), vocodes at 1000 bytes per second locked at full rate. If running at variable rate and assuming a standard voice activity factor (one-sided) of about .6 for one side that's 600 bytes per second, or one megabyte for the half hour. (If you're really worried about space and want to trade for voice quality you can lock out full rate voice entirely and force it to go at half-rate and below only). This system was designed to sound good on a cellular system, and when there's no data mangling in the transmission medium it _really_ sounds great. You should be able to do two separate voice conversations over a V.32bis modem using a CELP variation like this -- there should be enough bandwith because of the variable rate, and if there's ever a problem you can throttle back the vocoders to a random half frame now and then. Going back to the net, in the worst case you could "decompress" the vocoded speech once you'd ftped it if your software wasn't fast enough to do it in real time, then play back the decompressed version. The only problem is that QCELP and variations are designed to handle speech, so that any music will be mangled and you can't have a cool theme song (maybe someone singing acapella?) unless you store that separately. I'm not suggesting using QCELP specifically, I'm just using it as an example that it can be done -- I know there are plenty of CELP variations out there, some of which are public domain. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 10:59:43 CST From: varney@ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: Future of North American Numbering Plan Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article stefan@stefan.imp.com writes: > A couple of days ago, I asked: >> Why can't you just add another digit to the phone number? [And John Levine responded:] > In case nobody else has pointed it out, North American switching > systems have evolved a different switching protocol than is used > elsewhere in the world. The CCITT standard used everywhere else > passes a digit at at time with per-digit handshakes. The North > American standard buffers up a full ten digit number and transmits it > in a block. (Before you ask, at the time this convention was invented > in the early 1950s there were probably more dial phones in North > America than in the entire rest of the world.) But this "buffering" isn't all that unusual once you get beyond a SXS view of switching. Almost all switches have to know when the caller has completed dialing, and since billing is done at the local end (except of SXS), all the digits have to be seen at the local end. SS7 will support "en bloc" and "subsequent digits" forms of calling, but a single "en bloc" IAM is much simpler and efficient. > So making phone numbers longer than the current ten digits would > require immense changes to every phone switch we've got. Newer > switches use SS7 which could probably be changed with a software > upgrade, but there is still a lot of crossbar which would require > soldering in hundreds of new relays. (Ech, solder dripping into the markers!! How about wire-wrap? And all that wiring would have to happen on one night!!) But the basic point to remember is that North America isn't running out of numbers in the ten-digit spectrum. We have plenty of numbers available. Unfortunately, the NPA middle-digit-is-0/1 rule meant we were not using 75% of the spectrum. Much easier to use up the existing spectrum (which doesn't change anyone's existing number either INSIDE the USA or in the rest of the world). And much more sensible, IMHO. So the impact (unlike adding a digit) is almost entirely on the equipment vendors and owners of that equipment, not every person that makes a call into North America. (Not to mention that such a change would be more complex because Canada and the 809 countries would likely resist adding a digit to their numbers -- this would add immense even more complexity to switches everywhere in the world.) If you think there is an uproar over the planned NPA change because of it's impact on the somewhat tiny world of telecom, step back and think about the impact of another digit on every business and telephone user in the USA (and their world-wide callers). Now there's an UPROAR! Al Varney - just my opinion, of course ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Toll Stations in California Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 17:28:21 GMT In article fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) writes: > The other toll station missing from the list is (or was) at the > intersection of Nevada 266 and US 95, about 40 miles east of Deep > Springs. This was Lida Junction 3, a pay phone with no dial in the > parking lot of the, er, "Cottontail Ranch," a whorehouse (yes, they're > legal in rural Nevada!). I think LJ 1 and 2 were inside, but I never > went in to check. According to the "Best Cathouses in Nevada" by J. R Schwartz (Copyright 1984, and there's a new book out by now, I'm sure) the Cottontail Ranch is indeed served by Lida Junction #2. This is not the only cathouse served by a toll station. Janie's Ranch, west of Montgomery Pass on US 6, just inside the California Nevada Border is served by "Montgomery Pass #4" although they are also served by direct dial out of 619-933, Benton, CA. One more telecom anomoly in this book is listed under "Billie's Day and Night." Here the listing states "No Telephone." The mind boggles. Where are their priorities? What _could_ they be thinking? :-) Now you have an excuse to check out these facilities. After all, they are telecom history in the making. :-) Edward W. Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0511 | edg@netcom.com 1600 Stokes St. #24 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95126 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 11:09 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA. tredydev.unisys.com writes: > I know this has been discussed before, and I thought it was a > switch-settable option, but GTE only permits one call at a time to be > in processes through a normal Call Forwarded ("Programmable Call > Forwarding") line. This is really annoying, as I intended for people > to continue using my old (GTE) number, even though I am receiving > calls at my new (PacBell) number. I have often wondered why people forward the old number to the new one. My mechanic did this after he moved from his old location to a new one just over the exchange boundary line. The only thing that I could see that it bought him was the postponing of the inevitable day of truth when people would finally HAVE to learn and dial the new number. Plus there was the side "benefit" of paying all those local units for the forwarded calls. So let me ask you: why don't you just have the old number referred to the new one? Are you going to leave the old one forwarded forever? As long as someone can reach you by dialing the old number, he is NEVER going to learn the new one (or even care). John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@Panix.Com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Moving a Phone Line Within Apartments Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 22:50:35 GMT In hwc@kalpana.com (Hon Wah Chin) writes: > While moving from one unit in an apartment building to another, I > wanted to have access to my phone line from both places. I did this > from the building's side of the demarc. Now that I'm out of the old > apartment I called PacBell to get the records changed to reflect the > situation. > After talking to the rep I get the feeling that they would have done > the transfer at the CO and charged me $35. It looks as though my > attempt to do the switch "make before break" didn't work. > It looks as though I will have to back out my wiring changes and ask > for a regular transfer of service. Any hints about how to minimize > the no-service window? Well, you do not indicate which state you are in. The answer varies from state to state. Some states (including NY) define the point to which they (as distinct from the landlord) provide service as the network interface jack in your individual premises. In those states, they would take a _very_ dim view of your reconnections since there is no "building's side of the demarc". Other states (e.g. Illinois and California) define it as the street-cable binding posts in the basement. In such a state it is not the telephone company's business what happens on the riser side of the basement cross-connection. It is the business of the landlord. In such a state I should think you could call them up and simply announce you want your bill sent somewhere other than where it was being sent before (e.g. the new apartment) if that is what you want. Or, if you don't mind the bill being addressed in an unchanged way (e.g. you are having it sent to a PO Box) then no further action would be required on your part. Here in NY, a change of service location that happens to be within one building has a smaller one-time charge than a change of location that changes what building you are in. The different pricing is, I assume, a throwback to the days when all changes involved physical manipulations of wires. In those old days, a within-the-building move required one technician act (in your basement) and a building- to-building move required three technician acts (one in your basement and one in the central office, as well as a technician act in the new basement in most cases). Of course, nowadays with dedicated pairs running from the central office to each apartment in each building, the intra-building moves are handled from the telco's point of view exactly like inter-building moves, namely by keystrokes entered at a keyboard. But in NY, at least, the difference in one-time charges persists. Here in NY, the tariffs let the customer have up to ten days, I think, of overlap in service between the old and new locations, at no extra cost. Hope this helps. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW (intellectual property lawyer) 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10112-0228 voice 212-408-2578 fax 212-765-2519 ------------------------------ Date: 08 Mar 93 18:31:24 EST From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failure varney@ihlpl.att.com (Al Varney) writes in TELECOM Digest V13 #154: > Tim, I'd like more info on this SS7 "compatibility" issue. In trying to be brief, I made a statement that was misleading. The incompatibility is that SS7 trunk signaling on CAMA trunks between an ANI office and its CAMA billing office is not provided for. This does prevent the use of CLASS features on calls to and from these offices. It does not prevent the completion of calls using ANI. It does not prevent these calls from interworking with trunks and or call processes using SS7 trunk signaling or data base queries (at least as long as the switch vendor properly implements this ). > But when you replaced the CDO in my home town, you forgot to > activate the "four-digit local calling" feature on the new switch > (grin). And my dad's impression was that it was SWBT, not the PUC, < that forced him to private line service from 8-party. Of course, Since there may be a good possibility of having to go to 10D local dialing in the near feature, forgetting to activate 4D dialing may turn out to be a blessing :->. Elimination of four-party and eight-party was part of a five year telecommunications network upgrade agreement SWBT in KS made with the PUC. In turn for eliminating multiparty service, going completely stored program control/equal access, upgrading interoffice facilities, and freezing certain rates including local flat rates the PUC moved away from rate-of-return regulation to more of a price regulation format. This plan is to be complete 12-94 and will be reviewed for renewal in late 1994. Tim Gorman-SWBT *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager From: jgeorge@whiffer.atl.ga.us Date: Tue, 09 Mar 93 00:31:51 EST Organization: The Waffle Whiffer, Atlanta, GA jackl@pribal.uucp (jack lowry) writes: > The skypager had a few advantages over the local pagers I have had: > 1. possibilty of retrieving missed pages. (upto 100 hours ago) > 2. Blocking pages. (Don't bother me I'm...) > 3. future pages. (page you at some time in the future) > 4. The newer sky pagers can also tell you when you are out of range. I had a SkyPager for a long time, and I was very unhappy with it. They're up to 4x as expensive as a regular pager, and the local pagers around here have all the features the SkyPager has but better local coverage. While the SkyPager may work in 100+ cities, the local pagers we now use have well over THREE TIMES the coverage area. In my travels I've found that SkyPagers rarely work even to the edges of the city, and huge sections of metro areas are without service from their weak signals. I've boiled my travels down to primarily Chicago and Atlanta and I find it cheaper to just have local pagers in both cities than a SkyPager that works marginally in either city. If you travel to more than three or four cities with regularity, then a SkyPager will probably work for you. I think that there are several other companies offering nationwide service, and some local companies (like PacTel Paging, I think) can offer service in more than one metro area on the same pager. >> Would cellular phones be better? Personally, I would think that a cellular phone would be a necessity nowadays as a supplement to a pager rather than a replacement for it. The service (especially if you're roaming) was still _way_ too expensive to be used as a paging service, but it's sure easier to return a call via cellular than to trudge around in the rain looking for a payphone, and fumbling for a calling card. ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.Com Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 12:14 EST Reply-To: turner@dixie.com Subject: Re: Costs to Telco: Leased vs Dial Vance Shipley writes: > Network simplification has to be important to the telco, their manpower > costs are a high percentage of operating costs. Also, as another poster > pointed out automated loop testing, etc. are not possible (or more costly > and difficult) on special service facilities. Assuming you don't mean automatic (ie ALIT) when you say automated, I will have to disagree. Special Service circuits can be tested from either the digital (ie DCS) or analog (ie SMAS) side. I would assume there are very few all analog SS circuits, unless both ends are served by the same CO. All transmission impairment measurements (SNR, noise, attenuation distortion, envelope delay, IMD, jitter, etc) can be preformed from the DACS as well as the SMAS. The biggest reason to use the SMAS is to allow centralized (ie SARTS) testing of cable pairs for problems such as ground faults and side crosses. A SMAS, or similar metailic facility access, also allows tones to be sent to both pairs of a four wire circuit. This is useful for locating bad cable pairs, or IDing pairs in critical situations. I have been told that the SMAS capability comes built in to most of the CO equipiment used for SS circuits. Every SS circuit I have been involved in troubleshooting was accessable by the SMAS if the office was so equipied (and not served with DLC.) I would imagine the problem with maintaing SS circuits would be being able to access the circuit for testing. With the nailed up connections, you don't know when, if ever, you can access the circuit for routine or automatic testing. This problem is made worse because of the critical nature of some SS circuits. Holston Mt, TN is a good example. Along about two miles of mountain top sit a NWS radar, a FAA VORTAC, three TV stations, four radio stations, several microwave repeaters and DIPs, two airphone transmitter sites, and a whole bunch of two way sites. The local United cable man will not touch a pair unless he is at either end or has a tone on the pair. Patton Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: A Little More TWX History Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 18:33:34 GMT In article , hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: [as part of a truly interesting article on some hobby uses of old teletypewriter equipment] > ... We now don't even plot our boards. We just take a disk with > the Gerber photoplot file and drill file across town to the PC house. > We give them a disk and back come PC boards. Pretty neat! > It's amazing to see the changes I've seen in the electronics > industry ... but then, I'm getting older ... Harold: It is, indeed, amazing. There even are places where we no longer have to take the disk across town ... our phototypesetter accepts Postscript files from us by modem. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #160 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04844; 9 Mar 93 5:12 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21581 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 02:38:53 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26937 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 02:38:11 -0600 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 02:38:11 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303090838.AA26937@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #161 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Mar 93 02:38:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 161 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (John Higdon) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Andrew Funk) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (John Boteler) Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Things Really Went BOOM! (Steve Forrette) Re: Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID (Dave Levenson) Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Kevin Paul Herbert) Re: Explain This Phenomena (Mickey Ferguson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 16:31 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) writes: > Neither would I. My brother, who is also an avid reader of this > digest, told me that at an AM radio station for which he used to be a > part time DJ, they could not use IBM PC's because the broadcast tower > interfered with the keyboard preventing it from working properly. Rather than indicate any mysterious forces at work, the fact that the PC did not work properly simply indicates a lack of knowledge on someone's part concerning proper grounding and shielding. I know of a number of 50KW AM stations that have studios and transmitters co-located. They also have PCs that work just fine. > I also recall a comment about feeling the hair on the back of one's > neck stick out from the electric field as one approached the tower. Someone was pulling your leg. For the hair on your neck to be noticably affected would require an electrostatic field in the one-million volt department to occur at any distance at all from the source. RF voltages (even at the voltage-peak point on the tower) never even remotely approach this, even on a 50KW tower. I have worked around dozens of 50KW stations over the past twenty-five years or so and have NEVER observed my hair standing on end. What nonsense! Once again, let us nip the folklore in the bud. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that RF energy at AM wavelengths causes ANY physiological affects. It is common practice for tower workers to climb energized AM towers (you cannot get much closer than that) and no one has come up with a single case of anything that can be attributed to such exposure. Yes, you can get an RF burn off the tower if you brush your hand past it, but that is due to the arc that is drawn, not some mysterious, unseen force. FYI, I have known a number of pregnant women who have worked around AM transmitters and have all given birth to very healthy babies. > * * * * * * --> DISCLAIMER: I speak only for myself. <-- * * * * * * > Brent Whitlock Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology > bwhitlock@uiuc.edu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering > University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Amazing! Do you ever work in the lab? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: kb7uv@Panix.Com (Andrew Funk) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:43:35 GMT In dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 156 sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com > (scott.d.brenner) writes: >> In article add@philabs.philips.com >> (Aninda Dasgupta) writes: >>> A newspaper article I read earlier this week implied that the station >>> (and other local stations) was able to provide their signal to other >>> stations out in Long Island, who were then able to uplink the signal >>> to the satellite, from which the cable systems could pick up the >>> signal. > What happened on Long Island is that WNBC uplinked to a satellite and > the local PBS station, WLIW - Channel 21, picked up the signals and > retransmitted them over the air and the two cable companies > (Cablevision of Long Island and TCI) sent the signals to their > subscribers. In this way, all TV viewers could receive the news "as > it happened." Uh, not quite ... WNBC-TV has a 2 GHz Electronic News Gathering (ENG) receiver on the WLIW tower in Plainview. their equipment is in a rack inside WLIW's building. WNBC-TV put a portable ENG transmitter on 30 Rock and pointed it to Plainview, WLIW patched into the WNBC ENG rack and got the video and audio. WCBS-TV has primary and main back-up transmiters on WTC. We're the only VHF to maintain back-up transmitters on the Empire State Building. So, when WTC wend dark we "lit-up" Empire and stayed on-the-air. Many of the cable systems receive direct studio feeds via microwave or cable (copper or fiber) rather than getting the local stations off-air. So the other stations kept their news going, but only those few viewers watching on cable systems getting these feeds could see them. I had a bit of a busy week! We were on-air from 12:40 PM to 7 PM, and then 7:30 to 8 PM, with only the half-hour break for the CBS Evening News. Except for a single five minute break I was in Microwave Control handling all the ENG feeds and live remotes. They had me in before 6 AM and until midnight for quite a few days of the following week. (Can you say overtime? It feels weird to profit from a terrorist act. Yes, I've sent major contributions to my favorite charities in memory of the victims and with some of the overtime money!) Debbie Matut, the WCBS-TV transmitter technician in question, apparently decided to stay at the transmitter during her pregnancy rather than accept a new position in video maintenance at the broadcast center because the transmitter is an almost stress-free place to work ... she is definitely reconsidering! (And I spent about 1/2 hour talking to her and her husband, suggesting that a high RF area is *not* a good place to be during pregnancy!) We'll see what she does ... Andrew Funk, KB7UV Chair, Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society (RATS) ENG Editor/Microwave Control, WCBS-TV Channel 2 News, New York Internet: kb7uv@panix.com Packet: kb7uv@kb7uv.#nli.ny.usa [Moderator's Note: Look at all the overtime the New York Police Department is paying, and the overtime the FBI guys are getting. In that Texas confrontation with Jesus Christ (at least that's who he says he is) the FBI says they believe JC has enough food, ammo and other supplies to stall them for another *year*. They say they'll be waiting for him. The television news tonight showed the FBI guys at their shift-change. One crew leaving, another crew arriving to sit it out until JC decides to surrender or have a mass-suicide like the former San Fransico Commissioner of Housing, Rev. Jim Jones. I guess they figured after he preached the sermon over the radio he would go with them quietly. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Date: 8 Mar 199 &PC}\23 04:51:37 -0500 Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner) writes: > add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda Dasgupta) writes: >> said that all the other TV stations had their transmitters on top of >> the WTC. > I don't care how they did it, but I was really pleased that they were > able to continue broadcasting. It's amazing that they were able to > get it all set up so quickly. I know it's not *really* related to > telecom, but if anyone can give a more detailed (but understandable) Au contraire, it does have a telecom twist, and that ain't a pair. All the networks have fiber links from NYC to Washington DC bureaus. Apparently those other stations you mentioned on Long Island are also connected this way. I assume that these were on hot standby and provided a quick path for the programming to get out. I also found out that IDB's (you remember them) NY Teleport sits on top of one of the WTC towers, and it was knocked off too. They nabbed one or two of their transportable sat. trucks and possibly a flyaway dish to keep critical (big $$$) customers on the birds and in touch, much like they would a sporting event such as the World Series. Although this had a major impact, for broadcasters at least it was not the kind of doomsday that might have been had these two modern technological gems been unavailable. bote@access.digex.com (John Boteler) ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM! Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1993 21:50:23 GMT TELECOM Moderator noted: > [Moderator's Note: They realized people with 900 blocks on their phone > would not be able to use it, but the idea was to be able to service a > huge volume of callers at the same time with emergency reports. Many > 900 services are set up to take thousands of calls at the same time. I > think they want to be able to send a message to television and radio > stations saying (something like) "there is a serious emergency affecting > residents of Chicago. Please dial 900-xxx-xxxx at no charge to hear an > emergency announcement by the mayor". Of course, someone suggested > why not just make the announcement on the radio/television in that > case ... it was an idea they've tossed around while building our new, > very modern, very high tech police communications center. PAT] The FCC is looking into updating the broadcast Emergency Broadcast System allowing for automatic program interruption by emergency operations centers. They are looking at replacing the existing 853 & 960 Hz tone signalling with some other method that would include an end of message signal to return programming to normal. I wrote an article in the January issue of {Radio World} on this. In addition, we have proposed such a system for use in San Luis Obispo County. It does seem that broadcast stations would be a more effective way of reaching the population than asking everyone to dial a 900 number. I'm sure the telco would run out of dial tone. Also, I seem to recall a previous discussion here about having a capability thru the central office of ringing every telephone in an area and dropping it into an emergency message recording on answer. It seems like this could be quite effective for localized emergencies such as chemical spills, etc. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Things Really Went BOOM! Date: 8 Mar 1993 20:42:19 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA > [Moderator's Note: They realized people with 900 blocks on their phone > would not be able to use it, but the idea was to be able to service a > huge volume of callers at the same time with emergency reports. Many > 900 services are set up to take thousands of calls at the same time. Most of the 900 service bureaus can set up such a system just as easily on an 800 number. They have a bunch of dedicated T spans to the IXC, coupled with their conferencing equipment. There's no reason why they can't implement the large "broadcast" conference using an 800 number instead of a 900 number. It's just that there's not much demand for such a service, so you don't see it that often. After all, how many people have the need to broadcast to a large number of people, and allow anyone to call into the conference on their dime? Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Blocking of Phone Numbers With Caller ID Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 19:00:40 GMT In article , Bob Baxter writes: > Anyhow, I seem to remember reading someplace, whether it was a New > York Telephone pamphlet, or perhaps an old Digest, that if you had > Caller ID, you could block out either: > a) A selected phone number(s); > b) A number that is marked private would not even let my phone ring. Call-screening is available from many telephone companies, and allows you to block calls from a customer-administered list of (usually) up to eight numbers. This is available independently of Caller*ID. At least one state (Virginia) also offers a service called Anonymous Call Rejection. This service allows you to prevent incoming calls on which the caller's number is marked PRIVATE. This service is performed for you by the telephone company. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1993 21:19:58 GMT The monthly rates on pagers are sure a lot better than the airtime use on cellular phones. To discourage use of pagers in drug sales, our paging supplier limits free paging to 300 per month, which is certainly adequate for my use. I think doctors and others who can demonstrate a need for a higher limit can get it at no charge. Our tone only paging, which is simulcast all over California and parts of Nevada costs $10 per month. The pager operates at about 931 MHz. Now and then I have to travel outside the coverage are of the system. It would sure be great if the various pager companies would set up a co-op where I could tell my pager company I'm going to be somewhere for a couple weeks and they'd give me a telephone access number for that area. If the local paging companies were to do this, they could hold off some of the competition from nationwide paging companies (Skypage, etc.). I've suggested this in a letter to the editor of Mobile Radio Technology magazine, but no one (that I know of) has done it yet. To help those of us that occasionally travel, it'd be great to have "communications stores" in airports. They'd offer pagers and cellular phones for rent while you're in that city. I've seen (as I recall) car rental companies that are renting cellular phones, but have generally not seen pager rental. Somewhat related, at the National Association of Broadcasters convention (in Las Vegas), exhibitors can rent a single dial up line for about a week for $191.65 (no instrument). Portable cellular phones are available for $3.00 per day and $1.45 per minute air time. Pagers are available for $25.50 each (again, for about a one week period). We intend to utilize the paging network in one of our broadcast transmitter control systems. On an alarm, the system would dump transmitter parameters to the on call tech's pager (alphanumeric). Finally, I read a lot about data broadcasting (using FM subcarrier, TV aural subcarrier, TV vertical blanking interval, etc.). It seems that the paging companies are in an ideal position to serve the data broadcasting market. They could stuff data between pages. Since paging traffic definitely varies with time of day, there could be variable rates depending on system loading. It'd be a way to sell some of their excess capacity without having to expand the system over what is currently needed to meet their existing peak demand. Finally finally, I find UPS's use of the cellular telephone network to track package deliveries pretty interesting. Someone want to write about that? Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 13:43:04 -0800 From: Kevin Paul Herbert Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls TELECOM Moderator noted: > Curiously, on a couple of exchanges here, if A forwards to B and B > forwards to C then a call directly dialed to B goes on to C while a > call reaching B via A stops at B and rings through right there > regardless of what B wants done with *his* calls. This is the behavior of #1 ESS switches. This was fixed in 1A. This happens if you set up call forwarding to a number on the same switch. > In other words, you cannot go A > B > C > D > A > B > C > D just to > have the equipment running around in circles. I'm pretty sure that this is the basic reason that multiple forwarded calls off the switch are not allowed. Without SS7, the forwarding switches have no alternative for forwarding a call than to just grab a trunk and place the call. The switch can't route to the eventual end destination and do loop detection, so in order to prevent loops, it must just allow one forwarded call. As far as I know, if the destination of a forwarded call is on the same switch, there is no limit to the number of allowable concurrent forwarded calls. Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 14:04:23 PST From: mickeyf@clipper.zfe.siemens.de (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: Explain This Phenomena > My kitchen phone's DTMF keypad is intermittently on the blink. One > morning I decided to see if I could dial a number by flashing the > switch-hook (trying to emulate rotary dialing). [stuff deleted] > [Moderator's Note: What happened was your 'pressing the hook eight > times' was not properly synchronized, and the eight probably got taken > as four 2s, or two 3s and a 2, or maybe a 3 and two 2s and a 1, or > similar. You could have wound up calling 332-1133 or any number where > a total of 16 pulses would be used. Pressing the hook rapidly is not a > very reliable way to dial unless you are really coordinated and good > at it. The taps of your finger were probably not precise. PAT] That reminds me of the good old days ;-) back in college when our pathetic telephone system only allowed us rotary phones. My roommate used MCI for his long distance, and the only way he could use it was to dial the 800 number, then tone dial the access code and phone number. Since he only had a phone and not a tone sender, what he would do was to disconnect our rotary phone, plug in his tone phone (which didn't have a switch for pulse), and then tap out the entire 9-800-xxx-xxxx number for MCI. (That's a *lot* of taps!) We both got so good at tapping out phone numbers that sometimes we'd just keep the tone phone connected, and then "tap" someone (no, it isn't the same as reaching out and touching someone! ;-) instead of dialing them. We made very few mistakes, and those where we did usually resulted in some fun! ;-) It also prevented others from coming in the room when we were out for a minute and stealing long distance use or message units. Mickey Ferguson -- Rolm, A Siemens Company -- PhoneMail Development ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #161 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05650; 9 Mar 93 5:37 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20461 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:11:45 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31636 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:11:07 -0600 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 03:11:07 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303090911.AA31636@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #162 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Mar 93 03:11:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 162 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Steve Forrette) Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (Don Hackler) Re: CLASS Question (Steve Forrette) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Dan J. Declerck) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy Date: 8 Mar 1993 10:36:21 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article richard@dgbt.doc.ca (Richard Paiement) writes: > stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: >> I have a business associate in Canada who tells me that businesses in >> Quebec (or some part thereof) are forbidden to answer the phone in >> English. Reportedly, even a mixed French/English greeting is not >> allowed -- the person answering can't use English until the caller >> indicates that they want to speak English. And, (perhaps in the >> "Office de la Langue Francaise) there are Phone Police (tm) that call >> businesses at random in order to ensure compliance with these >> regulations. > First off, Steve, I'll excuse you for believing such crap since you > don't live in Canada. > That anobody could believe such a rumour is hysterically funny. Quebec > has never been and will never be an Orwellian society. One can walk in > any city or town in the province of Quebec and will see many bilingual > as well as English-only signs defying the language law, and nobody has > been killed yet. Since I didn't want to be guilty of spreading any false facts here in the TELECOM Digest, I just double-checked them by calling my Canadian friend and discussing this issue with him at length. For reference, he is a Canadian citizen who lives in Canada full-time, and has owned and operated a business there for many years. He has corporate customers from all over Canada, many of them in Quebec, and has had many opportunities to personally deal with and observe these language regulations in action. Here are several issues that he cited: 1. The French language regulations on the answering of telephones has caused several major companies to leave Quebec. A specific example cited was Sun Life, which catered to a predominantely English-speaking clientele. The French language regulations would have required them to put all of their English-speaking clerks who answered the phone through classes in order to teach them to speak French, even though the only people who they talked to were English-speaking. Instead of paying for this waste, they moved to another province. Another example is Cominsco. 2. All business signs must be predominantly French. Having French everywhere English is used on a sign is not enough -- it must be predominantly French. This may be accomplished by having the French part in a slightly larger font. There was a case where a business owner had restroom signs that used just the silhouette pictures to denote the men's and women's restrooms, and was fined by the Language Police because the signs were not predominantly French. 3. By default, all public school instruction is primarily in French, with English being taught as a second language. In order for a child to attend a public school with most instruction in English, one of the parents must have graduated from a primarily-English high school in Quebec. This was implemented to ensure that immigrant families who came to Canada and spoke neither French nor English would send their children to French schools. Before, when they were given a choice of French or English, most chose English, because that's the language they wanted their children to learn. But, this law also affects Canadians moving from other provinces, or Americans who live for a few years in Canada. If I, as an American, were to come to Quebec for a few years, why should my children have to go to French schools just because me or my wife didn't graduate from an English high school in Quebec? Businesses can apply for an exemption for specific employees. This was passed because American executives from companies that operated Canadian branches (such as General Motors) started refusing to come to Canada. 4. Quebec tried to change their air traffic control system so that all dispatching was done in French. English is the international language of air traffic control, and in fact they even land the planes in Paris, France by speaking English, but Quebec wanted to use French instead. Reportedly this never got implemented, though. I don't know about you, Richard, but a lot of this sounds quite Orwellian to me. And yes, Pat, there is a further telecom relevance to this post. My friend has a single 800 number that can be called from either Canada or the United States. It was issued sometime before divestiture. When he applied for it, they would not give him any number he wanted, but said that they were issuing numbers on a certain prefix, and he could have any available number on that one prefix. So, he sat down with pencil and paper, and figured out what interesting words could be spelled with the given prefix. He found a great phrase, which works really well for his business, and requested that particular number. He didn't dare tell Bell Canada what it spelled, as it surely would be given to a bigger, "more important" customer. So, he just said that he wanted this certain number. The assignment was approved by both AT&T and Bell Canada, and in fact he received a written confirmation from Bell Canada. A couple of weeks later, he got a call from a Bell Canada exec telling him that they had made a mistake, and the number wasn't available after all. Of course, what had really happened is that someone realized what the number spelled, and wanted to give it to someone else. But, he had in hand a written confirmation of the number, and AT&T was going to honor their commitment regarding the number assignment. He was able to convice them that it would be silly for Bell Canada not to give the number to his Canadian company that AT&T was willing to give, and that they should have thought about all of this before mailing a written confirmation. So, he got his desired assignment in both the United States and Canada. And no, it is not answered in French, as he's located in another province. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review From: donh@shakala.com (Don Hackler) Date: Mon, 08 Mar 93 01:39:08 PST Organization: Shakala BBS (ClanZen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA +1-408-734-2289 TELECOM Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: In the early days of MCI, they were fond of showing > unsophisticated (telecom-wise) business executives how they could > 'save money' by using MCI. And sure enough, a comparison of their long > distance rates ONLY versus AT&T showed the cost for the *long distance* > part of the call was less. But they conveniently neglected to mention > that AT&T's higher rates included (admittedly due to their connection > with the local telcos at that time) as well the local part of the > connection from the local CO to the long distance switch. So business > pplaces signed up with MCI and saw a decrease in the long distance > side of their bill but a substantial increase in their local message > unit charges. The 'savings' was a wash at best and in many cases, the > total monthly outlay for telecommunications (local bill from telco > plus long distance bill from MCI versus a single bill from telco which > included long distance charges from AT&T) was actually higher than it > had been before. > MCI conveniently failed to mention that if you > called via their switch somewhere and the distant end was busy or did > not answer on five attempts, you still wound up paying for five local > message units to the local telco, which in those days was understandably > not about to give a free ride to the long distance switch of AT&T's > competitor. After several complaints to the FCC and getting sued, MCI > finally began mentioning this 'slight additional expense' over and > above their published rates. As Charles Brown, former Chairman of AT&T > said at the time, " ... they have no investment in outside plant, they > have no local loops or switches, they only handle (this was in the > middle 1970's) the high traffic, very profitable east-coast corridor > stuff ... of course their prices will be cheaper. If I could get away > with the stuff they are allowed to pull off, my prices would still be > less than theirs ..." I grew up in Southwestern Bell territory, where business lines were flat rate by default, and measured service was a lower priced option for low usage business phones and the measured charge was flat rate per call, any duration. In that situation, you were really directly comparing actual long distance charges, and the competition was pretty stiff among not only the MCI/USTEL/SPRINT guys, but also WATS line resellers. We were surprised when we found people that actually used AT&T! Don Hackler - donh@shakala.com Shakala BBS (ClanZen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA +1-408-734-2289 [Moderator's Note: You said the secret phrase: flat rate business service. Even years ago when Chicago had flat rate residence service it was not available to businesses. Everytime they made a call it was a five cent charge. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: CLASS Question Date: 8 Mar 1993 18:32:26 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article silver!rudholm@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Rudholm) writes: > My next problem is with Call Return (*69). It seems to work (well, if > you ignore the fact that half of greater L.A. is GTE who hasn't > apparently heard of SS7 yet) O.K. I have a line at my parent's home > that I use as an RCF, it isn't a REAL Pacific Bell RCF but just a line > with Call Forwarding on it and no sets connected to it. > [Moderator's Note: I think the problem with call return on the 261 > line is the switch is trying to place an outgoing call on a line not > equipped for outgoing calls. The 261 line is only set up for incoming > calls. It thinks 'here is 261-xxxx placing a call to > ...' and realizes that is impossible since 261 is for incoming calls > only. An interesting bug, to be sure. PAT] Pat, from where do you infer that the 261 number is set up only for incoming calls? The way I read it, it is just a regular POTS line with Call Forwarding, which Mark has set once to forward to his home number, and just leaves it that way all of the time. I'm sure that it can place outgoing calls just fine, as Pacific Bell offers no such thing as an "incoming only" line, unless it is part of a Centrex group. Besides, when using Call Return, the call from his home number should go directly to the originating number of the original call, and not through the 261 switch. When forwarded calls arrive at his home through the 261 switch, the terminating switch knows both the original calling number, and the (last) forwarding number. If the caller decides to invoke Return Call, it has no need to deal with teh 261 switch at all. This reminds me of something I've been meaning to ask. It was reported here that Pacific Bell will x out the last four digits of any toll call that is placed as a result of using Call Return on a call that came in marked PRIVATE. Of course, this only applies to intra-LATA calls, right? Inter-LATA calls, even those that are intra-state, will still have the full number displayed. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: You are correct that inference by myself should not have been made. But I still think the problem stems from the equipment trying to place a call that it thinks on the one hand 261 is originating only to discover an instant later that 261 is not in that switch. I am going to try this with my line and see what results I get. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls Date: Mon, 8 Mar 93 13:25:31 CST > [Moderator's Note: Again, are we talking about the number of calls > which can be forwarded at one time from A > B or are we talking about > the extent to which A can be chained linked to B then to C and D, etc? > If the former, there is no problem with the number of circuits which > are available. As soon as the place to which calls are being forwarded > runs out of places to put them (i.e. two, three or how many lines in > the hunt group) then subsequent callers to the first number will get a > busy signal. If we are talking about chains that run forever, then > the important thing is to stop the process when a previously visited > number is found again in the chain. If this were not the case, then > any call forwarding could be a potential problem because what would > happen if A forwarded calls to himself, ie *72 from>? Would an incoming call hit the CO and run in circles forever? > No -- we know it sees a place where it has already been (original pass > through A) and gives up, returning busy to the caller. PAT] This brings up an interesting question. What would happen if such a loop were set up. For example, suppose phone A forward to phone B, which forwards to phone C, which forwards back to phone A. Assume no number of calls that can be forwarded at one time limits are in place. (i.e. assume that if X just forwards to Y, that there is no limit of how many calls can be forwarded, except that once Y runs out of trunks in the hunt group callers will get a busy signal). There are several cases, then: 1) A, B, and C are in the same switch. The switch would then probably detect the loop and return a busy signal or stop forwarding and ring one of the phones. 2) A, B, and C are in the same city, but off different switches (that are SS7 connected). Would the loop be detected? Does SS7 signalling tell the switch the entire path the call has taken? (i.e. when the switch for C got around to returning the call to A, would it know that the call has already passed through A? The CNID field would be of no use since that would have the number of whoever started the loop by dialing A (say, D, for example), and the ANI field would be of no use, since that could contain B. So, are there additional fields that would tell the switch that the call had passed through A?) 3) A, B, and C are in, say, Texas, California, and New Uork, off switches that have no SS7 connection to the IXC (if we are using sprint or MCI, that would be no problem, and even AT&T has lots of places without SS7 connections to the LEC). It would seem that the OLY information the IXC would then get would be ANI, which would be of no use in detecting that there is a loop. Do the IXC switches count calls in real time, and notice that there is a very large number of calls being made from A to B, for example, and then block A from calling B. Note that A having lots of calls to B is a normal occurance. Say a large company in LA has 100 lines, and several people are calling this companys office, which has the number B (assuming that don't have DID). Then the IXC woudl think A was making lots of calls to B (since all the lines from A's office would have the same billing number, which is what ANI sends). It would seem, that in the abcense of SS7 connections reporting the entire forward path of a call, there would be NO WAY to detect such a loop positively. (i.e. do we have a loop here? or is A just a big company that has lots of people simultaneously dialing B for some reason?); and that to prevent this, the telco would have to use some method of detecting activity that appears to be a loop, and stopping it. I am not trying to be naive here ... I am assuming that I am not the first person to think of this, and that the telcos have a way of preventing this from occurring. I guess my real question is how do they detect this? By counting calls and noticing that there is a large number of attempts from the same number to the same number is rapid succession? Do all local telcos limit the number of simultaneous forwards at once? (Although it would seem dangerous for an IXC to bet the stability of its network on every local telco remembering to set that parameter). BTW, note that this loop would be free to the people involved, since there would never be supervision from the call being finally answered. Brett (rfranken@cs.umr.edu) [Moderator's Note: Others have commented that because of the problem you describe, forwarding done out of the CO is limited to one call. But this does not seem right to me; I am certain a few years ago when we were partially ESS here and partially X-Bar that I tried forwarding my ESS line to the office where the X-Bar was and succeeded in getting more than one call forwarded. I could be mistaken; can't remember. You'd think even if they did not have a complete 'aduit trail' to use in detecting loops, they could at least compare one call coming through to another and see that the origins were different. PAT] ------------------------------ From: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com (Dan J. Declerck) Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 14:53:01 GMT In article eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se (Terence Cross) writes: > Daniel E. Ganek wrote: >> In article eeitecs@eeiuc.ericsson.se >> (Terence Cross) writes: >>> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a >>> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong >>> province, China. >> Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it >> to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement? > I don't think US phones will work. I think there are two issues here: > there must be a billing arrangement with the foreign roamer (e.g. an > on-line transaction system (VLR) between Chinese PTT and US mobile > carrier or perhaps the visitor could become a Chinese PTT subscriber) > and the foreign roamers phone must be compatible with the system in > use. > The system in Guangdong will be the sophisticated digital GSM (Global > System forMobile communication). If the foreign man has a GSM phone > then he is half way there. I don't think GSM is used in the US, yet. The FCC has no intention of using GSM in the States. The US presently has AMPS (most popular) NAMPS, AMPS-DC, and eventually DS-CDMA. The Frequencies used in GSM are being used by cordless, and trunked radio. Also, the cost factor of GSM is still pretty high, while spectral efficiency is only about 50% better than AMPS. Dan DeClerck EMAIL: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com Motorola Cellular APD Phone: (708) 632-4596 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #162 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17421; 10 Mar 93 12:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31262 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 09:27:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06689 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 09:27:02 -0600 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 09:27:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303101527.AA06689@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #163 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Mar 93 09:27:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 163 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Al Varney) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Kevin Paul Herbert) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Steve Forrette) Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question (Dave Gellerman) Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question (David G. Lewis) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 15:21:19 CST From: varney@ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: > This brings up an interesting question. What would happen if such a > loop were set up. For example, suppose phone A forward to phone B, > which forwards to phone C, which forwards back to phone A. Assume no > number of calls that can be forwarded at one time limits are in place. > (i.e. assume that if X just forwards to Y, that there is no limit of > how many calls can be forwarded, except that once Y runs out of trunks > in the hunt group callers will get a busy signal). Brett, I hope you realize you are not the first person to think of this question. Every ESS(tm) switch in a college town probably had this tried at least once before 1970. > There are several cases, then: > 1) A, B, and C are in the same switch. The switch would then probably > detect the loop and return a busy signal or stop forwarding and ring > one of the phones. Bellcore suggests switches should detect the loop and block after some number of forwardings, say five times. The same DN should not appear in two legs of the forwarding. (This is for CFV -- customer-changeable call forwarding). For RCF -- Remote Call Forwarding -- they suggest a customer-specified number of simultaneous forwardings be permitted. They also hint that the default should be one, except for cases where the customer has a multi-line hunt group at the forwarded-to DN. CF loop detection doesn't result in ringing any telephone. > 2) A, B, and C are in the same city, but off different switches (that > are SS7 connected). Would the loop be detected? Does SS7 signalling > tell the switch the entire path the call has taken? (i.e. when the > switch for C got around to returning the call to A, would it know that > the call has already passed through A? The CNID field would be of no > use since that would have the number of whoever started the loop by > dialing A (say, D, for example), and the ANI field would be of no use, > since that could contain B. So, are there additional fields that > would tell the switch that the call had passed through A?) Per Bellcore, ANI isn't passed in SS7 unless the call is inter-LATA. As you suggest, it's not useful in detecting the loop anyway. However, Bellcore's TR-972 (and ANSI T1) discusses the parameters in SS7 that are created/modified by forwarding. Of note: a) the Calling Party Number (CPN, your CNID) parameter is not changed when forwarding occurs in the switch, b) the Called Party Number (CDPN) parameter is changed to the forward- to number, c) if not present, parameters Redirection Information and Redirecting Number are added to the call; RI indicates how many forwardings have occurred so far and why this one occurred, RN contains the old CDPN, d) if those parameters were already present, the forwarding count in RI is incremented by the number of forwardings that occured in this switch, the RN updated with the last number that forwarded within the switch, and the RI gets the reason for the last forwarding. If not present, a parameter called Original Called Number (OCN) is added and receives the previous value of RN. If already present, OCN is not modified. At any time, if the number of forwardings indicated by the total of intra-switch and RI-indicated forwarding exceeds that allowed for the DN currently forwarding (or a switch default, usually 10), the call is routed to some tone. All of this not only helps the looping-forwarding problem, but also permits Voice Mail and Answering Service systems to receive the first and/or last forwarding number, thus identifying the "mailbox", even if the client is located in another switch. It also allows the systems to know "why" the forwarding occurred, so "her line is busy" vs. "no-one is answering" information can be given to the caller. > 3) A, B, and C are in, say, Texas, California, and New Uork, off > switches that have no SS7 connection to the IXC (if we are using > Sprint or MCI, that would be no problem, and even AT&T has lots of > places without SS7 connections to the LEC). It would seem that the > OLY information the IXC would then get would be ANI, which would be of > no use in detecting that there is a loop. > Do the IXC switches count calls in real time, and notice that there is > a very large number of calls being made from A to B, for example, and > then block A from calling B. I don't speak for any IXC (despite the Organization name), so I can't comment on what they might do. > It would seem, that in the abcense of SS7 connections reporting the > entire forward path of a call, there would be NO WAY to detect such a > loop positively. As I've indicated, one doesn't need the path -- just a count. > I am not trying to be naive here ... I am assuming that I am not the > first person to think of this, and that the telcos have a way of > preventing this from occurring. I guess my real question is how do > they detect this? By counting calls ... TELCos do not have cycles to burn in this manner. > ... Do all local telcos limit the number of > simultaneous forwards at once? (Although it would seem dangerous for > an IXC to bet the stability of its network on every local telco > remembering to set that parameter). BTW, note that this loop would be > free to the people involved, since there would never be supervision > from the call being finally answered. The last statement is a clue. The default (no parameters to forget to set) in many switches is to allow only one forwarding from a given number, UNTIL THE CALL IS ANSWERED. This is why such things as call- forwarding for un-answered calls (to Voice Mail, etc.) doesn't absolutely guarantee that every call will be forwarded. If a forwarding occurs, say because of call-forward-busy-line while another call is ringing, but the Voice Mail system hasn't answered when the first call attempts to forward, the call will not complete. If the switch supports assignment of other than '1' for simultaneous unanswered forwarded calls from a given DN, then the probability of such happening can be reduced. Such a tariff, if offered, is usually more costly because of the added switch resources needed. Remote Call Forwarding is sometimes offered with a limit > one even in switches that can't support CFV/CFDA/CFBL for more than one unanswered call. Al Varney - just my opinion, of course ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 14:03:40 -0800 From: Kevin Paul Herbert Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls TELECOM Moderator notes: > But this does not seem right to me; I am certain a few years ago when > we were partially ESS here and partially X-Bar that I tried forwarding > my ESS line to the office where the X-Bar was and succeeded in getting > more than one call forwarded. I could be mistaken; can't remember. Perhaps you were calling your ESS line from another line on the same switch. There is no forwarding limit in this case, just like if the terminating number is on the same switch. Kevin [Moderator's Note: Yes, as a matter of fact, I was. Thanks for pointing this out. I had forgotten this experience until this thread of discussion reminded me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls Date: 9 Mar 1993 22:21:20 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: > [Moderator's Note: Others have commented that because of the problem > you describe, forwarding done out of the CO is limited to one call. > But this does not seem right to me; I am certain a few years ago when > we were partially ESS here and partially X-Bar that I tried forwarding > my ESS line to the office where the X-Bar was and succeeded in getting > more than one call forwarded. I could be mistaken; can't remember. > You'd think even if they did not have a complete 'aduit trail' to use > in detecting loops, they could at least compare one call coming > through to another and see that the origins were different. PAT] This 'one call' limit is not always the case. It is set by the telco, and can have different values for each class of service, even in the same switch. I had to deal with this not four months ago with US West. I had a number that was going to be used for an advertising campaign, and was going to be forwarded to an answering service's DID number (they don't allow the DID to be published directly, so that they can reuse the number right away if the customer cancels the answering service's service). At first, I was going to set up a Remote Call Forwarding number. The cost was $18 per month plus message units. But, it allows only one simultaneous call. You can buy extra simultaneous capacity for an additional $18 per month each. I asked about regular call forwarding on a POTS line. They had to put me on hold, and check what the value was for my specific switch, which is a 5ESS. I was told that standard call fowarding allows up to 20 simultaneous calls, if it is a business line. So, I ordered up a business line in my apartment, with call forwarding. This costs about $36 per month for unmeasured service, which is a much better deal. And it cost US West a lot more to provision, since they had to send someout out to install it. As far as how they can allow a relatively large amount of simultaneous forwarded calls without creating the possibility of a forwarding loop eating up a large amount of trunks, here one way it could be done: limit the number of unsupervised forwarded calls. So, in my example above, with me being allowed 20 simulaneous forwarded calls, once my switch got one call, and forwarded it on to the next destination, it could return "busy" to additional calls until the first call supervised. Then, it could allow the next call through. This would prevent looping, but still allow 20 simultaneous calls. In order to reduce the chances of callers getting a false busy, they could put a slightly larger limit on the unsupervised calls; say, 20 calls maximum, but only five at a time in the unsupervised state. This way, a looped setup would only consume five loops of trunks before the caller hit a busy. And, the chances of more than five legitimate callers calling at the same time is not too much to worry about, I don't think. Of course, both of these numbers would ideally be individually configurable, based on the expected traffic patterns for each number. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: I have a voicemail number available to me which can be given out direct as the need arises, to use for promotions, etc. On it I have noticed any number of calls can hit it at one time. Of course, that is a little different: the voicemail system has a large number of DID trunks. When anyone calls, the voicemail system looks at the DID number and decides what to do with the call. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gelerman@access.digex.com (Dave Gellerman) Subject: Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question Date: 9 Mar 1993 16:47:20 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA In article Ken Stone writes: > I appear to have dug into a rats nest on this one and I'm just not > sure why :-). It is my understanding that the ONLY way to get DS3 is either via digital microwave or fiber, as there really isn't a standard way of moving DS3 long distances on copper. If this is true, then for a landline distribution there will always be a fiber interface. I'm also not aware of a standard way of representing a DS3 signal optically. This is in fact why SONET is getting so much attention -- prior to it, virtually all fiber system used a proprietary (at least vendor specific) representation of the DS3 signal. I think this means you need the $bucks$ unit to convert (that is demultiplex) the DS3 from the fiber. David R. Gellerman (301) 590-3414 Hekimian Laboratories, Inc. gelerman@digex.com 15200 Omega Drive Rockville MD 20850 USA ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: DS3/T3 Electrical vs Optical Question Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 14:31:37 GMT In article Ken Stone writes: > In trying to look at getting a T3 to an offsite building a while > back, we noticed that tariffs for buying at the optical vs buying at > the electrical interface were considerably different ... It is to my > advantage to buy at the optical interface on at least one end since > the existing DS3 mux equip is "microwave located" and not "demarc > located". I'd also like the idea of the lower tariffs. In what > little research I have done so far (talking to my DS3 mux vendor), the > only thing I have come up with is that it would appear that optical > DS3 is not necessarily optical DS3 ... in that it may be that PacBell > REQUIRES the optical/electrical interface be done with this nifty > super do-all $bucks$ mux gadget from NT which can do MUCH more than > just the E/O conversion. That would explain the tariff difference. Typically, when telcos offer an optical interface for high capacity private line service (DS3 or higher), what they're offering is an optical demark between their E/O equipment and your E/O equipment, NOT an optical pipe through the network. This is why they specify the equipment you need -- it has to be compatible with the equipment sitting in their CO. (Note that I'm talking about before SONET phase 2, at which time equipment from multiple vendors conforming to the SONET specifications will be able to interconnect optically. At least theoretically.) The motivation behind this is that telcos see themselves in the business of selling telecommunications services, not fiber-optic plant. If you're selling a DS3 service, you have to be able to manipulate, or at the very least monitor, the signal to provide fault detection and isolation, performance monitoring, and so on. This requires a telco fiber optic terminal somewhere in the circuit. Additionally, if the telco provides an end-to-end fiber pipe (referred to as "dark fiber"), they have no knowledge of what you're putting on it. You could ostensibly be purchasing it for a DS3, and instead hang an OC-48 FOT on each end, getting 48 times the capacity you've paid the telco for. Telcos, needless to say, don't like this. > The inability to use some of the simpler gear I have heard of, having > to deal with a rack full of PacBell gear onsite AT THE DEMARC, and > being length limited by DS3/coax from said PacBell rack really stinks!! Actually, I'm surprised that the length limitation is really a problem, unless by "microwave located" you mean up a tower or something. I recall from my days at Teleport that the only buildings in which we had any kind of a length issue with DS3 risers were the World Trade Center and the Empire State Building. Anywhere else, the distance was well within the typical DS3 buildout. If there is a length limitation, it can be ameliorated by the use of a DS3 repeater somewhere between the PacBell demark and your mux; they're made by the usual crossconnect/repeater type vendors (ADC, Telect, I'm sure we (AT&T) make one, but I don't know if it's widely offered). Alternately, you find a company willing to provide you dark fiber. Alternately, you find a company willing to locate equipment in closer proximity to your mux. > What I'm interested in is what's available as far as DS3 optical > termination equipment (the simpler the better) and what other's > experiences with buying DS3 point to point from the RBOC's are. AT&T's DDM-1000 can provide a 90 Mb/s optical signal which is composed of two DS3s (DDM = Dual DS3 Multiplexer); the electrical signal can be either DS3 inputs or low speed inputs (DS1, DS1C, DS2) which the DDM muxes up to DS3. Telco Systems offers a system (the name of which escapes me - the FOX-3, perhaps?) which is a pure O/E DS3 - electrical DS3 in one side, optical DS3 out the other side. They also offer a system called the 828A which takes low speed inputs, muxes them up to DS3, and converts to optical. (Note that this information is at least a year and a half old; I haven't worked with transmission equipment in that long.) Disclaimer: I don't know any of this from working at AT&T, so they can't complain. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #163 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20476; 10 Mar 93 13:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30275 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 10:46:58 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19962 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 10:46:31 -0600 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 10:46:31 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303101646.AA19962@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #164 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:46:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 164 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson More Musings About UK "Phoneyday" (Richard Cox) How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line? (Lars Poulsen) Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC (Simon Townsend) 30-Channel PCM (Kees Hol) The New Phone Books Are Here! (John Higdon) TeleAdapt Surveying Hotel Comms (Jon Knight) Telecom Donation Wanted (John Pettitt) Caller ID Available in 405 Area Code May 3 (Stan Hall) To Tap or Not to Tap (malcolm@apple.com) Information Needed on ATM's (Clayton E. Kuetemeyer) Looking For Used Dialogic Boards (John V. Jaskolski) Device Wanted to Prevent Line "Bleed" Between Multiple Lines? (M. Rosen) US Post Office Not Caught Up With Common Technology? (Michael Rosen) How to Measure BER of V.29 9.6k/s? (Ching-Chang Liao) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 22:25 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: More Musings About UK "Phoneyday" Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) asks: >> There would be no problem with collisions with STD codes 0801 through >> 0809 (if any of them are even in use today), because they will change to >> 01801 ... 01809 as part of the Phoneday cutover. >> Any comments from the UK readership? Certainly. If the change was made as you suggest there would be problems. Firstly you cannot reuse the old codes for about two years after the changeover: there would be too many misdials. Secondly, not all codes are having a "1" inserted anyway. That's one of the reasons why we refer to the change as "PhoneYday", not "Phoneday". And one of the codes in the 080X range (0802 -- used for GSM Cellular), will not be one of those getting changed on Phoneyday. The UK does have 0500 for Mercury toll free calls (though this is definitely non-preferred as it does not conform to international recommendations -- and in any event does not support the concept of 800 number portability. Ultimately I expect 0800 will be changed to seven digit numbers just like the good ol' USA. One thing we are going to have to handle is the demand for a common European toll-free numbering space. Present idealists would put this on 00-800 (using International Country Code 800) but I guess too many payphones and business switchboards would block 00 calls anyway. (00 is what most of the world, apart from World Zone 1, will use as their international access code after 1995) I'd prefer to put the toll free numbers on 1-800, just like Ireland and one other country whose name for the moment escapes me ... Richard D G 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 Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA ------------------------------ From: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line? Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 05:01:26 GMT I have been asked to provide ordering specifications for a third party to lease a full-time voice grade circuit here in GTE-CA territory. The line is to be used to connect two V.32bis modems about six miles apart (served out of different central offices). The modems are designed for operation on the public switched telephone network (i.e. they expect a two-wire circuit with battery, dial tone and ring signal present). The application seems straightforward to me, but I have encountered an amazing difficulty in getting appropriate information for this request. (1) The ordinary customer service representatives do not seem to know much about modems or leased lines. (2) In general, there is suspicion when I ask about what is available, particularly when I explain that "It is not for my own use, but for somene from a different company". ("Then THEY should call themselves." "But they asked ME to find out for them.") (3) The customer service reps refer me to the data services people, who basically want to sell me either a four-wire circuit (3002 type) or 56 kbps DDS service. If the two points were in the same CO, I would be inclined to ask for a 3002 with metallic continuity and install a ringdown box, but I'm afraid to do that between two CO's. It seems to me that this is similar to an off-premise extension for a PBX; is that what I should order? If I get a two-wire "private circuit" will it have battery, dial tone and ring? Telecom readers, please help me. I will collect information and send a summary back to PAT for publication. Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l Telephone: +1-805-968-4262 Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083 TeleFAX: +1-805-968-8256 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:39:50 +0100 From: st@bbl.be (Simon Townsend) Subject: Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC Not too many replies, but they may be useful. I enclose them all: ----------------------- From: bears!rhyre@cinpmx.attmail.com I'm not sure where to get them, but AT&T makes a voice power card, that has Unix driver suport. It can handle four phone lines. - Ralph ----------------------- From dave@westmark.com Check out Dialogic Corp, Parsippany, NJ. They offer ISA-buss compatible boards providing trunk interfaces, station interfaces, DTMF receivers, voice recording and playback, and a matrix switch for interconnecting the whole lot. They also terminate T-1 links, DID trunks, and provide a multi-line fax board. No, you won't quite build a PBX in a single slot, but with a few of their modules, you could build a very sophisticated PBX with automated attendant, voice mail, and as many other features as you card to write code for. You may contact me for additional info; Westmark is a Dialogic value-added-reseller. ----------------------- From: Steve Forrette There is a product called PCBX that does this, although they may not have a published API. It is made by a company in Orange County, CA, also called PCBX. I thin they may be in Tustin, but I don't have the specific reference in front of me. ----------------------- Thats all folks! If there's interest, I'll post how I get on with the project later in the year. Simon, st@bbl.be ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 1993 08:56:29 +0000 (GMT) From: C.Hol@research.ptt.nl Subject: 30-Channel PCM Organization: PTT Research, The Netherlands The European 30-channel PCM has signalling information in the 16th slot. What kind of information is in this slot? Does it tell which slots are empty (i.e. no call)? If you can help, please e-mail me. Kees Hol hol@research.ptt.nl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 03:51 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: The New Phone Books Are Here! The new Pacific Bell telephone directories for San Jose/Santa Clara have two interesting format variations in the White Pages. The first splits the directory into two approximately equal-size sections: Business Listings and Residence Listings. If you are looking up a business, you search the first section. If you are looking up an individual, you check out the second section. This has already caused me a minor inconvenience in that someone whom I was looking up had business service. I have a hard time seeing the advantages to the separation of "business" and "residence" listings in the white pages (unless it is for telemarketers). The second change is the way residence listings are presented. Instead of the traditional approach, each surname is listed with the customers of that name in the column underneath, but indented. Something like this: HIGDON Fred....... George A....... John...... etc. It actually makes the directory easier to read, particularly if you are looking up someone with a common last name. The most common name in the San Jose directory is Nguyen, which goes on for four five-column pages (Smith is less than two). John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 [Moderator's Note: We've had the 'surname once, first name indented' style in many of our suburban directories for a few years now, along with the businesses listed separately. Listing the businesses in a separate section is a clever way for telco to force people who operate businesses from home on residential lines to obtain business listings -- and as a result, a business phone. In a consolidated list, someone trying to find 'John Higdon and Associates' would not find it but they would find John Higdon and assume it to be one and the same, which of course is what you want, i.e. you have residence service and get to conduct business on that line. But under the new system, if I am looking for a BUSINESS in San Jose called 'John Higdon and Assoc- iates' I will find nothing. It does not occur to me to check in the residence listings, because after all, I am trying to reach a business, or at least that's what I was told you were running. :) This is a very clever ploy by telco and a perfectly legal, perfectly logical way of organizing their directory ... but it has resulted in many a small time, one person operating-from-home business man being forced to pay for business service ('but why would you want to be listed in the business section, sir? are you running a business? well in that case you need a business phone line ...') PAT] ------------------------------ From: J.P.Knight@lut.ac.uk (Jon Knight) Subject: TeleAdapt Surveying Hotel Comms Reply-To: J.P.Knight@lut.ac.uk (Jon Knight) Organization: Dept of Comp. Studies, Loughborough University of Tech., UK. Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:12:31 GMT I just spotted an article on page 4 of the UK edition of {PC Week} magazine that reports that an international data connectivity firm called TeleAdapt is launching a survey of hotel chains worldwide in order to assess the standard of communication facilities they make available. TeleAdapt apparently are suppliers of phone adaptors which allow you to use your modem on foreign phone sockets. The eventual outcome of the survey will be a free guide issued to TeleAdapt's customers which details what facilities hotels provide on a city-by-city basis. According to the article the guide will include: "[...] details of freephone access to alternative carriers, second lines, direct inward to dialing to the room, surcharges, and crucially the particular telephone/plug connection type." TeleAdapt are also seeking information from hotel users. Anyone with information to contribute can ring 081 429 0479 (that's a UK number so remember to prepend +44 and drop the leading 0 if ringing from abroad). They're mainly looking for information on the main European and American business cities, but welcome any experiences with hotel comms anywhere. The article also mentions that the US hotel chains are the most ``modem-aware'' and that the Germans are the worst. The Marriott and Sheraton chains have corporate strategies which encourage the provision of good comms for modem users in their hotels. Note that I have no connection with {PC Week} (other than as a reader) or TeleAdapt. I just thought that as hotel comms was a pretty frequent item in c.d.t that you might find this interesting. Jon Knight, Research Student in High Performance Networking and Distributed Systems in the Department of _Computer_Studies_ at Loughborough University. ------------------------------ From: John Pettitt Subject: Telecom Donation Wanted Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 22:58:54 PST Las Madres is a network of neighborhood playgroups for mothers and their children. It is a not for profit organization covering the greater San Jose area. My wife is a board member and I have been asked to help update their telephone information line. This line takes calls from mothers and provides information on which playgroup to contact based on age of child (by year of birth) and area. Currently this is done with an answering machine with a ten minute message. This is proving unsatifactory due to the unreliable nature of the machine and the difficulty in sitting through ten minutes of phone numbers. I would like to get them on an automated system -- this is where you can help. If you have spare capacity on a system (needs one DID number and a two level tree with about 30 messages) or you can donate an old 286 PC with or without a voice card that I can program then I would like to hear from you. This is a tax deductable donation. I am also looking at getting them an 800 number to hide the underlying telephone number. The best quote I have had so far is from MCI ($20/month, .19 day .14 eve and .11 cent min nights and weekends, California only). If you know of a better solution to hide the POTS number please let me know. N.B. 700 numbers are out because they are deemed too complicated. Thanks in advance. John Pettitt ------------------------------ Subject: Caller ID Available in 405 Area Code May 3 From: kilgore@wuntvor.pillar.com (Stan Hall) Date: Tue, 09 Mar 93 16:35:43 CST Organization: The Eternal Apprentice BBS, Norman, OK In my latest SWB bill there was a notice saying that they plan on offering Caller ID in most of the 405 calling areas beginning May 3. It seems that they will be offering per call blocking at no charge. The local SWB rep told me they were offering Caller ID units made by Sidco (or something close to that). Is anyone familiar with units made by this company? Anyone have any suggestions for cheap Caller ID units (no frills)? I also remember someone mentioning a unit that hooks up to the serial port of a computer in the (under $50 range). kilgore@wuntvor.pillar.com (Stan Hall) The Eternal Apprentice BBS, Norman, OK -- +1 405 447 3772 ------------------------------ Subject: To Tap or Not to Tap Date: Tue, 09 Mar 93 21:06:29 PST From: malcolm@apple.com This month's issue (March 1993) of {Communications of the ACM} has a pretty extensive set of articles talking about the issues posed by the recent FBI proposal to make it easier for them to wiretap new forms of communications. From the editorial pointers... With advances in telephone technology rendering traditional wiretapping procedures obsolete, the Justice Department has recently proposed legislation that would assure law enforcement agencies receive the technical assistance they need -- from U.S. phone companies. In "To Tap or Not to Tap," Dorthy Denning and a select group of commentators debate the issues posed by this digital telephony legislation. Denning presents the case for the government and the necessity of updating existing wiretapping laws to reflect new technology. She points out that there is no evidence the FBI ever abused this law in the past, and explains industry's role in the process. Her report is followed by a series of commentaries from noted representatives of industry, law, and government who argue issues of privacy, competitiveness and potential pitfalls and concerns. I thought the best parts were a discussion of what this might mean for encryption software. Check it out. This promises to be a debate that will make Caller ID look like a cake walk. Cheers, Malcolm ------------------------------ From: Clayton E. Kuetemeyer Subject: Information Needed on ATM's Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:45:32 GMT Organization: University of Illinois I am doing research on automated teller machines, and looking for current information on products or effects on customer service. Specifically, news about imaging systems, debit and credit card uses, networking capabilities with systems such as Cirrus and Plus, and the like would be useful. Any information would be greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: jasko@park.bu.edu (John V. Jaskolski) Subject: Looking for used Dialogic boards Date: 10 Mar 93 11:34:10 GMT Reply-To: jasko@park.bu.edu Organization: Boston University Dept. of Cognitive and Neural Systems I am looking for CHEAP USED (old) Dialogic boards. Specifically, I am interested in Dialogic's D121 Voice Boards (12-line voice processing board) older versions are fine; Dialogic's LSI120 Loop Start Interface (used to interface D121's with analog installations). At least two of each. Also of interest is the MSI baseboard and any other used boards. Anyone who has any of these USED and wants to get rid of them (or if you know of anyone who might have them) please let me know. I might be able to use D41's and other boards as well. Thank you very much, John V. Jaskolski ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Device Wanted to Prevent Line "Bleed" Between Multiple Lines? Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 06:01:01 GMT We have two phone lines in our house. When two people are on either line both can hear the other person on the other line. It is not loud enough for either called party to hear but loud enough for either person on this end to hear. It seems to fade from low to high occassionally. I wonder if this might also affect my modem connections. Is there anything available to attach to the phone line somewhere to prevent such line bleed? Thanks, Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 06:03:36 GMT With all the high tech scanning and sorting machinery the Post Office utilizies, this surprises me: I called the Maryland zip code information line and told the person on the other end that I had five addresses I wished to find the ZIP+4 for. I asked if it would be easier for him if I faxed the list to him and called him back later. I was told, with a chuckle, that they don't have a fax machine. You would think maybe the US Post Office would have something as simple and common as a fax machine ... Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: Ching-Chang Liao Subject: How to Measure BER of V.29 9.6k/s? Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 3:12:01 CST I am a student who is working on CCITT V.29 9.6k/s modem. I know how to generate V.29 9.6k/s voiceband data by computer program, but I am lack of the knowledge to calculate the BER of V.29 9.6k/s. If you know where I can find the materials of demodulating V.29 9.6k/s voiceband data or the equations to calculate the BER of V.29 9.6k/s, please notify me by mailing e-mail to my e-mail address listed below. My project is to find a way to improve the CCITT 32k/s ADPCM performance on 9.6k/s voiceband data. Therefore, I have to know how to calculate BER and the demodulation method of V.29 modem. Your replay will be appreciated. NAME: CHING-CHANG LIAO E-MAIL: liao@ee.umr.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #164 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21674; 10 Mar 93 14:25 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24887 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:20:22 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26018 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:19:36 -0600 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:19:36 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303101719.AA26018@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #165 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Mar 93 11:19:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 165 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Stewart Clamen) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Will Martin) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Harold Hallikainen) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (David Lesher) Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Justin Leavens) Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Gordon Burditt) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen) Subject: Re: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1993 18:15:36 GMT In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article richard@dgbt.doc.ca (Richard > Paiement) writes: >> stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: >> I have a business associate in Canada who tells me that businesses in >> Quebec (or some part thereof) are forbidden to answer the phone in >> English. Reportedly, even a mixed French/English greeting is not >> allowed -- the person answering can't use English until the caller >> indicates that they want to speak English. And, (perhaps in the >> "Office de la Langue Francaise) there are Phone Police (tm) that call >> businesses at random in order to ensure compliance with these >> regulations. > First off, Steve, I'll excuse you for believing such crap since you > don't live in Canada. > That anobody could believe such a rumour is hysterically funny. Quebec > has never been and will never be an Orwellian society. One can walk in > any city or town in the province of Quebec and will see many bilingual > as well as English-only signs defying the language law, and nobody has > been killed yet. Since I didn't want to be guilty of spreading any false facts here in the TELECOM Digest, I just double-checked them by calling my Canadian friend and discussing this issue with him at length. For reference, he is a Canadian citizen who lives in Canada full-time, and has owned and operated a business there for many years. He has corporate customers from all over Canada, many of them in Quebec, and has had many opportunities to personally deal with and observe these language regulations in action. Here are several issues that he cited: Although the discussion of Quebec language politics is inappropriate on this forum, I feel the need to correct the inaccuracies in Mr. Forrette's post. I am an Anglophone (ie. English speaking) Quebecer currently studying in the US. 1. The French language regulations on the answering of telephones has caused several major companies to leave Quebec. A specific example cited was Sun Life, which catered to a predominantely English-speaking clientele. The French language regulations would have required them to put all of their English-speaking clerks who answered the phone through classes in order to teach them to speak French, even though the only people who they talked to were English-speaking. Instead of paying for this waste, they moved to another province. Another example is Cominsco. (If the telephone people only spoke English, is it any wonder that their customers were only English-speaking?) The move of the Sun Life Head Office from Montreal to Toronto might very well have been due to the newly installed regulations requiring the use of French in the workplace. However, it was only the Head Office (and its staff) that was moved. The customer service clerks remained in the downtown Montreal skyscraper that bears its name. I have never heard anything related to telephony that caused this move. 2. All business signs must be predominantly French. Having French everywhere English is used on a sign is not enough -- it must be predominantly French. This may be accomplished by having the French part in a slightly larger font. There was a case where a business owner had restroom signs that used just the silhouette pictures to denote the men's and women's restrooms, and was fined by the Language Police because the signs were not predominantly French. Actually, all outdoor commercial signage must be in FRENCH ONLY. Indoor signs are subject to the "predominantly French" regulations you describe above (although the restroom pictogram story makes no sense). This rule has been in force for the past four years, and constitutional requirements stipulate that it must be reaffirmed or rescinded this year. 3. By default, all public school instruction is primarily in French, with English being taught as a second language. In order for a child to attend a public school with most instruction in English, one of the parents must have graduated from a primarily-English high school in Quebec. This was implemented to ensure that immigrant families who came to Canada and spoke neither French nor English would send their children to French schools. Before, when they were given a choice of French or English, most chose English, because that's the language they wanted their children to learn. But, this law also affects Canadians moving from other provinces, or Americans who live for a few years in Canada. If I, as an American, were to come to Quebec for a few years, why should my children have to go to French schools just because me or my wife didn't graduate from an English high school in Quebec? Businesses can apply for an exemption for specific employees. This was passed because American executives from companies that operated Canadian branches (such as General Motors) started refusing to come to Canada. Actually, anyone who has had their (or some of their children's) primary education IN CANADA (and landed in Canada prior to mid-1977) can send their kids to English public schools in Quebec. Anglophones immigrants from other countries would not be allowed to send their kids to Quebec English public schools. (There are a number of English private schools to choose from, of course.) People temporarily residing in Quebec (eg. corporate transfers) can send their kids to English public schools for up to three years, I believe. 4. Quebec tried to change their air traffic control system so that all dispatching was done in French. English is the international language of air traffic control, and in fact they even land the planes in Paris, France by speaking English, but Quebec wanted to use French instead. Reportedly this never got implemented, though. I believe they did do it. The Quebec air traffic controllers and the French speaking pilots wanted to be able to communicate in French, and I believe they have been granted that right. What makes it all the more ironic is that the International Civil Air Organization is headquartered in Montreal. > I don't know about you, Richard, but a lot of this sounds quite > Orwellian to me. Orwellian? perhaps. Quebecois? absolutely. Stewart M. Clamen Internet: clamen@cs.cmu.edu School of Computer Science UUCP: uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu" Carnegie Mellon University Phone: +1 412 268 2145 5000 Forbes Avenue Fax: +1 412 681 5739 Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 8:28:59 CST From: Will Martin Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Just to provide some info which I hadn't seen on the usual media coverage: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation science program, "Quirks & Quarks", which I heard on Radio Canada International shortwave on Sunday, 7 March, carried a long interview with a person [whose name I forget, sorry] described as a building-demolition expert and international-terrorism consultant about the WTC bombing. Two very interesting aspects: This person had given an interview back in 1985, which had been published in a magazine article that year, in which he had been asked to state from a structural (as opposed to strategic or tactical) viewpoint what targets would be the most likely for a terrorist group to attack. His first choice was the Statue of Liberty, because of all the symbolic aspects and the way it epitomizes the American image. The second choice was the World Trade Center complex. I guess the terrorists must have read the article ... The other fact, and one that I find rather surprising, was that he stated that the bomb did so much damage that, if either the exact same bomb had been detonated at a slightly different location, or if the bomb at its actual location had been made with slightly more effective explosive, the effect could well have actually brought down one of the WTC towers. We're used to thinking that modern steel-frame buildings can be damaged (and probably made unusable) but not that they can be so easily caused to actually fall down. The way he described it, the margins of safety are adequate, given the building's structural integrity, to handle the usual loads -- the contents of the bulding, including the movement of people, the elevators moving up and down, wind loads from the outside, etc. But once that structural integrity is breached sufficiently, the building will begin to tilt, and that takes it out of the design envelope, and no more than a few degrees of tilt is enough to overcome all the structural safeguards, and the building will then basically disintegrate, falling right down due to gravity. Stuff I've previously read about building demolition has stressed the small amount of explosives that are actually used by professionals; the placement of those and the choice of the exact correct explosive, with the right brisance, to sever the structural supports in a controlled pattern, is what makes those spectacular pictures we've all seen of buildings basically collapsing in on themselves with a relatively small and unspectacular explosion-effect seen at the beginning. All that is needed is to take out the right legs, and let gravity do the work. In the WTC case, it seems that either the bombers were not intending to do this, or were not skilled enough to do it, or there was some error or mishap. There have repeatedly been comments about the possibility of the explosion being detonated at an unintended time, perhaps by the van hitting a speedbump or the like -- one can certainly speculate about the timing of the blast, since it seemed to occur at a rather odd moment during lunchtime, not when the building was as full as possible, nor when it was as empty as possible at night. Also, some of the early reports emphasized the blast location in relation to an area used by the Secret Service for VIP vehicles -- perhaps the actual intent was to trigger the explosion at some future time when some important personage would have been in the area? That is, of course, guesswork. In any case, though, it may be said that we were lucky -- things could easily have been much worse. Regards, Will ------------------------------ From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1993 19:29:43 GMT In article john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Once again, let us nip the folklore in the bud. There is absolutely NO > EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that RF energy at AM wavelengths causes ANY > physiological affects. It is common practice for tower workers to > climb energized AM towers (you cannot get much closer than that) and > no one has come up with a single case of anything that can be > attributed to such exposure. Yes, you can get an RF burn off the tower > if you brush your hand past it, but that is due to the arc that is > drawn, not some mysterious, unseen force. There is a lot of research going on in the RF exposure area. For AM stations, the latest I've seen is a report from Richard Tell Associates prepared for the FCC in October 1991. Based on the current ANSI guidelines, one should not climb a hot AM tower due to the radiated field. Richard Tell went back to the Specific Absorbtion Rate basis for the ANSI field limits and calculated what currents would be permitted thru the wrists of a tower climber and still stay below the SAR (using I squared R calculations for the wrists). Based on these calculations and wrist current measurements while climbing various towers, the report establishes suggested power limits for climbing hot towers based on frequency. In general, the suggested power is less than 1 KW. Note that the current limits the FCC uses use E and H field limits and not conducted body current. A new standard is proposed that does include conducted body current. Limits for VHF and UHF (such as FM and TV) fields are also listed in the ANSI standard. These are generally checked using measurements or the prediction measurements in the FCC bulletin OST 65. I've spoken with various agencies on radiation safety. A representative of OSHA in Salt Lake City agreed that there is very limited evidence of harm done to workers by RF (especially at AM frequencies), but he says that MAY be due to very limited data. There is no centralized "cause of death" database that also tracks the occupational and other environmental considerations of a person's lifetime. He pointed out that it took at least 30 years to discover the harmful effects of asbestos. He also said OSHA will enforce radiation standards for worker safety whether the new standards are adopted by the FCC or not. If a case ends up in court, it would probably be best if the station were using the best "scientific" study available. Unfortunately, establishing "scientific" can be difficult. There have been a lot of radiation scares based on flimsy evidence, if any evidence at all. Still, we need to look beyond our self interest (I work in radio) and indeed look for the truth, even if it means we have to change what we are doing. So ... summarizing, yes, I've climbed hot AM towers, and I haven't died, but I plan to. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 0:28:10 EST Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex The Chief Moo said: > I have worked around dozens of 50KW stations over the past twenty- > five years or so and have NEVER observed my hair standing on end. > What nonsense! Hmmmm: 1) John does not carry a mirror while tower climbing. 2) His eyes are burned out by all that RF. Even if it DID stand on end..... 3) If the eyes are not fried, what about the other end of the optic nerves? 4) Does he have any left to lay flat, much less stand on end? [Sorry, John - can't resist ...] wb8foz ------------------------------ From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill Date: 10 Mar 1993 01:05:57 -0800 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA TELECOM Moderator noted: > I still maintain a $15 item from a *telephone* information provider > with nothing written to bind either party is of no concern to credit > grantors except possibly telemarketers selling magazine subscriptions; > bill collectors for the Columbia Record Club (talk about a depressing > job -- "did you mail in your dollar ninety-eight for the fifteen > records we sent you?" !) and the like. PAT] Ah, but it's a BIG deal to another telephone provider. In my instance, the charge ($50) was being billed by AT&T. Thus, the outstanding charge was not from some nobody IP, it was an outstanding balance owed to AT&T, and that's exactly the way it appeared on my Equifax report. And that $50 was plenty enough to make GTE refuse to install a line until it was cleared up, and then demand a large deposit on the account. Nothing like trying to move into a new apartment and trying to deal with AT&T, GTE, and Pacific Bell at the same time. And then what really burned me was that I found out that after all my battling with AT&T over this matter (many weeks after receiving a letter from the IP stating that they had gone out of business and there was no money to make refunds) was that AT&T has stopped all payments to that IP. So AT&T was apparently trying to recoup whatever losses it could with the customer money. Justin Leavens Microcomputer Specialist University of Souther California ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 14:35:46 GMT > As for interception between the main phone lines, and the telco (such > as someone going in a sewer and tapping the lines, I can't see how you > can protect against that, unless you can get the telco to put a lock > on your line, which (I just thought of that) is a good idea, but I'm > not sure the telco offers such a security system, and even then, if > someone tapped the line, they can get the number. You'd have to set > up a preety complex system to be 100% foolproof, which for most > applications is way too expensive. It would seem possible, especially given a PBX, to detect when a CO line goes off-hook and it's NOT the inside line taking it off-hook. (Modifying existing PBX circuits might be the easiest way, if you have schematics, don't have to worry about warranties, and have a line to experiment with). Mutual-excluder circuits from Radio Shack and line-in-use lights do parts of this. You have to do something about incoming calls not generating false alarms. If you detect outside use of your line (someone at the demarc, on a phone pole, elsewhere in your apartment building, in a manhole, or at the CO), you can jam dialing. Send out all touch-tone tones simultaneously, and generate continuous pulse dialing (as though there were a digit for "ten thousand" on your dial). This should mess up any attempts to dial a specific number, and the conversation if they manage to complete a call. Have it time out after a few minutes unless it seems someone is still trying. You'd better have a way to shut this off if the phone company needs to work on your lines, and have a way for it to just set off an alarm without jamming for a while. CO line testing might set it off. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #165 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22598; 10 Mar 93 14:42 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03447 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:11:41 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26673 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:11:19 -0600 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 12:11:19 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303101811.AA26673@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Voice BBS, 1+ Dialing, Other Stuff The responses thus far to the Orange Calling Card have been gratifying. I've mailed out several hundred brochures and applications, and they are starting to be returned to the main office in Minneapolis. Still more brochures and applications are in the mail now. A portion of the revenue from this 25 cent per minute (billed in six second increments) and no surcharge calling card are returned to TELECOM Digest. Now some other companies have contacted me and asked if I would be willing to operate on the same terms for 1+ dialing and 800 numbers. I don't have agreements in place as of today with these companies, so I can only speak in general terms, but would appreciate some feedback to see if the support would be present. Please respond only to ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu with short answers. Please do not quote extensively from this message unless you must. If 1+ service from Sprint and/or AT&T were available -- meaning you did not have to change your long distance carrier, but merely agreed to be billed through a reselling service, with the reduced rates and other features available, would you agree to do it if the commissions came to TELECOM Digest? i.e. rates of 14-15 cents per minute on direct dial calls? i.e. the use of the AT&T Software Defined Network? If 800 service was available with no start up or monthly charge, and rates of 32 cents per minute which decreased to about 20 cents per minute based on volume, would you subscribe if the commissions came to TELECOM Digest? When '800 portability' arrives (now definitly sched- uled for May 1), would you be willing to consider this if you were able to keep the same 800 number you have now? The 800 numbers I will be offering are real; not bogus 'add a four digit pin' numbers like MCI. --- Note: The above rates on 1+ are *examples* only. They are giving me a bunch of plans to resell based on volume. Given the volume, rates would go down to 8 cents per minute with thousands of dollars of usage per month. Ditto the 800 service, where rates go down to about 10 cents per minute when you use enough of it. If there was a 'voice BBS' type service available strictly for use by telecom people, where open messages could be left and responded to by anyone calling, and private voicemail boxes were available as well to readers of TELECOM Digest / comp.dcom.telecom, would you be likely to use such a system? It would be priced 'at cost' with rates of: $20 per year for voicemail box and open bulletin board for employed persons; $10 per year for the same features for students and unemployed persons; FREE to international users due to their increased toll charges in calling. A call to Chicago on a regular POTS number would be required. (No 900/976 type numbers). Please let me know if these services would be of interest to you or used by you if they were available. *** I am not yet in a position to send literature or take requests to sign up, but hope to be soon. *** Patrick Townson TELECOM Digest Moderator   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25327; 11 Mar 93 4:31 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12210 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:50:01 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11688 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:49:31 -0600 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:49:31 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303110749.AA11688@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #166 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Mar 93 01:49:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 166 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! (Douglas Scott Reuben) Payphone Records in WTC Case (Jeff Wasilko) Distinctive Ring Discriminator With Caller ID (Greg Trotter) Facsimile CNG Tone (Richard W. Desaulniers) Inverse Paging Service? (Garrett Wollman) X.25 Over IP (Telematics and NCR Tower) (Ken Zmyslo) Come Here, Mr. Watson (John R. Levine) Information on USA Telephone System Wanted (4I Gymnazium Students Praha 9) 800 and 900 in Canada (murphy%switchboard@cam.org) Pricing For MAN Access (Hank Nussbacher) Needed: T1 Channel Equipment Recommendation (aar_osman@gsbvxb.uchicago.edu) Dialer Format Wanted (Joseph J. Snyder) Need Information on Fiber Optic Television (Martin Egan) RFC on SLIP (Robert L. McMillin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11-MAR-1993 00:13:06.53 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! I got a call today from a friend of mine who was trying to reach me via my 700 number. After verifying that he was dialing correctly, I concluded that there must be some error at the payphone or the switch he was on, and drove there later to investigate (I was in the area anyhow.) As it turns out, it was a NYTel coin phone, in the 516-931/Hicksville exchange. So I tried out 10288+0+700 etc., and it didn't work. (Got a local error message.) I called AT&T EasyReach Customer Service, and spoke to a rep named Lynn. I explained to her the nature of the problem, and asked her to take a trouble report on it. She said that she would, but that it could be that NYTel is blocking "700 and 900 numbers from that payphone due to fraud". I asked her just how can can someone make fraudulent calls with 700 numbers from payphones (and I stressed it was not a private payphone but a Bell System station), and she went on very sure of herself "Oh, well SWBell for example blocks out 700 calls from their payphones all the time, because they don't want people placing 700 calls and not paying for them." At this point, I decided not to waste my time with her anymore, and told her to have someone call me back within two days as to what was being done to resolve the matter. She didn't sound too happy about that, and said "You know, we gave you an 800 number so in cases like this people can still reach you..!", to which I replied "Well, so I should tell people: 'Call 0-700-555-1234, make sure you dial 0, and if that doesn't work, dial 10288 first, and if that doesn't work, then dial 1-800-824-5621, wait for the prompt, dial 1, wait for the tone, then dial 700-555-1234, and then your calling card number' - if I had to say THAT to people when they want my number then no one will call me!" This isn't the first instance where a given prefix (or even a coin station line) is mis-programmed so that it denies EasyReach access. The fact that the AT&T Rep (Lynn) didnt seem to think that it was too unusual, and that she casually told me to burden my callers by making them dial an extra 800 number in order to reach the 700 platform indicates (to me at least) that some people at AT&T EasyReach don't care too much that it is quite difficult and inconvenient for many callers to reach me, and don't seem to care that this greatly diminishes the utility of the service. If any AT&T people are reading this, I'd suggest you make greater efforts to train your people to be responsive to customers who whish to get a specific (usully LEC related) problem corrected - AT&T EasyReach is either misprogrammed or blocked from *many* areas (although SWBell doesn't seem to be one of them!). Just a few weeks ago I noticed that payphones along I-78 in Allentown wouldn't accept 0-700 AT&T calls, and callers needed to use the 800 access to get through. The same was true last summer of the 516-621 exchange, and the 203-728 exchange. Obviously AT&T can not check every single Bell (or LEC) payphone in the country, but the considerable number of areas that I have noted where 700 access isn't available indicates to me that there are more than a few areas where my callers will have problems reaching me. I am a bit disturbed by this, and Lynn did nothing to alleviate my concerns. Additionally, now that AT&T has announced EasyReach for business customers, they have GOT to make more of an effort to improve access to the service. Presently, callers from Rochester Tel service areas can not dial 0-700, and must use the 800 to access the EasyReach platform, and pay the calling card surcharge (even if from a non-coin phone). I doubt many cost-conscious businesses, once they realize that they can place the same call directly for about a tenth as much (for the first minute), will choose to utilize the service. AT&T has said that the reason callers can't access EasyReach directly is because Rochester Tel doesn't have the newest software generic for their 5ESS switches - well, maybe (and I know this is a crazy idea ;) ) - just maybe, AT&T could GIVE Roch Tel the relavent code so that peope with 700 numbers don't have to encumber friends and relatives in Rochester with additional codes in order to be reachable? Nah ...too simple, right? :( Or how about the way that EasyReach supervises when you get to the platform, and does not wait until the called party answers? Many people are reluctant to call me from their cellular phones because this means that they will pay airtime even if I am not available, or my phone is busy. Now that EasyReach is a "business" service as well, I think more and more "business" users will be annoyed by this deficiency. Overall, I DO like the service, and find it useful. But in my experience, I find that there are MANY areas where 700 access is denied, or where payphones don't offer 700 access, etc. I've noted Bell (not GTE or Contel or whatever) payphones in Rhode Island, Mass, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine, DC, Va, MD, Pennsylania and New York which for some reason or other have 700 access blocked. Although I may never get a call from any of these exchanges or payphones, I'd like to know that I *could*, and not make my callers go through such a rediculous procedure as using the 800 access that many may abandon the attempt and just not call at all. It is bad enough that many are reluctant to call me on the 700 (most don't like the fact that they have to wait for the "AT&T EasyReach" voice prompt, or enter extra keys ("#1")), but to make them use an 800 number to access the service on a seemingly regular basis goes too far. As discussed on the Digest when EasyReach just started, the "0-700" system is awkward for most callers, and it requires that they and/or I take the time to understand/ explain the service to them. 1+700 would have been preferable, with a 0-700 for Calling Card access and programming access. However, since AT&T for whatever reason chose to implement the system via the more awkward 0-700 access method, the LEAST that they can do is make sure that it is acessible from everywhere. I refuse to burden my callers with extra charges and procedures to reach me, and feel that they will choose not to call if the EasyReach service is too cumbersome. Already many have asked for a backup number (POTS number) to reach me at because either they can't dial 0-700 from their PBX, or they don't want to use the 800 and pay the Calling Card surcharge, or because they don't want to pay airtime if I do not answer, or becuase they are calling from a rotary phone and don't want to wait 45 seconds for the service to time out. Not to mention that it generally costs them MORE to reach me , that *no* AT&T calling plans include EasyReach, that you can't sequence call using the "#" key from a previous call to EasyReach, that friends and relatives of mine in Canada (and outside the US in general) can't call, and that I can't use the "#" key to force calls to the number I am calling from. Frankly, if *I* were told to call a friend with EasyReach, I'd just ask for the "master pin", check to see where calls were being forwarded to, and then use Sprint to place the call directly! :) So it behooves AT&T, that when a customer such as myself who is willing to put up with all these inconveniences, and who has friends who are patient and understanding enough to put up with the burdensome procedures mandated for EasyReach access, that when I do call to report a problem in accessing the system that I get something in response which is a bit more than mindless platitudes about how SW Bell blocks access from their payphones, or how callers can "simply" use the 800 number to access the service. Simply? Give me a break! AT&T: Get your act together on EasyReach - make it easier to use, and allow me to be reached from everywhere. The novelty and even the utlity of the service quickly wears off if even one person (not to mention almost everyone) complains about using "the 700 number" to call me. There are alternatives (like Cable and Wireless's Programmable 800 service), and I suspect that in the future there will be more. If you expect to retain me as a customer, I would expect you to address the issues raised in this post and make EasyReach as convenient and simple as dialing any other telephone number. Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) Subject: Payphone Records in WTC Case Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 23:18:37 EST Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div. Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com I just heard on the news that the latest suspect in the WTC bombing case was linked to the main previous suspect via payphone call logs. It seems that the first suspect used the payphone in the storage building lobby where the explosives were supposedly stored to call Nidal Ayyad (a chemical engineer at Allied-Signal) at Nidal's office a number of times. It's very interesting to see the use of call detail that is availble from public payphones. Remember that the Long Island kidnapping case also involved police using payphone call records ... Jeff Jeff's Oasis at Home. Jeff can also be reached at work at: jwasilko@airage.com ------------------------------ Subject: Distinctive Ring Discriminator with Caller ID From: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter) Date: 10 Mar 93 15:52:10 -0600 Organization: Gallifrey - Home of the Timelords I posted a message a week or so ago asking for info on distinctive ring discriminators. I got a lot of good information, but wonder if anyone has been able to use a Caller ID device *after* the DRD has split the line. A lot of people recommended the splitter by Hello Direct; their tech people say that Caller ID can't be detected after the DRD has routed the call. Has anyone successfully done this? Putting the Caller ID box inline before the DRD is not an option; nor do I have a spare pair of wires to route a "pure" telco line for the Caller ID box on. Any help is appreciated! Greg Trotter Norman, Oklahoma Internet: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu Fidonet: 1:147/63 Treknet: 87:6012/8009 | I don't even represent me. [Moderator's Note: Is it taking their box longer than one ring to decide how to route the call? Caller-ID comes between the first and second ring; you'd think if the routing device responded on the first ring the path would be clear when the Caller-ID came past a half second or so later. I use a device which works the opposite way I got from Radio Shack (two separate lines go into the box, the line which rings seizes control and gives its output to a single-line Caller-ID phone. Either line can be selected from the box for outgoing calls but the incoming ring signal from either line trips the box in that direction for incoming calls.) It always manages to wake up in time and do its thing so the single line phone can display the Caller-ID coming from either direction. Always? Well maybe it misses one call out of a hundred or so. Speaking of Caller-ID, it now works with Call Waiting here in Chicago. Not immediatly ... but keep the waiting call on hold; finish the first one and *hang up*, allowing the CO to give you a couple 'reminder rings' to let you know a call was left on hold ... between the first and second of *those* (reminder rings) the ID gets displayed. This, despite the fact it may have 'rang' a few times to the calling party before you answered and put them on hold. So even if you have to flash and (like me) merely say 'please hold' and flash back to the first party again, before actually talking to the new caller, we can get his ID if we hang up and let the CO pass it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:11:08 From: desaulni@mprgate.mpr.ca (Richard W. Desaulniers) Subject: Facsimile CNG Tone As I understand it a calling facsimile can send a series of CNG tone (0.5 sec 1100Hz) that can be detected by a receiving unit when it answers an incoming call. The purpose of the tone is allow incoming facsimile calls to be automatically switched over to a facsimile unit. I don't think this feature (i.e. being able to send CNG tones) is mandatory, but should one expect all facsimile units manufactured today to have that feature? What about the older facsimile units, do they have this feature? Are there a lot of these older units out there? Replies via e-mail would be appreciated. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 14:53:57 -0500 From: Garrett.Wollman@UVM.EDU Subject: Inverse Paging Service? Most TCD readers will remember the recent discussions of how to get a computer to talk to a paging service switch, to send a message to a paging subscriber. I'm wondering if anybody has created the logical inverse of such a service. In particular, when people ask me for my phone number, I usually give out two (one at home, one at work), with the caveat that I am rarely ever available at either number. However, during the times when I am not available by a phone, I am almost always still reachable by electronic mail. I'd really like a service whereby I can give people a "pager" number, which they could call up and punch in a return phone number like usual, which would then get translated into an E-mail message sent to me. Does such a service exist? (Note that suggestions to buy equipment to "roll my own" are not useful; to do so is really not worth the hassle for me.) Garrett A. Wollman wollman@emba.uvm.edu uvm-gen!wollman UVM disagrees. [Moderator's Note: What you are asking is available as an alphanumeric pager. People using these get little one line messages, etc from the caller. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ken Zmyslo Subject: X.25 Over IP (Telematics and NCR Tower) Date: 10 Mar 93 14:44:50 GMT Organization: NCR Corporation - Dayton, OH USA This is a general query regarding X25, TCP/IP, UNIX machines (NCR Towers) and Telematics 2600s (NCR 5480s). Currently, I have a Tower 32/700 communicating via async to a NCR 5480 (Telematics) box. The 5480 provides the X.25 PAD function for communications. I had Host PAD and X.25 running on the Tower 32/700 but it was taking CPU time to 0% free, (free CPU time is now acceptable). It is my understanding that there is third party software for the 5480 (it does have the ELA and tpx software installed). I wanted to take the X.25 calls (coming in to the 5480) and send them over IP to my Tower 32/700. Has anyone been able to do this or had experience with this configuration? If you can help with this situation, I'd appreciate it. Possibly I can help solve a different problem that you've been having. Thanks, please send your reply to: Kenneth J. Zmyslo VoicePlus 622-1779 WIN Management Services (513) 445-1779 Ken.Zmyslo@wtcp.DaytonOH.NCR.COM ...!uunet!ncrcom!wtcp!kzmyslo ------------------------------ Subject: Come Here, Mr. Watson Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 10:15:08 EST From: John R. Levine Tomorrow [or by the time you print this, probably today], March 10, is the 117th anniversary of the first phone call from A. Graham Bell to Thomas A. Watson. It took place in Scollay Square, Boston, at a site now marked by a modest granite marker and a pair of pay phones. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 15:19:34 EDT From: Class 4I Gymnazium Praha 9 Subject: Information on USA Telephone System Wanted Organization: CSAV UTIA [Moderator's Note: May I call on any Digest readers who wish to do so to please answer this letter of inquiry I received. I am hoping there will be several responses. If they have storage space for Archives files or a way to receive the Digest via their school, I'll gladly add them to the mailing list. Do NOT send them the FAQ file; I mailed that out to them myself; nor do they need this issue of the Digest which has also been especially mailed to the school. Thanks to everyone who replies! :) PAT] -------------- Dear Mr. Townson, We are students from high school in Prague. We would like to get some information about telephone system in America. We want to talk to our telephone company in Czech Republic. We are looking for more telephones, improved service; because we believe American telephone service is better than here. How can it be better? Please write us detailed information about American telephone system. Write us soon because this information is important to us. Write us directly at our school computer address since we do not receive your journal. Vladimir Vojik Andrea Kurova Petra Zateckova Lucie Fleischmannova Maria Mejsnarova Sasha Jungwirth Linda Kosarova Eva Pavlikova Paul Schlitter Students of Class 4I, Gymnazium Praha 9 ------------------------------ Subject: 800 and 900 Service in Canada From: murphy%switchboard@CAM.ORG (murphy) Date: Wed, 10 Mar 93 23:48:58 EST Organization: Switchboard BBS - +1 514 334 7883 I only had a very small question that's been bugging me for a while now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S. from Canada? Just wondering. [Moderator's Note: 900 numbers, no. 800 numbers, maybe, depending on if the owner of the 800 number wants to receive international calls and has had the line configured to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: Bar-Ilan University Computing Center, Israel Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 11:25:03 IST From: Hank Nussbacher Subject: Pricing For MAN Access I am looking for places that already have MAN pricing in place. For example, what is the monthly charge for 10Mb/sec access? Does your PTT charge per gigabyte of traffic? What is the price for 34Mb/sec access? Any and all information would be of help. Thanks, Hank Nussbacher Israel ------------------------------ From: aar_osman@gsbvxb.uchicago.edu Subject: Needed: T1 Channel Equipment Recommendations Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 15:36:03 GMT I am going to be installing a T1 local loop at our site and need recommendation/caveats on equip: T1 channel bank, CSU/DSU, the whole works! Can someone help? I am not able to check this board as often as I would like to so replies send directly to me will be appreciated. Will be happy to summarize responses for the group. Osman ------------------------------ From: jsnyder@rock.concert.net (Joseph J Snyder -- Graphic Data Inc) Subject: Dialer Format Wanted Organization: CONCERT-CONNECT -- Public Access UNIX Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 15:39:12 GMT I am looking for the data transmission format used by security system dialers to talk to a central station. I believe that it is some kind of a pulse stream at very low (20 pulses/sec) rate, set up many years ago when phone lines were noisier and less reliable (?) than today. Also, does any one know of any dialers that use Touch-Tone as the data format (instead of pulses or modem)? Thanks in advance. Joe ------------------------------ From: Martin Egan Subject: Need Information on Fiber Optic Television Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 14:57:56 GMT Organization: University of Illinois I am doing research on the competition between the telcos and cable companies over the cable television market. If you have any general information, or if you have specific information on who may have the competitive edge, please post it. Thanks! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:41:56 -0800 From: rlm@indigo2.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: RFC on SLIP I want to hear from people in net.land who've used SLIP (especially if you've used it with Linux, assuming such a thing is currently possible). Specifically, I want to know how it stacks up as a file transfer protocol versus UUCP 'g', XMODEM, YMODEM, ZMODEM, etc. If I get enough interest, I will post a summary to this group. Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@indigo2.hac.com After June 25 : rlm@mcgort.com or rlm@surfcty.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #166 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27430; 11 Mar 93 5:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16989 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 02:58:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10407 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 02:58:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 02:58:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303110858.AA10407@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #167 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Mar 93 02:58:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 167 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson An Alarming Circuit ID Technique! (Dave Levenson) Conference: Integrating Voice, Video and Data (Matt Lucas) Wanted: Novatel PTR825 Programming Information (Mike Brand) 18kf Limit Measurement (Ken Hester) Local Phone Companies as Collection Agencies (Marc Kozam) Voice '93 BoF (Bill Cerny) Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity (John Kerns) Listening in via Call Waiting? (Wolfgang Rupprecht) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: An Alarming Circuit ID Technique! Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 04:27:54 GMT NJ Bell recently spent two weeks installing two private lines between my business and residence locations. The endpoints are actually about six miles apart, and are both served by the same central office. So what took them so long? Well, it got a little bit complicated ... the office is served by short copper loops from the nearby central office. The house is served by a SLC-96 system that uses fiber between the central office and the remote terminal, and then a few blocks of copper. The NJ Bell technician connected the copper loops to the network interface at my office. Then he connected the copper between the SLC remote terminal and the house. Another NJ Bell employee connected the copper loops from the office to the appropriate part of the SLC central office terminal to complete the job. The lines are called OSNA lines (in USOC-speak). They connect from station ports on the PBX at my office to a telephone set (actually, one of them connects to a modem) at my house. The SLC system provides a little bit of gain, and repeats loop supervision toward the PBX, and AC ringing toward the house. I picked up a phone in my house, and I heard dial tone from the PBX at the office. I dialed 9 and I heard central office dial tone. I called a friend. He said 'hello'. I said 'hi, John'. He said 'hello?' several more times, apparently unable to hear me. I raised my voice and spoke his name. He finally reacted. He could barely hear me when I shouted at him. I could hear him just fine. I dragged out my box of telecom tools. I placed a 1004 Hz tone at 0 dBm on the line at the house, and measured the level at the office. I swapped ends. From the office to the house, the via-net-loss was about 4.8 dB. From the house to the office, the VNL was almost 8 dB. No wonder John couldn't hear me. The end-to-end loss from my house to the office, through the PBX, and then out to the NJ Bell central office was about 18 dB. I called NJ Bell. Then sent the technician back. He said that he could replace the line cards in the SLC with the older type that allowed him to adjust the gain independently in each direction. He also brought some test gear with him, and confirmed my loss measurements. (The tariff says that OSNA lines will present a loss of 4.0 dB in each direction.) The older SLC cards require a double-width slot. Using them meant moving two other subscribers' circuit packs to different slots, to free up pairs of adjacent backplane slots to accomodate the older card. When he was done (it was late at night) he had the loss down to 4.0 dB in each direction. But he had cranked the gain up so high that the circuit was right on the verge of oscillation. Voices were loud enough, but the sound was so badly distorted that people didn't recognize my voice. The echo was terrible. The modem didn't even detect carrier, let along pass data. I reported trouble again. NJ Bell sent the technician back again, and he brought some of his friends. With a man at my house, another at my office, and a third in the hut that contained the remote terminal of the SLC system, they reduced the gain to the original design, and then sought to add gain at the central office, where the SLC was joined to copper. They got to this point at about 7:00pm, and the central office is unattended at that hour. A central office technician who doesn't normally work this area was dispatched. At about 8:00pm he got to the central office, and told the technician that someone had removed all of the identification from the SLC terminals at the office, and that he could not identify the system that served the OSNA lines. A conference call was set up (courtesy of my PBX) between the technician at the remote SLC location, the technician at my house, the technician at my office, and the technician at the central office. After trying unsuccessfully for some time to locate the central office end of the SLC, they came up with a plan ... The man at the remote SLC location pulled the master control card out of the SLC equipment bay serving the OSNA lines. (The conference call was disrupted by this process. Approximately 96 of my neighbors were probably cut off if they were on the phone at the time.) The man at the central office got some alarms and lots of red lights, but he learned what SLC system we were trying to use! Well, now the lines work as tariffed. I have voice and data service between my house and my office. And except for the readers of this article, nobody will ever know ... Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 [Moderator's Note: Ah, but I have lots of good NJB people reading this Digest and they may recognize themselves or a co-worker! :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 02:19:29 -0500 From: matt lucas Subject: Conference: Integrating Voice, Video and Data A TeleStrategies Conference: INTEGRATING VOICE, VIDEO AND DATA Opportunities in Multimedia for Computer and Communications Companies April 29-30, 1993 Washington, DC APRIL 29, 1993 8:30 - 9:00 Registration 9:00 - 10:15 MARKET ASSESSMENT AND OVERVIEW Market size, market drivers and opportunities for revenues today and in the future will be covered. The discussion will also include: applications and services business users are demanding; business alliances being formed and applications being created; how vendors and users should position themselves for multimedia services; case studies of where integrated voice, video and data communications have succeeded and/or failed and why; integration strategies; structured data issues; standards and compatibility; and the significance of adjacent technologies associated with multimedia (groupware, objects, languages). Natasha Kroll, Vice President & Service Director Advanced Applications Development Strategies, META Group Steve Reynolds, Director, Interactive Media Services Link Resources 10:15 - 10:45 Coffee Break 10:45 - 12:30 COMPUTER INDUSTRY EFFORTS IN MULTIMEDIA Computer industry representatives will discuss their current efforts to bring integrated voice, video and data applications to the market. The role of network design, Pentium chips, new software programs, CD-ROM, groupware, networked multimedia and compresssion, ATM/SONET and other technologies will be assessed. The relationship between the computer and telecommunications industries and how it will influence the development of multimedia communications will also be covered. Compatibility issues and standards bodies will be discussed. What standards are most likely to be adopted in order to bring multimedia applications to the market more quickly? Standards such as H.261, H.243, DVI, MTP and the role of JPEG and MPEG will be assessed. Douglas Ehrenreich, Marketing Manager, Telcommunications Industry Sun Microsystems Daniel Harple, Jr., President, InSoft, Inc. Ken Severson, Section Manager, Multimedia Technology Laboratory, Hewlett-Packard Company Representative, IBM Corporation 12:30 - 1:45 Hosted Lunch 1:45 - 3:30 TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS' PERSPECTIVES The speakers will discuss their activities in support of multimedia communications. Compression technologies, video conferencing, the role of fiber optics, and the use of SMDS, frame relay and ATM/SONET for multimedia communications will be discussed. What are the network capabilities for multimedia now? What's the process to turn multimedia applications into service offerings? In a multimedia environment, how will landline services be coordinated with wireless services? What are the benefits of industry alliances? What types of multimedia services are users requesting? When do the carriers expect acceptable revenue streams from multimedia offerings? What services are operational now and likely to be seen in the future? Dennis Jennings, Director of Broadband Market Analysis Bellcore John Strickland, Director, Broadband Technology U S WEST Advanced Communications Services Richard Neugass, Product Manager, Video Conferencing MCI Telecommunications, Inc. Steve Tabaska, Director, Systems & Hardware Development Wiltel John McMenamin, Associate Director, Enterprise Services, Architecture & Design, New York Telephone 3:30 - 4:00 Coffee Break 4:00 - 5:15 LANs AND MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS WANs. They will also highlight the drivers behind store-and-forward and live video and other multimedia applications. Additional subject matter includes: economic breakpoints of desktop video and other applications; stored video applications such as training and video databases; and how important standards and compatibility issues are. More importantly, they will discuss how the successful implementation of multimedia communications can improve response time and cut costs and discuss the applications they expect from the computer and communications companies. Sam Shuler, Communications Strategy Manager Texas Instruments Speaker to be Announced For complete information and registration call TeleStrategies at 703-734-7050. ------------------------------ Subject: Wanted: Novatel PTR825 Programming Information From: mike@cronos.mcs.com (Mike Brand) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:15:15 CST Organization: The Keeper of Time BBS +1 708 389 1369 I have a Novatel PTR825 Portable Cellular Phone and I am looking for the programming information. I would appreciate any infomation I could get. Please send directly to me, and I will summarize if enough people are interested. Thanks, Mike Brand - mike@cronos.mcs.com The Keeper of Time BBS 1 708 389 1369 ------------------------------ From: khester@cinpmx.attmail.com Date: 11 Mar 93 06:25:43 GMT Subject: 18kf Limit Measurement In article goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > In article , exugsr@exu.ericsson.se > (Govindan Raghavan, XT-DL) writes: > The ANSI Standard BRI (2B1Q code) goes 18,000 feet. > Repeaters do exist. However, they cost something over a thousand > dollars apiece right now, so the telephone comapnies aren't exactly > beating down a path to the vendors' doors. Thus if you don't live > within 18 kf of an ISDN line termination (CO or neighborhood mux, > like a SLC-96, which handles ISDN), you're probably "SOL". > PRI (T1) only goes 6000 feet, so they're used to repeaters. Besides, > it's factored into the price. Does this 18,000 ft measurement start at the CO or the neighborhood mux (SLC-96, etc.)? If the neighborhood mux is within the 18kf limit, are you considered within the limit? The reason I ask is I can see situations where the telco could interpret the tariff to their advantage even if you are technically within the limit. The tariffs are usually vague about things like this and telcos usually will do what they think they can get away with and b.s. the customer with jargon when challenged. In article gary.w.sanders@att.com (Gary W. Sanders) writes: > Ohio Bell's ISDN request was approved on Jan 20 by the PUCO (Ohio). > In it they have a two tier pricing schedule, under 18kft and over > 18kft. If you're over 18Kft they bring in a T1 to your location and > split out to the ISDN interface onsite. > I am still waiting to find out what the pricing is really going to > be. Will Ohio Bell offer reasonable priced ISDN service and sell a lot > of price it out of site and sell a few? March 9 is the offical roll > out date. My home is served by Ohio Bell (but I work in Cincinnati Bell-land) and I am waiting to hear if they are going to gig me for a distance charge for my residential BRI. Judging from my conversations with Ohio Bell, I am the first residential customer (guinea pig) of their new ISDN Direct Service. The official rollout *IS* March 9th. Here is an incomplete list of per line charges (I left out the 60 Month rates): PIPE: MO-MO 12MO 36MO Direct Line-Res 12.00 11.75 11.50 Direct Line-NonRes 12.00 11.75 11.50 CO Termination-Custom 7.10 7.10 7.10 CO Termination- NI-1 7.10 7.10 7.10 Distance Charge >18KF 26.00 26.10 26.10 EUCL - Single Pipe 3.50 3.50 3.50 EUCL - Multi Pipe 4.15 4.15 4.15 BEARER SERVICES: CSV, per B channel 3.00 2.60 2.60 Addt'l Call Appear ea. 2.00 2.00 2.00 Secondary DN 2.00 2.00 2.00 CSD, per B channel 8.00 7.80 7.60 Alt. CSV/CSD, per B 9.00 8.80 8.60 PSD, per B channel 85.00 80.00 75.00 PSD, D channel 6.50 6.30 6.10 NON-RECURRING CHARGES: PIPE: CO Termination - Custom 50.00 CO Termination - NI-1 50.00 Svc. Establishment Charge-Res. 50.00 Svc. Establishment Charge-Bus. 49.35 BEARER SERVICES: CSV, per B channel 15.00 Addt'l Call Appear ea. 6.00 Secondary DN 6.00 CSD, per B channel 15.00 Alt. CSV/CSD, per B 15.00 PSD, per B channel 100.00 PSD, D channel 15.50 I am sure there are some minor errors in the above list, all I have is a blurred fax. I do not speak for Ohio Bell or Ameritech, only for myself. Ken Hester, Telcom Consultant Internet: khester@cinpmx.attmail.com Computer Sciences Corporation Voice: +1 513 768 4440 Cincinnati, OH Fax: +1 513 768 4446 ------------------------------ From: mlksoft!kozam@cs.UMD.EDU Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:24:42 EST Subject: Local Phone Companies as Collection Agencies Local phone companies are now in the collection agency business. When you use AT&T or dial a 1-900 number, the charges (and errors) pop up on your local phone bill. Have a billing dispute? Your local company may (albeit ilegally) threaten to discontinue your service. In C&P territory, the bottom of every bill states that "This portion of your bill is provided as a service to AT&T. There is no connection between C&P and AT&T." If there is NO connection between C&P and AT&T, then what grounds do they have to discontinue your service as long as the local portion is paid in full? Sounds like a connection to me. At one point, a local phone company supervisor explained that C&P telephone BUYS AT&T's accounts receivable. This means that AT&T has been paid directly by C&P. Since AT&T has the cash, they have no incentive to resolve billing disputes. C&P telephone has an incentive to press for payment, and they have the stick (e.g. cancel your phone service) to coerce payment. And yes, I know the legal rights with regard to bills in dispute. But I also know the reality that resolving billing disputes is going to be a double problem -- you must first keep your local phone company from disconnecting your service, while at the same time getting the information provider or long-distance company to correct their error. It seems that being a collection agency is an inappropriate activity for a public utility. Otherwise, perhaps there could be interesting arrangements between, say, a gasoline station and the electric company. Car repair bill in dispute? Get your lights turned off. The incident that spawned this posting is long over. It involved six identical bills for a long distance phone call. Six billing lines for the same time and phone number. Random check showed duplicate and triplicate entries going back at least six months. C&P says call AT&T. AT&T says OK, we'll credit you for the five duplicates. I say "but there are LOTS of these errors going back at least months -- it's your problem, you audit my account, find them, fix them." AT&T replies, "OK, we'll look into it." I estimate the overcharges and deduct that from my C&P bill. Seems that the problem really isn't in AT&T's software -- it is in C&P's billing software. AT&T keeps closing the claim, never performs the audit, I reopen, start cycle again. C&P says "pay or else". I finally wound up paying since the amount wasn't worth another second of my time or energy. A few other people scrutinized their past bills and also saw the overcharges, so it wasn't just me. The error involved the way C&P telephone handled AT&T Reach Out America charges. Calls that spanned 10PM (e.g. evening and ROA multirate) resulted in duplicates. This occurred between June 1992 and March 1993. C&P and AT&T were aware of the billing problem but never made any effort to identify and reimburse customers who had been billed in error. And this is a company that is entrusted with a public monopoly! Marc Kozam UUCP: {media,mimsy}!mlksoft!kozam Internet: mlksoft!kozam@cs.umd.edu ------------------------------ From: bill@toto.info.com Subject: Voice '93 BoF Organization: Sun, Surf 'n Sushi, San Diego, CA Date: 11 Mar 93 06:58:12 GMT Voice '93 is coming to San Diego March 30 - April 1. I've received a lot of e-mail already, so here's the public announcement: There will be a Voice '93 Bof held at Dick's Last Resort in San Diego after the exhibition hall closes on Tuesday March 30th. We'll be easy to find, just look for the table with the ash Comdial 2500 set in the middle. Dick's is across Harbor Blvd. from the San Diego Convention Center. Enter from the 300 block of either 3rd or 4th Streets, in the heart of the historic Gaslamp Quarter. Contrary to rumor, John Higdon wil not be present signing autographs and mooing unmoderated remarks on GTE. ;-) Bill Cerny 10288-0-700-FON-BILL ------------------------------ From: jon@sd.cadence.com (John Kerns) Subject: Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity Organization: Cadence Design Systems, San Diego Center Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 18:24:42 GMT If anyone has information on connecting a teletype (TTD) for the hearing- impaired to a PC through a modem over phone lines, it would be much appreciated. Since I'm posting this on behalf of someone else, I don't have all the particulars, such as whether data needs to be transmitted one-way or both ways. Thanks for the help. John W. Kerns Cadence Design Systems jon@autosys.com San Diego R&D {uunet|ncr-sd}!asihub!jon ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 22:53:04 -0800 From: Wolfgang Rupprecht Subject: Listening in via Call Waiting? Organization: Wolfgang S. Rupprecht Computer Consulting, Fremont CA This is something I found on rec.humor. Does this work? wolfgang Another Tap So, you have an enemy who talks behind your back, eh? Or, maybe you just would like to "listen" in on your friend's conversations? Well, if you have two phone lines and call waiting on one of them, you are in luck. (Only one problem: your friend must also have call waiting!) Procedure: [1] Call up your friend with the phone you want to listen with. When he answers call waiting (he's already on the phone, and you are the 2nd caller), then you either sit there or say: sorry, I have the wrong number. [2] Next, you wait until he goes back to the other line (puts you on hold). [3] Then, pick up your other line and call -> YOUR <- call waiting. [4] Answer call waiting. [5] Then go back to him. (Answer, and then click back. Click -> 2 <- times, answer, and go back..) [6] Hang up your second line. [7] You are now on the line! [8] Listen and be Q U I E T ! He can hear you! Techniques I use to prevent noise or confusion: If you have call forwarding, turn it on and forward calls somewhere before you start listening. If a call comes through on your call waiting circuit, the people talking (your buddie and his pal) will not hear anything, but after you answer call waiting and come back, they will hear the other call hang up (two clicks). If you don't have call forwarding, I suggest you get it if you are going to make a habit of this, because it will become a major pain in the ass. When your call waiting rings, you are removed from the "listening" conversation and placed back on his hold circuit. In order to get back on, you must answer the phone and wait for your party (when you answer the phone, tell the guy you are in a hurry and you have to go or you'll call him back later or something) to hang up. When he or she hangs up, you will be back on the conversation. Then, one of your pals will say: What was that? (because of the clicks) ... so, try to use call forwarding if you can. Remember: Have fun, and don't abuse it. I am not sure about it, because I just discovered it. It is illegal (what isn't these days?) because it is "invading privacy". I don't know if the phone company just did not realize there was a flaw in it, or that it was planned for line testing. I am not sure. Have fun! [Moderator's Note: Two observations: If you put your 'listening phone' on call forwarding before you start this little gag, *how* do you get through to that phone from your second line in order to activate the call waiting on it which is so integral to your scheme? Maybe you meant one should use *70 once the second call is up so as to prevent any interupption. While this may *possibly* work between two calls on the same malfunctioning switch (I've never seen or heard of such a thing before), it certainly would not work when the caller and callee were in different offices; I don't think it works that way at all. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #167 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17878; 11 Mar 93 14:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09066 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:43:32 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29229 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:43:07 -0600 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:43:07 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303111743.AA29229@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #168 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:43:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 168 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Archives and the World-Wide Web (Frederick Roeber) Rural Network Setup (Steven Shulman) CT2 Digital Mobile Phones in Brisbane (Tom Worthington) IS-41 Roaming Question (John McHarry) AT&T Billing Practices --> Followup (Christopher Wolf) What is Telecom Gold? (Ted Koppel) Call Forward Don't Answer/Busy Line and Call Waiting (Mark Baker) Number Replacement (Vance Shipley) Public Service Usage for 900 Numbers (Joe Wiesenfeld) ATM and SS7 (Martin B. Weiss) Australia Privacy Document (Dave Leibold) Bell Canada Further Restricts Payphone Card Calling (Dave Leibold) Another Quiet Evening at Home (John Higdon) Bomb Scare (1970s) Forgot Area Code (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roeber@vxcrna.cern.ch Subject: Telecom Archives and the World-Wide Web Reply-To: roeber@cern.ch Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:40:05 GMT I'd like to mention to everybody that the Telecom Archives are available on the World-Wide Web, a global hypertext network. From the standard "Information by Subject" page, go to "Computing" and then "telecom archive." Currently, the archive structure seen is merely the directory structure. However, if people submit documents in html (hypertext markup language), the document structure will be visible. This might be useful for a country code/city code list, for example, or for files that contain references to other information, either in the archive or elsewhere on the net. If you are not familiar with the WWW, but would like to explore, I would recommend the "xmosaic" X-windows web browser available by anon ftp from ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu under Web/xmosaic. If you use the web much at all you'll probably want to set up your own home page, but to start, try the CERN home page (under the "Documents" menubar item). Its "other subjects" entry is the "information by subject" mentioned above. If you have image viewing software (like xv), you might be interested in "Information by Subject" --> "Literature & Art" --> "Renaissance Culture / Vatican exhibit." This set of text files and jpeg images is an "electronic exhibition" from the Library of Congress. Xmosaic will happily plug into other viewing software, and this makes walking through the exhibition very easy. Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research e-mail: roeber@cern.ch or roeber@caltech.edu | work: +41 22 767 31 80 r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: +33 50 20 82 99 [Moderator's Note: My thanks to Mr. Roeber for bringing this to our attention. The Archives (available using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu) includes all the back issues (12 years worth!) of TELECOM Digest and it is gradually becoming more and more accessible and easier to use thanks to the various programs like Web, Gopher and others now avail- able. And of course, our dialup sites have helped a lot also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shulman@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (Steven Shulman) Subject: Rural Network Setup Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads). Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 10:16:50 GMT I'm required to evaluate the feasibility of setting up a rural network using cellular telephony as an honours project. The rural location is not financially over-endowed and I was wondering if anyone had design ideas on how to minimise the cost (and if so what the cost could be) of setting up a rural network like this using GSM and cellular telephony. Please mail me or reply to the NET with any ideas. Thanks, Steve ------------------------------ From: tomw@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Tom Worthington) Subject: CT2 Digital Mobile Phones in Brisbane Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 15:17:55 GMT Telecom Australia News Release MEDIA INFORMATION Tuesday 2 March 1993 TALKABOUT - WORLD'S BEST ANNOUNCED FOR BRISBANE Telecom Talkabout, one of the world's most advanced personal communication services, will make it's Australian debut in Brisbane later this month, announced Telecom Australia today (Tuesday 2 March). Mr Albert Sommer, National Manager for Talkabout Services Dyranda Hortle or Chadd McLisky Telecom Australia Tel: 07 3691055 Tel: 03 2521500 * Talkabout is a registered trademark of Telecom Australia ATTACHMENT A: HOW TALKABOUT WORKS: TALKABOUT is a personal communications service which works with battery-powered, compact and lightweight high-quality personal telephones. To operate it in and around the office and home, a small private base station is connected to the existing telephone installation on the premises and typically would be placed discreetly on a desk or table. Users are freed from their work station or the fixed telephone at home, able to move around as they continue their conversations. For public calls, there is a network of about 600 highly-visible base stations found throughout the Brisbane metropolitan area. Host businesses include major shopping centres, restaurants, hotels, railway stations, fast food outlets, supermarkets, service stations and post offices. They are also located on main shopping streets and major roads. The personal telephones can bc used up to a range of 100 metes away from the base station on which particular calls are registered. The three pencil-torch-sized batteries which power the personal telephones provide up to 10 hours of continuous communications, rechargeable battery packs are also available . Experience overseas suggests the average duration of calls on this type of service is about two minutes. Telecom Australia, with it's network partner, GEC Plessey Telecommunictions (GPI), enhanced overseas technology to develop a world first with Talkabout's ability to enable the user to make and receive calls when out and about. It achieved this by working closely with the service's major equipment manufacturers. Telecom's industry partners are GEC Plessey Telecommunications (GPT), a world leder in public and business communication systems; and the giant US specialist supplier of radio equipment, systems, components and services, Motorola. Talkabout is a personal communications service that meets owing consumer demand for portable and flexible services that can be affordably used in all the places that people want to use the phones most often. That is the office, the home, and out and about at places of entertainment and work. Talkabout compliments Telecom's existing cellular mobile services which provides for high out and about mobility needs which justifies the associated costs. ATrACHMENT B: TALKABOUT PACKAGES AND PRICES: TELECOM Australia will make Talkabout available in a range of packages, with options to suit businesses and individuals, such as managers and supervisors, sales and service representatives, the self-employed and others working from their homes, for example, and domestic users. The personal telephone costs $499 while options include a private base station, battery re-charger, voice-mail facility for taking messages and communications to and from the user. Talkabout's basic package of the personal telephone is especially suited to people who are consistently out and about. They can respond to a message immediately wherever they see a Talkabout sign. Talkabout Priority teams the personal telephone with a pager for $699, while Talkabout Plus, at $999, includes the personal telephone, a private base stations and a battery re-charger. A special introductory offer, available until June 30 1993, includes free connection to the Telecom Talkabout network, as well as 60 minutes of regional peak hour calls free in the first month of use. Around the office and home, the personal telephones are an extension of existing telephone installations rather than an additional service, so calls through private base stations cost the same as those made on a conventional telephone and are included on the usual Telecom account number for that telephone. A $10 monthly subscription is paid for the use of the public network. Regional calls made while out and about cost 29 cents a minute and all out and about calls are recorded on a separate account. On this network, 50 minutes of regional peak-hour calls everY month will cost less than $15. The subscription fee varies according to the communications needs of the user. Talkabout Access, for example, enables the user to receiYe calls or messages when they are out and about. When the personal telephone is registered on a base station, calls to the user's personal number will be directed to them. At other times this option automatically stores messages to which access can be gained whenever it suits the user. Access costs $8 a month. *Telecom Talkabout, Talkabout Access, Talkabout Priority, Talkabout Plus are registered trademarks of Telecom Australia ------------- Posted as a community service by Tom Worthington, Director of the Community Affairs Board, Australian Computer Society Incorporated. ------------------------------ From: mcharry@freedom.cwc.com (McHarry) Subject: IS-41 Roaming Question Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 8:52:05 EST Reply-To: mcharry@freedom.cwc.com The IS-41 recommendation is emerging as a major way cellular radiotelephone systems interconnect to handle roamers. This allows user profiles to be sent from the home system to the visited system over an SS7 network. I have a small question: Is the subscriber's primary interexchange carrier (PIC) information sent to the visited system, and does it honor that selection? Related to that, does anyone know which cellular systems lack Equal Access? I believe any system in which an RBOC holds an interest must implement Equal Access, but that leaves many others, including (I think) McCaw systems that have the option of making other arrangements. John McHarry (mcharry@freedom.otra.com) ------------------------------ From: cmwolf@mtu.edu (CHRISTOPHER WOLF) Subject: AT&T Billing Practices --> Followup Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 09:58:41 -0500 (EST) This is a follow-up to a post I made several weeks ago about AT&T's Acus service, and billing problems with the system. Seems that after I made the post here, it someone got back to the AT&T Public Relations Department, and they spent my entire vacation trying to reach me to make sure all my questions had been satisfactorily answered. Seems that while the bill may say that I will be charged more than 10%, the computer will actually only charge 10% when it actually adds it on. In other words, it works out "in the end". Queries as to why the printed warning amount is incorrect were completely misunderstood ("...But sir, it does add the right amount!" "Why does it print the wrong amount, then?" "...But sir, it does add the right amount!" "But, why doesn't it print the right amount?" "..But sir..." etc etc ). So i gave up. Which is probably what they wanted. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, they asked me several times during the conversation if I would publish a "correction" to my previous post. I assume I am supposed to correct the fact that it will all work out "in the end", as they have not fixed one of the original problems I complained about, namely, the computer printing wrong amounts on the warning. Oh! The power of E-Mail. Christopher Wolf (cmwolf@mtu.edu) ------------------------------ From: tkoppel@cassandra.cair.du.edu (Ted Koppel) Subject: What is Telecom Gold? Organization: CARL Systems Inc, Denver, Colo. Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 15:28:17 GMT I have in front of me a business card from a gentleman in Great Britain. It has all of the normal stuff: Name Title, Department Address City Telephone # Telex # Fax # and then a line that says: Telecom Gold followed by an alphanumeric string in the format: NN:aaannn (where a=alpha and n=numeric) What is it? Ted Koppel -- ted@carl.org or tkoppel@cassandra.cair.du.edu ------------------------------ From: mcb@ihlpl.att.com Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 09:53 CST Subject: Call Forward Don't Answer/Busy Line and Call Waiting There have been a couple of mentions lately about the interactions (or lack thereof) between the Call Forward Don't Answer (CFDA) and Call Forward Busy Line (CFBL) features and the Call Waiting (CWT) feature. I thought I'd try to clear things up. Keep in mind this discussion applies to 1A ESS(tm) and 5ESS(r) Switching Systems. I can't speak for other vendors. Actually, I'm not sure I can speak for AT&T either, but here goes ... Until just recently (within the last year or so), if you had the CFDA and/or CFBL features and CWT on the same line, CFDA would only forward if you did not answer and were not being call waited. In other words, if you did not answer a second call which call waited you, the second call would not forward. CFBL would not do anything as CWT had precedence. Within the last year, some but not all RBOCs have purchased a feature called Call Forward after Call Wait. With this capability active in your central office the features now interact differently. If you do not answer a second call which call waited you, the second call will be forwarded to your CFDA number. If you are already being call waited by a second call or can not be call waited (e.g. your phone is ringing), new calls will be forwarded to your CFBL number. This is much more useful for forwarding to a voice mail service. I hope this helps. Mark Baker - AT&T Network Systems ------------------------------ From: Vance Shipley Subject: Number Replacement Organization: Xenitec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 08:22:07 GMT I spoke to someone at Bell Canada today about "Number Replacement". This is apparently a new service they can apply to your line which will allow outgoing CLID from your lines to show a more appropriate number. For example I have two lines with equiavalency at home; 555-1234 hunts to 555-1235. I would have Number Replacement on the second line set to 555-1234. Thus when someone used automatic call back, etc on a call placed from my second line they would ring in on my first and consequently take advantage of the fact that I have two lines. Good News: No monthly charge. Bad News: An $18.75 service charge applies. :( Vance Shipley, vances@xenitec.on.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu 11 Mar 1993 13:15:33 -0500 From: jwiesenf@dg-webo.webo.dg.com (Joe Wiesenfeld) Subject: Public Service Usage for 900 Numbers In a recent reply, the Moderator noted: > the City of Chicago is considering a 900 number with no charge > attached to calling it to be used for announcements to the citizens on > a mass-calling basis. That night be a very good idea for the public > transit system also. PAT] I would propose that the use of 900 numbers for this type of public service is a poor choice. Those of us who block 900 service would not be able to access the public service messages. Perhaps a new category of phone service should be created. ------------------------------ From: mbw+@pitt.edu (Martin B Weiss) Subject: ATM and SS7 Date: 11 Mar 93 13:27:36 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh Many of the IXC's and LEC's are making significant investments in SS7 to provide new services and improved call setup time, etc. As I understand it, ATM defines a Virtual Circuit setup procedure as well. How are SS7 and ATM services supposed to interact? If the SS7 network has to be scrapped, how will IN services be offered? Martin Weiss Telecommunications Program, University of Pittsburgh Internet: mbw@pitt.edu BITNET: mbw@pittvms ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:46:36 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Australia Privacy Document I received a document regarding telecom privacy issues in Australia, namely the one mentioned by Arthur Marsh a while ago in the Digest. At present, it is available through the Fidonet under the file name AUSTPRIV.ARJ which Fido nodes can file request here at 1:250/730. Size of package is 94.5k. The same contents are also available in the LHA compression by requesting AUSTPRIV.LZH instead of .ARJ when making the file request. The size came out larger at approximately 110k, however. Thanx to Arthur Marsh for sending this file my way. I don't know when I'll be able to submit it for the TELECOM Archives, but this is a start. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 22:15:26 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: Bell Canada Further Restricts Payphone Card Calling [from Bell News (Bell Canada, Bell Ontario division) 22 Feb 93] Payphone fraud prompts more restrictions on overseas calling. A continuing problem with payphone fraud to some overseas countries, has prompted Bell to restrict calling card, credit card, or cash calls from Millennium payphones in Bell Canada territory to China, Pakistan, or Bangladesh. The restriction became effective the weekend of February 13, and applies to all Canadian, American and international calling cards. Also affected are Visa, Mastercard, American Express and enRoute credit cards. Investigators continue to indicate that Bell is losing money from calling card and recently credit card fraud. Current figures show that a significant and growing amount of the payphone fraud in Ontario and Quebec to China, Pakistan and Bangladesh was with the use of stolen or counterfeit credit cards. Over the past year, Bell has introduced a number of measures to deal with the growing payphone fraud problem, including restricting the use of calling cards from payphones to overseas destinations, and blocking calling card calls from payphones or cellular phones to all 809-area (Caribbean) countries. Those customers, including consulates, who are frequent callers to these three countries, are being notified by letter explaining the situation and offering dialing options. [end of article; content is that of Bell News] Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 03:07 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Another Quiet Evening at Home Organization: Green Hills and Cows Once again, the lack of Caller-ID has enabled me to spend a quiet, productive evening at home. Since I could not screen out the one call I was avoiding (from a client for whom I had no answer yet), I just answered no calls. I have, in essence, two numbers for talking: a published, public line and a more private line for good clients, friends, and associates. The first line is always answered by a machine; the second is never answered except by me. One evening last week, I just turned the bell off. Selective call block (which features a recording that says, in essence, "the party you are calling does not want to talk to you...",) is not horribly subtle. Screening with a machine on a line that is not intended to be machine-answered does not do the trick. No, folks, Caller-ID would have returned the use of my phone to me this evening as nothing else would have. Oh, well, the work needed to be done anyway and I did not waste my time talking on the phone. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:32:27 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Bomb Scare (1970s) Forgot Area Code In the 1970s (middle to late?) there was a case I saw in a newspaper (Wilmington, Del.) where an attempted bomb-scare call to a building in New York City was received at a Cedar Grove, NJ service station. Its attendant replied "You've reached a service station in New Jersey. What am I supposed to do?" and the line went dead. Police theorized that the caller was in New Jersey and forgot to dial the NYC area code. (Notice the use of "forgot to dial"; I am warning you NOT to say "should have dialed", because out of context it could be inter- preted to mean that the call should have been placed!) I think a good guess for the phone prefix for the intended and actual reception of the call is 239. At that time, there would be no N0X/N1X prefixes (except in 213 in California), and no area codes 908,718,917. Whether the call was direct-dial, cash from a pay phone, or 0+ (and assuming the call did indeed start in 201), you would only have to insert area code 212 to distinguish between a call within 201 and a call to NYC. [Moderator's Note: Ah yes, bomb threats and the early seventies Vietnam era. It got to the point we were getting 'em once a month at the credit card billing office in those days. The callers always claimed to be Weathermen or some other radical group. The background Muzak would stop and a voice on the speaker in each office would say "It is necessary for all employees to leave the building at this time. Please leave immediatly and wait outside until instructed to return." All the chickens which had been roosting at their desk-nests would flutter and cackle and carry-on as they flooded down the stairwells and out onto Canal Street along with their fellow nesters from the Social Security Administration's back-office on the 11th floor, for whom I think the bomb threats were intended most of the time. A half-dozen of us (our lives were not as valuable, perhaps?) would always be called and told to report to the phone room and work the switchboard for the duration. Kids in school call in bomb threats on warm spring days; so do office workers, believe me. A couple of ours were inside jobs. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #168 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20547; 11 Mar 93 15:35 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01723 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 12:35:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24994 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 12:35:01 -0600 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 12:35:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303111835.AA24994@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #169 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:35:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 169 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson "457 Channels and Nothin' on..." (Paul Robinson) Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format (W. J. G. Overington) CLID vs ANI in California (Laurence Chiu) Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Craig Moynihan) Internet Access From Home (Chris Norley) DigitalLink DL551VX <-> Canoga 2240 (Mark Scannapieco) Need Card For Speech-Out and DTMF-In, Preferably For PC (Laird Broadfield) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 10:36:01 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: "457 Channels and Nothin' on..." Back during November on the cartoon show "Tiny Toons" they did a parody of television in general, and Cable TV in particular, with an episode about a cable system which had 400 channels. When I was watching it, I was laughing about such a silly thing because it was so obviously ridiculous. They may have the last laugh after all. There is a new system for Cable-TV coming out which will offer over 500 channels. It looks like Bruce Springsteen underestimated capacity in the song whose name is misquoted above. More details later as soon as I can find out some information about it. But someone had better tell the local stations and the TV networks to get their act together and make better programs or they are going to be destroyed by this type of development. Correction: they will not 'be destroyed'; they will have committed mass suicide. Broadcast television is dying from its lack of quality in writing, script development and idea content. And its anathema to taking risks and making hard choices over carrying material some fringe group might not like or be opposed to. A lot of material appearing on Cable Television is boring or uninteresting; it has been that way because of the large capacity of most systems that can carry 40 channels or more, that you can't get a large part of the audience when they can choose from 39 competitors. Cable networks know they have to work with a fractional audience; that's why a large number are using older material from shows which were cancelled or have been off for a while; these shows often had some good writing and ideas, and because they've already had a broadcast run, are available much cheaper than equivalent material (if it was even available.) A subset of 'Gresham's Law' (Bad money drives good money out of circulation) has come into effect in the broadcast industry: Bad (and cheap) television drives good (and expensive) television off the air. One need only look at the kind of garbage that makes the top 10 broadcast shows to know that there is a famine of ideas in network television. "Hill Street Blues", at the height of its effort, was costing a million dollars an episode to make. For that kind of money, no cable network could come close to afford to make a show like that. And the level of audience needed to support that kind of cost can only be done by a Broadcast network. Broadcast television has the money and the audience to put on shows that require a larger audience to be profitable to do so. But what has been happening has been the constant 'eating the seed corn' in which shows are being pushed out into broadcast where they have to be instant, massive hits or are cancelled within *weeks*. Some of the best television programs on took two or more *years* to build an audience: Hill Street Blues, 60 Minutes, Family Ties, Cosby, Cheers, and others. You can't build up a clientele who wants to come in for good material when you keep changing the menu. Also, I hear complaints about good shows being 'poisoned' because the good content of some shows were damaged by 'too many cooks spoling the broth.' (The usual comment around my house I hear is 'They destroyed that show, I want my "old Torkelsons" back'). A clear and obvious example of where quality will destroy lack of quality, can be compared in the recent syndication of the new "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" and the cancelled CBS show "Space Rangers". I only watched two episodes of each, and while I thought that both shows were valid expressions of science fiction, comparing the two shows production values and quality of content was like looking at the difference between AT&T Long distance and the Brazillian Telephone Company, which is probably the only system worthy of the moniker, "Worse than GTE." So what has happened: since there's no guarantee a TV show will be allowed enough time to build an audience, there is no risk taking because the stakes are too high and the chance of failure is virtually certain. So what do we end up with: documentaries, talk shows and amateur video -- all of which cost next to nothing to make, take almost no brains to write scripts for, and provide no significant content. (Those who think "U.S. Best Snuff Video" represents a good use of television should think twice.) Next is the issue of cost. In the past, a company would make a TV show pilot for a small amount of money; if the pilot was successful, the network would pay some, but not all, of the cost of the production of the series, and the company making the show would gamble on it staying on long enough for them to be able to put it in syndication and make money off of it from that. But no more; the constant demand for 'instant success' means that no one is going to seriously be willing to absorb the cost of production on a wghow that they know will have almost no chance of succeeding; the networks will end up having to fully fund, plus profit, the cost of these shows from the beginning. Otherwise the shows they will be able to obtain will be reduced even further, as only large companies with huge, deep pockets will be able to afford to make new programs. This may even cause a scandal if it comes out that some Japanese companies end up financing some of these show ventures, as almost started over the issue of a group of Japanese investors who wanted to purchase the remainder of the Seattle baseball team. Another problem is the continual attempts to do something or put on a show that you have been unable to do. Nobody can be all things to all people. The National Broadcasting Company has tried at least 23 times to make a news analysis program like "20/20" or "60 Minutes" that would be successful, and has failed miserably in every case. It may just not be possible in that culture to do this. Jack Welch should try and save General Electric some money: order NBC to not attempt any more news analysis programs. Which brings up another issue, that because of their despiration to do something that they've been unable to accomplish, has lead them to commit very serious breaches of ethics, let alone honesty and integrity. (This would be on the order of Pat Townson, the Moderator, telling how people used to have problems with AT&T's billing until they switched to the Orange Card, then we discover the commentary was all faked. [Note that this is an example; I believe Mr. Townson has a higher level of ethical conduct than some of the people working for NBC]). The people who run these systems should be thinking long term. Sure, you can make money running cheap videos, talk shows or any of the other things that local and network stations are doing. But so can their competitors in Cable, and since a cable channel carried nationally or regionally on multiple systems could potentially have a wider audience than any single broadcast station, local stations that fall into this are risking their market share to someone else who can provide the same thing, and perhaps do better. (If there are 12 restaurants on one block all offering the identical thing, and one which is offering something different, the one which is different has the potential to steal customers who are bored of everyone else. But if they run a filthy counter and slovenly help, people will go back to the other places.) UPS washes its trucks every day, in order to show a professional appearance. They do deliver packages on time, which is the main issue: but the 'spotless trucks' and 'spotless drivers' inform people -- who may not yet be customers -- of how efficient their operation is. Broadcast television has the capacity to make more money than cable networks because of its larger available audience, and its ability to reach people who cannot afford or will not purchase Cable TV, which means it can sometimes target people which are unreachable by other means. Note that more people get their knowledge of the world's situation from the evening news than from anything else, including magazines, newspapers, cable or radio. This makes broadcast, and network television, one of the last major mass communications methods which is able to reach a significant segment of the public. The telephone industry shows us the whole thing in a nutshell: since the competitors to AT&T cannot compete on quality, the *only* thing they can compete on is price. With broadcast television dropping quality, they have nothing to make people watch them in place of virtually identical material on cable or on other broadcast stations. (Someone want to tell me if there's a dime's bit of difference between Oprah, Donohue, S.J.Raffael, Jenny Jones, Whoopi, and the next group down from there?) My mother complained because a cable network is cancelling "the good movies" they used to run in the afternoon in favor of a talk show. Broadcast networks can compete on quality and the money they have to spend to keep it, or they can fight for market share against cable networks that can make the same cheap shows as they run. When they work on making shows based on cost alone, broadcast will lose over cable because anything they can make cheap, cable can do the same. If you look at the wretched state of broadcast television, I think you will discover that it was the 'flight to quick profit' and away from quality, that has damaged their market share and in the long run will damage their profitability. Until they return to quality and providing a much more expensive and well-done product than Cable companies can afford to make, they will keep losing market share. Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: esx038@cck.coventry.ac.uk (W. J. G. Overington) Subject: Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format Organization: Coventry University Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:31:54 GMT Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format for expressing the information content of teletext pages with conventional computing equipment. Issue 1.0 4th March 1993 W. J. G. Overington Management Division, School of Engineering, Coventry University, Coventry, CV1 5FB United Kingdom. Telephone: +44 203 838655 (within UK Telephone: 0203 838655) Fax: +44 203 838949 (within UK Fax: 0203 838949) e-mail: esx038@cck.coventry.ac.uk Teletext pages are broadcast in the vertical blanking interval of some television channels. Teletext pages appear on a television screen in a selection of colours, with various graphic mosaics and so on. In the engineering management of a teletext system, both of a working service and within research and development, the need arises to be able to express the information content of a teletext page using conventional computing equipment. The Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format is designed to be usable in a number of circumstances. Files of information can be processed by specially written software to give teletext format displays using, for example, a vga display on a PC. Only printable characters are used, so that pages can also be viewed and edited using ordinary text manipulating software which has not been designed for teletext format usage. The display will not, in such cases, be a teletext display, but a knowledgeable person will be able to understand what is intended in a straightforward manner. It can be used easily in hand written notes, may be expressed in documents typed on ordinary typewriters and can be faxed. In everyday speech, please refer to pages expressed using this format as being in "Coventry format". You may like to give computer files containing information in Coventry format the suffix .ctt (from the initial letters of the three words Coventry Teletext Transfer). This is not obligatory but will often help file organization in a system with many such pages, as the ready to broadcast file can have the same name but with a different suffix. The Coventry Teletext Transfer Open Format consists of the central core, the simple method and the general method. The Central Core: Each line of text that appears upon a teletext page is expressed in Coventry format by two lines of text, namely the text line and the command line. The text line is always above the command line and the two lines are regarded as one line unit. In analysing the meaning of the character to be placed at any one character position of a teletext page one considers the two corresponding characters in the Coventry format representation of the page, namely one character from the command line and one character from the text line. If the command line character is any one of . ; : | then the page character is taken to be simply the text line character as a level one teletext character. The four characters . ; : | are regarded as equivalent to comments. The use of four such comment characters is so that | may be used every five or ten character positions as desired or that ; and : may be used every alternate fifth position. Some typewriters do not have the | symbol. Here is an example. The snow is falling. ....;....:....;....:....;....:....;....: The Simple Method: Using the simple method one can express any level one teletext page. Simply place the appropriate character in the appropriate place in the command line and a space in the text line. For example, Strawberries, lemons and aubergines. R...;....:....Y....:.G..;M...:....;....: The commands listed below are defined. Please note that, as appropriate to a system intended for international usage, there is both an English and a French influence in the choice of the command characters. For example, J reflects the French word jaune and U and D the French words un and deux. R Red alphanumerics r Red mosaics G Green alphanumerics g Green mosaics V Green alphanumerics v Green mosaics J Yellow alphanumerics j Yellow mosaics Y Yellow alphanumerics y Yellow mosaics B Blue alphanumerics b Blue mosaics M Magenta alphanumerics m Magenta mosaics P Magenta alphanumerics p Magenta mosaics C Cyan alphanumerics c Cyan mosaics T Cyan alphanumerics t Cyan mosaics A White alphanumerics * a White mosaics W White alphanumerics * w White mosaics F Flash ? Conceal display S Steady * O Contiguous mosaics * K End Box E Separated mosaics I Start Box Q Escape U Normal height * Z Black background * D Double height N New background H Hold graphics L Release graphics * X Character 7/15 The commands marked * are the defaults at the start of the row of the teletext page. The General Method: The general method, which can be stated as a method, but which is still under development, and for which representations may be made, is that the command character is a digit character and that the text character is then also used in the procedure of deciding what character is intended on the teletext page. A figure 1 character in the command line together with the same letter in the text line as would appear in the command line for the simple method has the same meaning as with the simple method. For example, RStrawberries,YlemonsGandMaubergines. 1...;....:....1....:.1..;1...:....;....: has the same effect as Strawberries, lemons and aubergines. R...;....:....Y....:.G..;M...:....;....: Clearly, for simple level one pages, the simple method is much clearer to read when the Coventry format page is viewed by a person, whether on a screen or a printed page. However, the general method will allow the expression of more complicated cases. Where two character sets are used on the teletext page, the Coventry format equivalent could also have figures as commands beneath characters intended to be displayed as text characters. This will give an explicit indication of which character set is to be used at the character position itself. Consideration is also being given to using characters such as % & and so on as command characters so that the contents of rows 25 to 31 of a teletext page may be expressed in a .ctt file unambiguously. ------------------------------ From: LCHIU@HOLONET.NET Subject: CLID vs ANI in California Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 03:47:25 GMT I recently read an article in the {San Francisco Chronicle} which did not appear to correct to me. I wonder if more Telecom literate readers might comment. The writer was reporting on the surprise of a caller who has an unlisted number when he called a 800 number and the service provider, addressed him by name, presumably based on his calling number and a lookup database. The writer went on to say after some investigation, that although California has no CLID yet, 800 service providers can get the calling number because 1) they are paying for the call and need it for demographic purposes 2) although CLID is not available in CA, there is nothing to stop the number from being sent out of state. From there the 800 serivce provider could use a reverse lookup database to locate the name of the caller. This was an invasion of privacy and a direct contradiction to the idea of have an unlisted number. This seems wrong to me. Recent postings here have indicated that even if the appropriate SS7 signalling is in place from CA to another state, and the callee has CLID enabled, they do not see a number but some message to the effect that the number is not available. I am guessing that in the above scenario, the 800 service provider received the number via ANI and the caller was a repeat customer who had to give his phone number on a previous occasion to make a credit card order or such. Thus there was a record in the database of the 800 service provider. Comments? Laurence Chiu lchiu@holonet.net [Moderator's Note: As you note, ANI is *not* Caller-ID although the end results are the same. The California requirements do not pertain to ANI -- only to Caller-ID. Out of state calls would not be part of this requirement in any event. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nalco@balr.com (Craig Moynihan) Subject: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing Organization: Balr Corporation Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 05:11:33 GMT Can anyone explain to me why the following scenario can occur: A phone can use an analog phone line to orignate and receive phone calls. A modem is hooked up to this same phone line. This modem is set answer on the third ring (S0=3). Another modem calls this modem. The AA light flashes on and off, but the modem does not answer. Occasionally, the modem will answer after a hundred rings or so. Does this behavior indicate that the modem is sensative to ring voltage and this ring voltage is too low? Should the polarity of the two wire phone connection have any impact on the modem answering? Can anyone provide some general answers on why a phone would work on this line, but a modem typically won't. Thanks in advance. Craig A. Moynihan Naperville,IL nalco@balr ..!balr.com!nalco ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 07:50:39 EST From: E102030@PWAGPDB.pwfl.com Subject: Internet Access From Home I am interested in getting internet access capabilities from my home computer. How do I do that? I have a Mac IIvx. What hardware/software will I need and who do I call to allow access and get the internet access phone number? Thanks in advance for any information. Chris Norley Internet: norleyc@pwfl.com [Moderator's Note: There is no single point of contact for access or single 'internet access phone number'. For example, if the administrator of pwfl.com okayed it, you could call into that system from home with a terminal program for your Mac and a modem. There are numerous public access services which connect with the internet. Some which come to mind are the Freenet sites, Portal Communications in San Jose, CA, and Chinet in Chicago run by Randy Suess. All you need at home is a modem and a terminal (program). Lots of places sell or give away (depending on circumstances) access. Check out the 'nixpub' file if it is still being published. PAT] ------------------------------ From: scann@merlin.tc.cornell.edu (Scannapieco) Subject: DigitalLink DL551VX <-> Canoga 2240 Reply-To: scann@merlin.tc.cornell.edu (Scannapieco) Organization: Cornell National Computer Facility Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1993 21:37:44 GMT Folks, I'm attempting to connect a DL with a T1 feed to a Canoga fiber modem via a V.35. I realize a standard v.35 cable won't cut it but my "null modem" isn't either. Here are the pin assignments I'm using: pins CSU LINE DRIVER P-R TDa RDa T-S TDb RDb R-P RDa TDa S-T RDb TDb V-U RCa XTCa X-W RCb XTCb U-V XTCa RCa W-X XTCb RCb C-D RTS CTS D-C CTS RTS E-H DSR DTR H-E DTR DSR Has anyone had any experience or success in doing this ? Any and all insight would be appreciated. Please respond to me directly. Suggestions for a more appropriate group would also be welcomed. Thanks, Mark Scannapieco scann@tc.cornell.edu ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Need Card For Speech-Out and DTMF-In, Preferably For PC Date: 11 Mar 93 20:14:03 GMT I need to find a card that will receive calls, accept DTMF digits, and play speech back, with a decent API. My preferred target is PCs, but I'll look at anything right now. The ability to support multiple lines, whether through several cards or through several ports per card, is a big plus. The name Dialogic comes to mind, but that's all I know, so contact info would be appreciated, as would other vendors, feedback, etc. I'm just starting this project, so I'm looking for anything at this point. Thanks! Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #169 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17537; 12 Mar 93 2:42 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24593 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:35:42 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14179 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:35:06 -0600 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:35:06 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303120535.AA14179@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #170 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Mar 93 23:35:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 170 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Brent Whitlock) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Andrew Funk) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (John Higdon) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Dave Niebuhr) Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News (Tommy O'Lin) Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (Meg Arnold) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (Jim DePorter) Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls (John R. Levine) Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada (David G. Lewis) Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada (Steve Forrette) Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada (Brad Kollmyer) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Ed Oliveri) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (John Higdon) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (Jeffrey Jonas) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:50:24 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > In article bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent > Whitlock) writes: >> Neither would I. My brother, who is also an avid reader of this >> digest, told me that at an AM radio station for which he used to be a >> part time DJ, they could not use IBM PC's because the broadcast tower >> interfered with the keyboard preventing it from working properly. > Rather than indicate any mysterious forces at work, the fact that the > PC did not work properly simply indicates a lack of knowledge on > someone's part concerning proper grounding and shielding. I know of a > number of 50KW AM stations that have studios and transmitters > co-located. They also have PCs that work just fine. The key to the IBM PC's not working was their keyboards. So, the problem is, as you said, shielding. The capacitive mechanisms of the keyboard would not work in the environment at the radio station. Keyboards which use a different technology than IBM's would work. * * * * * * --> DISCLAIMER: I speak only for myself. <-- * * * * * * Brent Whitlock Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology bwhitlock@uiuc.edu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ From: kb7uv@Panix.Com (Andrew Funk) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 01:53:53 GMT I spoke with Debbie Matut (the pregnant WCBS-TV technician) today and mentioned this discussion. First of all, she says "Hi!" to everyone. Apparently the FCC measures the RF field strength at the WTC at least once each year. Debbie had the same measurements done at her home. The levels at the WCBS-TV transmitter site are extremely low! There is considerable shielding installed there to protect workers, as well as shielding protecting the tourists at the other tower's observation deck. I've found a worthwhile charity which I'll be supporting with some of my overtime pay -- the NY Firefighters Burn Center. It's part of the NYU/Cornell Medical Center, and treats victims of serious burns (not just firefighters). I'm waiting to receive their literature ... if anyone wants info let me know. Andrew Funk, KB7UV Chair, Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society (RATS) ENG Editor/Microwave Control, WCBS-TV Channel 2 News, New York Internet: kb7uv@panix.com Packet: kb7uv@kb7uv.#nli.ny.usa ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 18:45 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News David Lesher writes: > The Chief Moo said: >> I have worked around dozens of 50KW stations over the past twenty- >> five years or so and have NEVER observed my hair standing on end. >> What nonsense! > 4) Does he have any left to lay flat, much less stand on end? As a matter of fact, while all of the color has left, most of the hair is still there. Quote from my barber: "Jeez, your hair is thick!" So in the tradition of my father and those who went before him, I have a full head of white hair. Believe me, if any hair was going to be standing on end at any of my transmitter sites, I would be the first to notice. And I can prove it: my mug shot was in the 3/7 of the {San Jose Mercury}. The picture was taken the week before. Neeeeah! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 [Moderator's Note: Don't let John fool you. His picture in the papers, like that of Ann Slanders and her twin sister Scabby Van Buren was taken thirty years ago. :) I've heard rumors that he is bald-headed, his hair having fallen out after working around that radiation all these years. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 07:23:39 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News The news yesterday made mention of the type of bomb used in the WTC disaster. It seems that there were at least four different types of acids, that when combined, would be able to create a blast the size of the one that exploded there. It was assembled in a 10x10 foot room away from the WTC and then taken there in parts and stored in the parking garage until it was fully assembled and placed in the van that was involved. Now a movie company wants to make a film about it and is going to offer money to the people who were affected by the disaster. Unfortunately, the students who were there won't get any of this but the movie company said that it will make sizeable donations to the schools. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 08:48:57 EST From: adiron!tro@uunet.UU.NET (Tommy O'Lin) Subject: Re: NY World Trade Center - Some Telecom News Reply-To: tro@partech.com > [Moderator's Note: .... In that Texas confrontation with Jesus Christ (at > least that's who he says he is) .... He claims to be Jesus Christ and says he's waiting for further instructions from God. Can't we find somebody who claims to be God and have them tell "JC" to surrender peacefully? Tom Olin tro@partech.com uunet!adiron!tro (315) 738-0600 Ext 638 PAR Technology Corporation * 220 Seneca Turnpike * New Hartford NY 13413-1191 [Moderator's Note: I gave him direct orders last week to surrender. PAT] ------------------------------ From: meg_arnold@qm.sri.com (Meg Arnold) Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada Date: 11 Mar 93 20:24:49 GMT Organization: SRI International In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) wrote: >> Which brings us to the subject of telecommunications. Canada's >> telephone system and the services related to it are world class. > From correspondence with Canadians, I have determined that the US has > benefitted greatly for deregulation and divestiture. While Canada > still has step equipment and multi-party lines in rural areas, that > equipment and facility arrangement has all but disappeared in this > country. Bell Canada has no technical superiority with regard to the > typical service provided in the US; and frequently the reverse is > actually the case. From living in Canada and working in telecommunications (for a corporate user) in Canada, I can say that Canadian telecom is not considered truly "world class" by many (knowledgeable) people. My personal residential LD rates were substantially higher than they would have been for same distance/same length phone calls in the US (Toronto-California for 20 minutes at 9 p.m. was once four times as much as Buffalo-California for 20 minutes at 9 p.m., including AT&T's calling card surcharge). Business rates were astronomical. For a dedicated T1 running from Toronto to NYC, the Toronto-Buffalo link was -twice- as expensive as the Buffalo-NYC link, even though it was -half- as long. Not to mention that such services as Virtual Private Networks, taken as a given in the U.S., have only recently been tariffed forintroduction in Canada. At my employer, we were implementing LANs in satellite offices across the country, but ran into a brick wall of cost when it came to automated software distribution to those LANs from the operating center. Even running distributions in the middle of the night was prohibitive. Not to mention that telcos were often unwilling to comply with our requests for redundant routing for contingency planning purposes, and, in one instance, a route we had set up as redundant had been disconnected at the CO, which we unfortunately discovered exactly when we needed to put it to use. I'm not saying that recalcitrant telcos do not exist under competition, but at least you don't have to use them! Needless to say, the movement toward competition in Canada is strongly supported throughout the business community -- and among knowledgable consumers. During the recent competition hearings, the consumers advocacy groups opposed competition -only- if it raised local rates. Under the recently-issued decision, a mechanism for keeping local rates low has been set forth, quieting those fears of consumer groups. However, the TWU's position did not really _surprise_ me... Meg Arnold, Business Intelligence Center, SRI International 333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025. phone: (415) 859-3764 internet: meg_arnold@qm.sri.com ------------------------------ From: jimd@SSD.intel.com (Jim DePorter) Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls Organization: Supercomputer System Division, Intel Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 23:41:43 GMT rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes: > This brings up an interesting question. What would happen if such a > loop were set up. For example, suppose phone A forward to phone B, > which forwards to phone C, which forwards back to phone A. Assume no > number of calls that can be forwarded at one time limits are in place. > (i.e. assume that if X just forwards to Y, that there is no limit of > how many calls can be forwarded, except that once Y runs out of trunks > in the hunt group callers will get a busy signal). With the call forwarding that I have the number you are forwarding to has to answer; if there's no answer or a busy there'll be no forwarding. If C tries to call A, C is already off hook and the call will not be completed (a busy). Sounds easy to me. Is there different forms of call forwarding where you don't have to answer? There have been times that I've wanted to call forward to a cabin/house/etc for the weekend, but since I'm not there I can't answer the phone to complete the forward. jimd [Moderator's Note: I thought all call forwarding routines allowed for the conditions you describe by entering the number *twice*. Dial it, and if BY or DA, dial it again to confirm. IBT has always had it that way. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Number of Simultaneous Forwarded Calls Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 11 Mar 93 01:36:31 EST (Thu) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > If we are talking about chains that run forever, then > the important thing is to stop the process when a previously visited > number is found again in the chain. ... It is my impression that the standard technique used to prevent call-forwarding loops is to allow only one unsupervised call per forwarding number at a time. Once a call either supervises or is abandoned, then more calls can be forwarded unless the switch is programmed (as it usually is) to arbitrarily restrict the number of forwarded calls per forwarding number. Trying to detect forwarding loops by recognizing the incoming number seems unlikely to work in the absence of 100% perfect SS7 signalling, since without that there's no reliable way to tell that two incoming calls are in fact the same call looped around. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada Organization: AT&T Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 14:38:47 GMT In article murphy%switchboard@CAM.ORG (murphy) writes: > I only had a very small question that's been bugging me for a while > now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S. > from Canada? > [Moderator's Note: 900 numbers, no. 800 numbers, maybe, depending on > if the owner of the 800 number wants to receive international calls > and has had the line configured to do so. PAT] If it's an AT&T 800 service, there are additional service offerings which allow inbound international 800 calls from Canada and the Caribbean. I'm not sure of the exact tariff -- whether they have to be purchased in addition to domestic 800, or can be purchased separately. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!goofy!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada Date: 11 Mar 1993 14:45:58 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article murphy%switchboard@CAM.ORG (murphy) writes: > I only had a very small question that's been bugging me for a while > now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S. > from Canada? > [Moderator's Note: 900 numbers, no. 800 numbers, maybe, depending on > if the owner of the 800 number wants to receive international calls > and has had the line configured to do so. PAT] AT&T ReadyLine numbers (the ones that route to a POTS line for $20 per month) have Canadian calling enabled by default. I think most AT&T plans now have Canada turn on, unless the subscriber specifically requests that it be disabled. My experience with other carriers is that they charge extra for Canadian access. This brings up an interesting issue: What happens with calls to Canada with respect to 800 portability? Will the local telcos in Canada be connected to "the big database" and do ten-digit lookups themselves? Or will this be done at the gateway point into the US? Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: bradk@nic.cerf.net (Brad Kollmyer) Subject: Re: 800 and 900 Service in Canada Date: 11 Mar 1993 09:33:22 GMT Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group In article murphy%switchboard@CAM.ORG (murphy) writes: > now: Is there ANY way to call 800 and 900 numbers located in the U.S. > from Canada? You can if you use a long distance service that offers this option in Canada. When I lived in Vancouver I used CamNet to dial US only 800 numbers. They would charge me for the call though. Brad ------------------------------ From: eo@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Ed Oliveri) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? Organization: AT&T Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 18:36:59 GMT In article mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) writes: > You would think maybe the US Post Office would have something as > simple and common as a fax machine ... I don't see a smiley, but you must be joking. You expect the USPS to employ the very same technology that will eventually help put them out of business? On the same note, I wonder how long it took Western Union to start using telephones? Ed Oliveri, eo@cbnewsb.att.com [Moderator's Note: WUTCO and AT&T fought back and forth about patents and one thing or another until early in this century. Then for about seventy years they were best of buddies. WUTCO in fact was the original 'charge it to your phone bill' service: For seven decades at least (maybe still today?) we could send telegrams by phoning the local telegraph agent (invariably at the phone number xxx-4321) and charging it to our phone bill. From pay stations, the instruction card said instead of calling 4321 to 'tell the operator to connect you with Western Union' ... the idea being when you had finished dictating the telegram, the agent would flash for the operator to come back on the line and tell the operator to have you deposit the proper amount of money in the phone. Telegrams could also be sent 'collect', but unlike phone calls, WUTCO let you read the message first, *then* decide if you wanted to accept it and pay for it. If not, it went back to the sender for payment. The two giants fought and squabbled over TWX and Telex in the 1960's; WUTCO took over TWX but continued to operate it out of the Bell central offices. The Post Office has made some concessions to modern technology. They have an agreement with MCI Mail and ATT Mail (as well as Western Union's 'Mailgram' program) to accept email on printers, stuff it in envelopes and mail it at the post office nearest the delivery address. The Post Office is involved in faxes, as another article in this issue will note, but it is poorly advertised. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 00:51 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? Organization: Green Hills and Cows In article mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) writes: > You would think maybe the US Post Office would have something as > simple and common as a fax machine ... Expecting the US Post Office to have a fax machine would be the equivalent of expecting the village smithy to have a tire changing machine. The fax machine will probably be largely responsible for the ultimate demise of snail mail. After all, why spend $.29 when you can spend less, get instant delivery (or even delivery at all), and get conveniently billed for the transactions? If you need to send physical documents, then use one of the DEPENDABLE services, rather than taking the crap shoot with good ol' USPS. No, I am not surprised that the post office lacks a fax. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:44:52 EST From: jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology > I called the Maryland zip code information line and told the person on > the other end that I had five addresses I wished to find the ZIP+4 > for. I asked if it would be easier for him if I faxed the list to him > and called him back later. I was told, with a chuckle, that they > don't have a fax machine. You would think maybe the US Post Office > would have something as simple and common as a fax machine ... Perhaps one of the best kept secrets of the U.S. Postal Service is that they have a public fax service called INTELPOST. Not all post offices have it. You can fax documents to another fax machine, or have it mailed after being faxed across the country or even to other participating countries. I agree that it's archaic that not all post offices have FAX machines for internal use, but the Post Office is an archaic organization. It's probably cheaper for them to add their internal correspondences to the regular truck/plane deliveries instead of paying a phone bill. Please don't take this as an invitation for Post Office bashing. Many good and intelligent people are employed by the Post Office, some of whom are friends. The PO has real challenges such as dealing with unions and the caliber of the typical worker. They do a good job most of the time, just like the phone company :-) [Moderator's Note: The trouble is, their labor disputes take very vicious turns: consider Royal Oak, Michigan and Edmund, Oklahoma as two examples. Crazy person gets angry at supervisor, comes in with gun and shoots everyone. We've had a few 'post office massacres' in recent years and there are lots of angry and demoralized people working for the US Postal Service. Its a sad state of affairs. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #170 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21033; 12 Mar 93 4:00 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03034 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 01:25:57 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28374 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 01:25:16 -0600 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 01:25:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303120725.AA28374@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #171 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 93 01:25:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 171 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Centel and Sprint Merger Complete (TELECOM Moderator) Telecom in Brazil, BAD? (Cris Pedregal-Martin) FBI Provides Update on Telemarketing Fraud (Nigel Allen) U.C. Berkeley Short Courses on Broadband Communications (Harvey Stern) DS0 Test Equipment Advice Wanted (Norman Gillaspie) Seek History on Computerized Message Switching (Jim Haynes) Simple Project Ideas For K-2? (Sue Miller) Disabling *70 (Francis J. Park) Call Waiting Disabling (Rob Henry) Non Phone Things on Phone Bills (Jeffrey Jonas) AT&T Free Time Rewards (Randall K. Smith) 900-Number FCC Rules in Telecom Archives (James Olsen) Thanks to Those Who Replied (Eric Miller) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 00:30:41 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Centel and Sprint Merger Complete The merger between Centel and Sprint which has been going on for a while now was completed earlier this week. There is no more Centel as such. Some parts of Centel were absored into Sprint and are now known as Sprint ... other parts, such as the cellular operations will henceforth be known as Sprint Cellular Services. So now, the two local telcos here in Chicago are Illinois Bell and Sprint (Centel has a very small wedge on the far northwest side of the city known as the Chicago-Newcastle CO plus the suburbs of Des Plaines and Hillary's home town of Park Ridge, IL.) Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: pedregal@unreal.cs.umass.edu (Cris Pedregal-Martin) Subject: Telecom in Brazil, BAD? Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 15:52:53 EST Reply-To: pedregal@cs.umass.edu Greetings. I couldn't help but smile on reading Mr. Robinson's (TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM) remarks on cable TV; he made several interesting points. But more on a telecom side, I have a comment and a question. The comment, on his saying: > [...] the difference between AT&T Long distance and the Brazillian > Telephone Company, which is probably the only system worthy of the > moniker, "Worse than GTE." [...] I haven't been to Brazil recently, but I used to go there fairly often. There used to be a two-tiered system (similar to the US in Ma Bell's time): Telebras/Embratel, handling LD and communications abroad, and regional companies, at the state level, like TeleRJ (RJ=Rio de Janeiro), TeleSP (SP=Sao Paulo), etc. In the wealthier part of the country (the Southeast, i.e., RJ, SP, etc.), the system worked very well; I can't tell about the rest of the country as I haven't been there. IMHO, the service was on par with that of Western European countries such as France, Germany, and the UK; it was clearly better than Spain's or Italy's. This is when I last looked, four or five years ago. The technology might not have been dazzling (e.g., pulse instead of tone), but it worked (high call completion rates, good intercepts, very few wrong numbers). And, also, rates were very cheap (compared with other state-owned, third-world rates such as neighboring Argentina's. Problems associated with wider-ranging (political, economical) issues, of course, existed: sometimes bad customer service (labor conflict), use of tokens instead of coins (inflation). And there were some pearls too, like automated collect calls (even within a city); I think one dialled 9+number and two synchronized recordings would come on, opening a short window to say one's name (or whatever); hanging up meaning non-acceptance of charges. There were also calling cards (charge, like in the US); all these things at least since the late 70s. I had a couple of chances to meet with some of the members of the technical staff of the research lab of Telebras (in Campinas, SP). These were people with PhDs from top notch schools in the US and Western Europe (mostly France and the UK). In the mid-80s they were well on their way to achieving vertical integration in the production of VLSI (they were negotiating installation of a plant, but with technology transfer). Since I was even less telecom- literate than I am now, I couldn't say how much of the telecom technology in use was being produced locally, but it was clear that these people were not your usual turn-key systems buyers. There's other related things, like Brazil's forays into communication satellites and the like; my recollections are way too vague on that. My "comment" (more bordering on an essay, sorry) is not very current, but I just felt I had to challenge a stereotype ... Now, the question: I am sure there are readers of c.d.t. qualified to tell us more on the current telecom situation in Brazil. Any takers? I am sure it will be an interesting topic! Regards, com saudades do Brasil, Cristobal Pedregal Martin pedregal@cs.umass.edu Computer Science Department UMass / Amherst, MA 01003 ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: FBI Provides Update on Telemarketing Fraud Organization: Echo Beach Here is a press release from the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation. I do not work for the FBI; I just find interesting press releases on other systems and post them on relevant newsgroups. FBI Provides Update on Telemarketing Fraud To: National and Business Desks Contact: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Press Office, 202-324-3691 WASHINGTON, March 10 -- FBI Director William S. Sessions, said today that 210 persons have been arrested in 16 states in connection with "Operation Disconnect," a nationwide crackdown on telemarketing fraud. FBI Agents have conducted 63 searches and have seized over $4 million in bank accounts, weapons, computers, cars, boats, Rolex watches, jet skis and other items. "The best method of combatting telemarketing fraud is an educated consumer who recognizes it as fraud before falling victim to it," Sessions said. To help consumers the FBI offers the following tips to avoid becoming a victim of telemarketing fraud: 1) Be skeptical of offers that sound too good to be true; they usually are. 2) Resist high pressure sales tactics. Don't allow yourself to be hurried into a decision. 3) Do not give your credit card number or checking account informa- tion to anyone over the telephone unless you know with whom you are dealing. 4) Don't make any purchase or investment you don't fully understand. Don't spend or invest more than you can afford. 5) Companies should be willing to provide their name, address, phone number and references. If not, be skeptical. Verify this information before making a purchase. 6) If you are skeptical about a company, check with the Better Business Bureau, your State Attorney General's office, or the local consumer protection agency before you make a purchase. 7) Report incidents of telemarketing fraud to your local Better Business Bureau, your state, or local law enforcement authority or your nearest FBI field office. You may also contact the National Fraud Information Center at 1-800-876-7060 for information concerning telephone frauds. --------- Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ From: southbay@garnet.berkeley.edu Subject: U.C. Berkeley Short Courses on Broadband Communications Date: 12 Mar 1993 01:47:16 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley U.C. Berkeley Continuing Education in Engineering Announces Two Short Courses on Communications Technology SONET/ATM-Based Broadband Networks: Systems, Architectures and Designs (May 17-18, 1993) It is widely accepted that future broadband networks will be based on the SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) standards and the ATM (Asynchronous transfer Mode) technique. This course is an in-depth examination of the fundamental concepts and the implementation issues for development of future high-speed networks. Topics include: Broadband ISDN Transfer Protocol, high speed computer/network interface (HiPPI), ATM switch architectures, ATM network congestion/flow control, VLSI designs in SONET/ATM networks. Lecturer: H. Jonathan Chao, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Brooklyn Polytechnic University Gigabit/sec Data and Communications Networks (May 19-20, 1993) This short course provides a general understanding of the key protocols and networking elements needed to design and implement gigabit local area and wide area networks, including the protocols and implementations for HiPPI, SONET, ATM, and FCS. Lecturer: William E. Stephens, Ph.D., Director, High Speed Switching and Storage Technology Research, Bellcore Applied Research For more information (complete course descriptions, outlines, instructor bios, etc.) contact: Harvey Stern U.C. Berkeley Extension/Southbay 800 El Camino Real Ste. 150 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Tel: (415) 323-8141 Fax: (415) 323-1438 ------------------------------ From: norman@NETSYS.COM (Norman Gillaspie) Subject: DS0 Test Equipment Advice Wanted Organization: Netsys Inc. Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:34:19 GMT I am looking for a good general purpose piece of test equipment for checking DS0 rate channel bank cards,DDS lines etc. I would like to have a piece of equipment that most carriers such as WillTel,Pac-Bell etc would use and be familiar with. Any recommendations? Regards, Norman Gillaspie ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 12:12:29 -0800 Subject: Seek History on Computerized Message Switching Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz I'm thinking of writing a piece about the transition from punched paper tape and relays to computer-based switching of messages. I'm dimly aware of some machines designed for the purpose: G.E.s Datanet 30, and IBMs 7740. Believe Collins Radio was in on it too. Anyway I'd like to hear from people who have something to say on the subject, even if it's just knowing when a particular old-technology system was replaced by a new one. ------------------------------ From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) Subject: Simple Project Ideas for K-2? Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 21:39:00 GMT I've been given an assignment to come up with a 1/2 hour "seminar" for K-2 (5 - 8 yrs) age kids on how telephones work for a science fair. Is there anyone out there who has done this sort of thing and who wouldn't mind sharing some ideas with me? I do know how telephones work but I would like to come up with an interesting demo or hands-on thing that the children could do. Other than cups and string. Any ideas or experiences gratefully received! Thanks in advance. Sue Miller sue@netcom.com smiller@raynet.com ------------------------------ From: killer@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Francis J Park) Subject: Disabling *70 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 08:04:27 GST Organization: Homewood Academic Computing, Johns Hopkins U, Baltimore, Md I am dealing with a highly annoying roommate who is fond of turning on *70 to disable call waiting when he calls out voice. Is there any way to call the C&P business office, or perhaps TSPS Engineering, to disable the feature, specific to my line? The few times I'm using a modem I can live without using the *70 feature. I also want to be able to kill 1170, the rotary dial equivalent (which also works for DTMF) which does likewise. Please help. Francis Park, Johns Hopkins Univ '94, Dept/History killer@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu The Baltimore Chainsaw Massacre BBS:410-467-2617, WWIVLink @14060 [Moderator's Note: All I can suggest is that you get on an exchange which does not have the *70 feature, if there are any in your community. I know there are people in a couple northern suburbs of Chicago with older ESS generics who would love to be able to use *70 if only it were available to them. I take it you pay the phone bill and control how the instrument is used ... why not just tell him to quit it? PAT] ------------------------------ From: ah157@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rob Henry) Subject: Call Waiting Disable? Date: 12 Mar 1993 12:11:04 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Reply-To: ah157@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rob Henry) Could someone please mail me the code to turn off call waiting for one phpne call on a pulse dial phone? Thanks alot, Rob [Moderator's Note: *If* the feature is available in your CO, then the code from a rotary dial phone is either 1170 (hear tone spurts and continue dialing) or just '70' (wait for timeout, hear tone spurts and continue dialing.) If dialing 1170 or 70 does not work and you get either a reorder tone or 'call cannot be completed as dialed' then your CO is not equipped for this. If it works, good for you. As soon as you replace the receiver, the line will return to its normal status. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:04:33 EST From: jeffj%jiji@uunet.UU.NET (Jeffrey Jonas) Subject: Non Phone Things on Phone Bills > The problem that is left is that if a slimy IP charges you for > something that legitimately you should not have been charged for, and > you cannot get the IP to reverse the charge, the balance stays on your > account and then is reported to Equifax as a deliquent balance. Then > see if you can get new phone service established in a new > residence ... not likely. That's a frightening thought, but denial of ANY credit or accounts can be based on incorrect or fraudulent information be it credit cards or store accounts. Phone accounts are not unique in this risk, which is why people are getting quite aware and concerned about the credit reporting agencies. In the business world, Standard and Poors and Moody's rate companies and rate their creditworthiness. A company's ability to borrow money and issue debit/bonds depends on these ratings. I suppose they try to work on solid fact only, but the slightest problem with their credit rating causes very unpleasant repercussions. I guess that's why most stockholder's reports have a disclaimer that pending legal action against the company is not expected to negatively impact their rating or earnings -- just like a bad bill, they're trying to shrug off the negative effects of bill collectors. > It still boggles my mind that the second most powerful collection > agency (referring to the collective Phone Company) in the country can > be used by any patch of slime to do what they wish. I think the whole > concept of "putting the charge on the phone bill" for any service > other than phone company charges is insane. I can't use $15 worth of > stamps on a package to buy a compact disc mail order, I can't put my > grocery charges on to my gas bill, and I can't pay for pool > maintenance on my water bill. If IPs can use the telco billing > procedures, why can't I order Chinese food for delivery and put *that* > on my phone bill ... While I want to agree with you, there's a contradiction. Before divestiture, the phone bill was only for phone service: rental/leasing of the equipment and the service provided and used. Everything was originated and operated by the phone company. They originated all the information. Post divestiture, the idea of 'phone services' has expanded into 'information services'. You can call several different places for directory information. Certainly you can agree that calling somebody to look something up for you is a service that requires payment above and beyond the cost of the call. You can pay for the service by a separate billing arrangement, such as a credit card. Ah, but if "THE" phone company can bill you directly for directory assistance and any other must bill you separately, that's an unfair home ground advantage, so the billing was opened and made available for all. I agree that many places are abusing the definition of what constitutes phone service. Renting a phone is reasonable. But ordering the paper pads for phone messages, pens and pencils? Perhaps there's an analogy between the phone system and the postal service. Both are "common carriers" that deliver packages but not the content. Paying postage on a letter gets it delivered, but says nothing about ownership of the contents. The Post Office can act as a billing agent by allowing me to send the parcel COD (Cash On Delivery) where you must pay for the contents of the box BEFORE opening the box and examining the contents. If I send you a box, you're not expected to pay for it unless it's solicited. But here's where the analogy breaks down: by placing the call, you're soliciting the information. Is a puzzlement! Jeffrey Jonas jeffj@panix.com [Moderator's Note: As mentioned yesterday, long before there was any 900 or 976 service, there were 'charge to your phone bill' services, although not as many, and certainly none that were naughty. Western Union allowed telegram charges to be placed on the phone bill as did a company called Postal Telegraph. If at a pay station, the telco operator was flashed to come in on the line and collect the amount specified by the telegraph agent. Another long time system called FTD, or Florists Telegraph Delivery delivered flowers anywhere in the USA via wire to a local florist (in the town of delivery); these charges could be put on a business or residence phone bill for many years. This was not something that came up at divestiture except for the growing number of such services, the automated 900 billing versus the manual billing where the agent told the telco operator how much to collect or write the ticket for, etc, and the nature of the services provided. All that changed was the use of 900/976 in lieu of a manual billing ticket in the same way that 800 replaced 'Enterprise' and 'Zenith' numbers by automating the process of automatic reverse charge or 'collect' calling. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rsmith@wisp4.physics.wisc.edu (Randall K. Smith) Subject: AT&T Free Time Rewards Organization: Space Physics, UW - Madison Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:30:44 GMT The Free Time promotion sounded too good to pass up, so I called and tried to sign up for it. But, unfortunately, it's a "targeted" promotion and if you're not one of the targeted few, it's no go. (According to the person I spoke to, your account will be flagged if you were selected, and if the account isn't flagged, you can't sign up.) Oh well ... worth a try, I guess! Randy Smith rsmith@wisp4.physics.wisc.edu ------------------------------ Subject: 900-Number FCC Rules in Telecom Archives Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 09:55:15 -0500 From: James Olsen For inclusion in the Archives, I have submitted the full text of the FCC's 'Interstate 900 Telecommunications Services' rulemaking order, as published in the Federal Register on November 1, 1991 (56 FR 56160). ------------------------------ From: eric@microware.com (Eric Miller) Subject: Thanks to All Those Who Replied Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 14:29:35 GMT Thanks to those of you who sent me information on T1 cards for the ISA bus. I unfortunately didn't give enough info on my application, but was able to find what I needed anyway. I needed a full 1.536 Mbit/second signal as this is a Video on Demand application. This precluded several of the suggestions for cards which were essentially voice only solutions. I finally found a card from a company called Niwot Networks in Boulder. It seems to be exactly what I was looking for. Anyway, thanks again. Eric Miller ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #171 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22421; 12 Mar 93 4:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16788 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:01:46 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14235 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:01:11 -0600 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:01:11 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303120801.AA14235@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #172 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 93 02:00:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 172 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing (Bob Longo) Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (John Higdon) Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (Jim Haynes) Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! (John M. Sullivan) Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express (Klaus Dimmler) Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express (Telephone Express Customer Support) Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Guy Hadsal) Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Steve Forrette) Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Mark Williams) Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review (James Borynec) Re: Payphone Records in WTC Case (Steve Forrette) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 22:24:54 GMT From: news@zeus.calpoly.edu From: hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 22:24:40 GMT In article nalco@balr.com (Craig Moynihan) writes: > Can anyone explain to me why the following scenario can occur: > A phone can use an analog phone line to orignate and receive phone > calls. A modem is hooked up to this same phone line. This modem is set > answer on the third ring (S0=3). Another modem calls this modem. The > AA light flashes on and off, but the modem does not answer. > Occasionally, the modem will answer after a hundred rings or so. One problem I've noticed with most modems is that they are easily confused if they are receiving data on the RS232 port (or thru the computer bus) while the line is ringing. We often want to be able to call a system that has a modem and terminals connected to a single serial port. If there is data being sent to the terminals (and the modem, which is then in the command mode) when the line rings, the modem will often answer for a very short time, then go back on hook. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@oboe.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: Bob Longo Subject: Re: Modem Doesn't Answer But Line is Ringing Date: 11 Mar 93 19:55:31 PST Organization: Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines In article , nalco@balr.com (Craig Moynihan) writes: > Occasionally, the modem will answer after a hundred rings or so. > Does this behavior indicate that the modem is sensative to ring > voltage and this ring voltage is too low? Should the polarity of the > two wire phone connection have any impact on the modem answering? I would guess that your computer (or whatever the modem is connected to) is not raising the proper signals (i.e. DTR) for the modem to answer. Bob Longo (longo@sfpp.com) Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines Los Angeles, CA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 18:34 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! > [Moderator's Note: We've had the 'surname once, first name indented' > style in many of our suburban directories for a few years now, along > with the businesses listed separately. Yes, after I naively posted my message, I was informed by more knowledgable collegues that this "split white pages; surname once" is a very common midwest format. It is sort of the thing you find in Kansas, Nebraska -- all the fly-over states. Apparently it is also in Chicago. And now, unfortunately, it is here. I have already expressed my displeasure with Pacific Bell. > In a consolidated list, someone trying to find 'John Higdon and > Associates' would not find it but they would find John Higdon and > assume it to be one and the same, which of course is what you want, > i.e. you have residence service and get to conduct business on that > line. Except for the fact that in my case, the name of my business is not related in any way to my own name. And it is definitely listed in the business section; after all, I have more business service (at my business location) than residence service at my residence. I mention this to emphasize that I have no investment whatsoever concerning how my residence lines are listed. In fact, the one simple listing is there for the convenience of people who which to contact me on a PERSONAL basis and may have no other way of getting my number. Otherwise, it would not be listed at all. It has no effect on my business. > But under the new system, if I am looking for a BUSINESS in San Jose > called 'John Higdon and Associates' I will find nothing. It does not > occur to me to check in the residence listings, because after all, I > am trying to reach a business, or at least that's what I was told you > were running. But this has a reverse problem. Shortly after receiving the new directory, I tried looking up a person whom I knew to be listed. It was not in the book. So I called (at $.25) directory assistance who gave me the number. Why was it not in the book? It seems that for some reason or another, he has BUSINESS service. Sure enough, there in the damn business section was his listing -- a simple name and address. > This is a very clever ploy by telco and a perfectly legal, perfectly > logical way of organizing their directory It may be legal, but it is certainly not logical. Telephone service is telephone service. The artificial categories of "business" and "residence" form a quasi-political hack designed to subsidize one service with another (or in more modern times to screw one category of customer more than another). I strongly resent having midwestern nonsense contaminating what has worked just fine in California for countless decades. > ... but it has resulted in many a small time, one person > operating-from-home business man being forced to pay for business > service ('but why would you want to be listed in the business section, > sir? are you running a business? well in that case you need a business > phone line ...') PAT] Oh, really! I am sure that all of those BBS operators in SWBT territory who are being given the shaft with the threat of business service will be heartbroken that their modem lines are not in the "business" section of the directory! What I suspect has happened here is that the new directory contractor is midwest-based and just assumed that Californians would put up with the same silly-style directories that are issued to the "great heartland". Phooey! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 11:10:55 -0800 Subject: Re: The New Phone Books are Here On this side of The Hill, Pac Bell has been running ads in the local paper for several days -- picture of a new phone book in a plastic bag -- text to the effect that it's NOT that time yet; new phone books aren't due out until October; if you get a new phone book now it's not the genuine article, so don't throw away your old one. I guess this means somebody is distributing phony phone books. ------------------------------ From: sullivan@geom.umn.edu (John M. Sullivan) Subject: Re: The New Phone Books Are Here! Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 18:49:34 GMT Minneapolis White Pages from US West have had separate business listings for two years now (first in the front of the book, now in the back). Apart from questions of why this is beneficial for the phone company, I find it very convenient. Especially when looking for a business it's nice not to have to wade through the rest of the listings. (Our's is only about 20-25% business listings.) On another note, the newspaper said a couple of weeks ago that US West is planning to introduce Caller ID here, maybe by the end of the year. John Sullivan@geom.umn.edu ------------------------------ From: klaus@teal.csn.org (Klaus Dimmler) Subject: Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc. Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 19:58:05 GMT Telephone Express is my long distance service. In addition to long distance they provide Internet access services. There address is tec@cscns.com. Perhaps they can answer this question directly. ------------------------------ From: tec@cscns.com (Telephone Express Customer Support) Subject: Re: Telephone Express/Penny Express Organization: Community_News_Service Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 21:08:27 GMT We're Telephone Express, and you're right. Your first ten minute call is only one cent, and after ten more calls, your next call is only one cent -- within the contiguous 48 states. The program allows you to try us without having to switch long distance carriers. It is currently offered in Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. We also offer a full line of long distance products for business and residential customers on a subscribed basis. You probably have not heard of us because we're new to the Arizona market. If you have any more questions, you can send e-mail to tec@cscns.com or call 1-800-748-1748. Telephone Express also offers Internet services. For more information on this call 1-800-748-1200. ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 09:02:09 EST From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager I am suprised your paging/cellular vendor hasn't been bombarbing you with pager/cellular business "applications". My favorite is the "alpha" pager where you recieve actual text messages, or the new "wireless" Apple Newton's and HP Palmtop text/file messages. Really *neat* stuff coming down the wireless "pike". Guy ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager Date: 12 Mar 1993 04:16:59 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > The monthly rates on pagers are sure a lot better than the > airtime use on cellular phones. I recently got a pager, and was surprised at how cheap the service has gotten. I have service from PacTel Paging, and for $21 a month, I get coverage throughout WA, OR, CA, and AZ. This is for a display pager. Local coverage only is $9 a month. > Now and then I have to travel outside the coverage are of the > system. It would sure be great if the various pager companies would > set up a co-op where I could tell my pager company I'm going to be > somewhere for a couple weeks and they'd give me a telephone access > number for that area. Unfortunately, this is not feasable, as far as I can tell. Before I moved to PacTel, I was with Telepage Northwest for a couple of months. I asked them about coverage in California, and their solution was to go to a SkyPager at $60 per month plus a per-page charge with no allowance. What I thought I could do is find a paging company in California that operated on the same frequency as Telepage Northwest, and sign up for service with them, independantly of my service here. Even if this were possible, the total bills would have been more than what I'm paying now, and I would not have had as much coverage. In any event, at least in the calling around that I did, most paging companies have the frequency they use reserved nationwide. So, if that particular company does not service a particular area, and in the absense of any sharing arrangement, their frequency is just not in use there. PacTel works well for me because they have a presence through- out the West. > To help those of us that occasionally travel, it'd be great to > have "communications stores" in airports. They'd offer pagers and > cellular phones for rent while you're in that city. I've seen (as I > recall) car rental companies that are renting cellular phones, but > have generally not seen pager rental. What I think would be a good idea is for the paging companies that are affiliated with SkyPage to rent SkyPagers on a short-term basis as a service to their customers. So, when you're in-town, you use your regular local pager, and when you're out of the area, you pick up a SkyPager for a nominal daily fee. They could even automatically forward any pages from your regular number to the SkyPager. > We intend to utilize the paging network in one of our broadcast > transmitter control systems. On an alarm, the system would dump > transmitter parameters to the on call tech's pager (alphanumeric). What about using paging to get data TO remote equipment? Are there any devices that are pagers with an RS-232 port, instead of a display? This way, you could send (short) commands to remote locations, without requiring a phone line be present. Also, why is there a delay in the delivery of pages? I can understand when the system may get busy during the day, and pages are stacked up in the queue, but even in the middle of the night, it can take upwards of a minute for a page to be delivered. Sometimes, they come almost instantly, then just a moment later, take almost a minute. There's no way that the queue was empty, then suddenly built up to a big backlog, all of a sudden in the middle of the night. Why are pages not just sent out immediately? Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: 12 Mar 1993 05:44:56 +0000 (GMT) From: williams@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu (Mark Williams) Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager Organization: Texas Christian University In article jgeorge@whiffer.atl.ga.us writes: > jackl@pribal.uucp (jack lowry) writes: >> will probably work for you. I think that there are several other >> companies offering nationwide service, and some local companies (like >> PacTel Paging, I think) can offer service in more than one metro area >> on the same pager. > Personally, I would think that a cellular phone would be a necessity > nowadays as a supplement to a pager rather than a replacement for it. I have PacTel service in Texas. It's $12.95 a month for a Motorola Bravo Plus (some more-than-reasonable quantity of stored messages timestamped) with coverage all over the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex. It's an additional $5.00 per month to pick up all the major urban areas of Texas (Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Midland/Odessa, Beaumont, Abilene, El Paso, etc.) and many interstate highway areas connecting them. That's reasonable in my book. Also, for $1.50 a month, per, I have a local phone number in each city (I only have Houston) and they were even able to assign a local number that matched my main one (817-xxx-4028 in Fort Worth and 713-xxx-4028 in Houston). You just have to make sure that people enter their NPA or you don't know where to call them back. Mark Williams williams@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu ------------------------------ From: james@cs.ualberta.ca (James Borynec; AGT Researcher) Subject: Re: The Geodesic Report II - A Small Review Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 00:33:16 -0700 goldstein@carafe.dnet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > competitive with a big one. Long distance, even per Huber's quote, is > almost exactly the opposite, a competitive commodity. In economics, a > commodity has many vendors entering and exiting, and the price is > always near "cost", and nobody makes "economic profit" (greater than > required rate of return on capital invested). That's just what LD > telecom is doing now, save AT&T's slipping umbrella. I believe that the argument goes like this: fiber has almost unlimited bandwidth. Once the outside plant has been paid for, the costs are associated with maintaining the line. This means that the person who most "fills up" the fiber pipe gets the lowest average cost. Therefore, they can charge the lowest prices. AT&T has the most traffic and they have an advantage in their access to the LEC (about a 15% cost advantage held back by the FCC). Therefore, in a 'free' market AT&T could put MCI and Sprint out of business. I have a question, if long distance were REALLY competitive, wouldn't we see AT&T, Sprint, and MCI competing on PRICE? Their prices have gotten a lot closer to each other in the last few years! j.b james@cs.ualberta.ca ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Payphone Records in WTC Case Date: 12 Mar 1993 04:32:03 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article jeff@digtype.airage.com writes: > I just heard on the news that the latest suspect in the WTC bombing > case was linked to the main previous suspect via payphone call logs. > It seems that the first suspect used the payphone in the storage > building lobby where the explosives were supposedly stored to call > Nidal Ayyad (a chemical engineer at Allied-Signal) at Nidal's office a > number of times. These people don't seem too bright. Repeatedly using the same payphone in a place that could be linked to them if they were to become suspect doesn't sound like a good idea. Also, they've got some nerve to go back and want the deposit back on the truck they blew up. > It's very interesting to see the use of call detail that is available > from public payphones. Remember that the Long Island kidnapping case > also involved police using payphone call records ... There was a case a couple of years back in Berkeley, CA that was big news in the Bay Area. She just disappeared one night. Everybody thought she had been kidnapped, but she turned out in Utah or somewhere around there a few weeks later -- it turns out that she just took off on her own accord without telling anyone, and ran off with some bus driver. Anyway, on the night she disappeared, she had called home (in Walnut Creek) from a payphone in Berkeley. They located the payphone, and used its location as a starting point to try to find witnesses. As for the phone company keeping detailed records of even coin-paid calls, I'm sure these are necessary at least for audits, if no other reason. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #172 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24690; 12 Mar 93 5:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04528 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:50:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17789 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:50:01 -0600 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 02:50:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303120850.AA17789@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #173 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 93 02:50:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 173 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! (John J. Butz) Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! (John Higdon) Re: OSPS and ANI Failures (Ihor Kinal) Re: OSPS and ANI failures (Matt Healy) Re: Inverse Paging Service? (Barry Margolin) Re: Inverse Paging Service? (Guy Hadsal) Re: Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity (Paul Cook) Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer (Carl Moore) Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer (Steve Forrette) Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada (Derek Andrew) Re: NAFTA Implications for Telecommunications in Canada (Richard Cox) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.J.Butz@att.com Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 14:18:30 EST Subject: Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! Douglas Scott Reuben writes: [text omitted] I've been waiting for this one ... Did you know that when microwave ovens were first sold, no one would buy them? Consumers back then knew that microwaves were mostly used to reheat precooked foods in large institutional and industrial type applications, like airlines, cafeterias and hospitals. We all know that food cooked in a nuker just doesn't taste the same as if it were cooked in a conventional oven. Add on top, the associations one may have with airline, hospital and cafeteria cuisine and you had a recipe for success, Right? **NOT!** So some slick marketers figured they had better come up with some new ideas to reposition their product and make it sell. Today, just about everyone owns one. (Except for me, and when you come right down to it, how many folks use it merely to cook pop-corn, quickly reheat left-overs or see what happens when you put metal inside it anyway?) The EasyReach 700 service is in on the steep part of the learning curve. Yes, people associate 700 and 900. Yes, there are lines that block AT&T. Yes to Rochester Tel, yes to 10288, yes, yes, yes, yes ... The service isn't "God-like" perfect, but Rome wasn't built in day either. We have been live in the AT&T network for less than a year. Our first feature release gives forward and reverse billing options, vanity numbers, nationwide, remote call forwarding ability with limited call screening, a call home capability and full rep support. We just recently put out our second feature release, with new features planned and being implemented. The problems you describe are being addressed. I'm not a spokesperson, but I think if you have a little patience and are willing to grow with us and the EasyReach service, you will be a "delighted" customer. This service promises to be very exciting. > Overall, I DO like the service, and find it useful. Thanks for the feedback, I have forwarded your posting to our product managers. Our competition does not have a similar service. J Butz ER700 Sys Eng jbutz@hogpa.att.com AT&T - BL ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:37 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: No One Calls My ATT EasyReach Number! Douglas Scott Reuben writes: > Simply? Give me a break! AT&T: Get your act together on EasyReach - > make it easier to use, and allow me to be reached from everywhere. The > novelty and even the utlity of the service quickly wears off if even > one person (not to mention almost everyone) complains about using "the > 700 number" to call me. Methinks you bitch at AT&T too much. If you will recall, there was this little matter of divestiture. AT&T no longer runs all those local telephone companies; their non-compliance with standards is out of AT&T's control. Just as AT&T cannot force COCOTs to place and route calls properly, it cannot be responsible for the LEC mishandling of calls. Your complaint is with each of the local companies who are not completing your 700 calls. > There are alternatives (like Cable and Wireless's Programmable 800 > service), and I suspect that in the future there will be more. If you > expect to retain me as a customer, I would expect you to address the > issues raised in this post and make EasyReach as convenient and simple > as dialing any other telephone number. What it sounds like is that you really want the programmable 800 service in the first place. Perhaps you should more carefully assess your requirements and properly select a product before you lambaste the provider for not meeting your misdirected expectations. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 13:33:40 EST From: ijk@violin.att.com Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures Organization: AT&T In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Now, given that the number of calls generated on the network by > automatic devices is increasing exponentially, feeble attempts to > "rescue" a call via operator intervention would seem to be a complete > waste of time and resources. > I guess what I am trying to say is, "why bother?" Just let the call > die; why take up more time? I don't know for sure, but I believe the LECs will charge the LD company an access charge even in such cases. Consequently, it does make financial sense to attempt to complete the call. No, I don't know the financial details -- I just write db software. [And other standard disclaimers apply] Ihor Kinal att!trumpet!ijk ------------------------------ From: matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy) Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures Organization: Yale U. - Genetics Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 14:15:56 GMT I know of at least one situation where the operator _always_ had to ask for the number. In my college dorm, circa 1982, there was a _bell_ in each room. However, the _phones_ were in the hall. The number on the dial was missing the last two digits; each room had a unique number that would only ring its bell on incoming calls. To call home (COLLECT ONLY), you had to tell the operator your phone number because that phone had six different numbers for various rooms. My senior year they finally upgraded the system: 1. replaced the University switchboard, which had been installed during World War Two; 2. Put in new phones, replacing the noisy old black wall phones in the hall with nice white phones in the rooms; 3. Started allowing credit card billing at direct-dial rates. (By this time several phreaky phriends had figured out how to wire room phones to the bells in the rooms!) Matt Healy matt@wardsgi.med.yale.edu ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 18:15:49 EST Subject: Re: Inverse Paging Service? Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA In article is written: > In particular, when people ask me for my phone number, I usually give > out two (one at home, one at work), with the caveat that I am rarely > ever available at either number. However, during the times when I am > not available by a phone, I am almost always still reachable by > electronic mail. I'd really like a service whereby I can give people > a "pager" number, which they could call up and punch in a return phone > number like usual, which would then get translated into an E-mail > message sent to me. Does such a service exist? (Note that > suggestions to buy equipment to "roll my own" are not useful; to do so > is really not worth the hassle for me.) > [Moderator's Note: What you are asking is available as an alphanumeric > pager. People using these get little one line messages, etc from the > caller. PAT] I don't think alphanumeric paging is what he wants, since it only broadcasts to pagers. He didn't say he had a pager, he said he was reachable by electronic mail when he's not reachable by phone. He wants a touchtone service that converts the keyed message into an electronic mail message. Barry Margolin System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar [Moderator's Note: Well, he *did* say he wanted to have a 'pager' number, and as a practical matter, how much text can a person key in using the phone pad? Probably two or three words without too much trouble. That is why it seemed tome his best 'email' under the desired circumstances would be via the display on an alphanumeric pager. PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 09:53:33 EST From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Re: Inverse Paging Service? In article , Garrett.Wollman@UVM.EDU says: > I'd really like a service whereby I can give people > a "pager" number, which they could call up and punch in a return phone > number like usual, which would then get translated into an E-mail > message sent to me. Does such a service exist? (Note that Yes. Its a technology that again is considered by the industry to be "out of date" and thus is not about to be offered. Early years of "alphanumeric" paging used the telephone (tone) as the *input* device. ie: 2-1 = A, 2-2 = B, etc They quickly discovered that it was not likley that a user would take the time necessary to spell/punch out the message; it was strapped (except in Arizona for some reason). The next step was to try another input device/technology. Things like Voice-Input and Electronic Input were explored and tested. The Voice- Input is still yet to be perfected enough for end-users on a broad range. The Electronic Input took off fast and has dominated the "input technology". The are a *range* of supporting electronic input devices; IXO, Teltype, Modex, Motorola's Alphamate, and software dedicated to paging like PcPage, SAMpage, PC-IXO, HP-page, and many others. None of the hardware devices were designed to dump to email, however some of the later software package did do it. SAMpage (hehe ... of Arizona again) wrote a sotware package (LAN based) for "messaging centers" or Answering Services that was 1economically proced and simple to use ... it sell for about $700 a node. The dedicated Answering Service hardware designers realizing that their market was being threatend jump on the development bandwagon and did their own upgrade modules to the exsisting hardware (and software) of their systems ... StarTel and a few others ... at about $5,000- $15,000 each. Now, to *answer* your question specifically; YES, *but* you still need and input (human using an electronic or an electronic alone) to do it. ghadsal@auvm.american.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 19:41 GMT From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Hearing-Impaired Teletype Connectivity jon@sd.cadence.com (John Kerns) writes: > If anyone has information on connecting a teletype (TTD) for the > hearing-impaired to a PC through a modem over phone lines, it would > be much appreciated. Since I'm posting this on behalf of someone > else, I don't have all the particulars, such as whether data needs to > be transmitted one-way or both ways. Thanks for the help. There are a couple of ways to do this. If you are using one of the newer TDDs, they should have a 300 bps ASCII mode, which will be compatible with the lowest speed on your modem. I have used CHAT mode in Telix to talk to TDDs this way, but the TDD *MUST* have the 300 bps ASCII mode. Otherwise, TDDs use 45.5 baud BAUDOT code, which conventional computer modems do not do. I understand that there is some MSDOS shareware that aids communications between PCs with conventional modems and ASCII compatible TDDs. (Note that the TDD must be ASCII compatible ... this program does NOT magically make your modem compatible with BAUDOT). Here is some information on this program, which I lifted off of the SilenTalk echo on Fidonet: "The Technology Assessment Program (TAP) at Gallaudet University offers a freeware program for use with standard modem that lets you communicate with ASCII TDD devices. You can download ASCII-TDD11.ZIP (16347k) from TAP's BBS at 202-544-3623 or receive the program on- disk by sending $3 for postage and handling to Technology Assessment Program, 800 Florida Ave. N.E., MSSD-200, WASHINGTON, DC 20002." If the TDD does not have ASCII, then you must communicate in 45.5 baud Baudot code. To do this, you must use a modem that can do Baudot. Here are some sources for TDD compatible modems, again lifted from SilenTalk, from a message posted there recently by Mark Rejhon: Ultratec InteleDModem: Ultratec ($329) 6442 Normandy Lane [Recommended] Madison, WI 53719 (608) 273D0707 (Voice/TDD) Notes: Has pulse/touchDtone dialing, builtDin speaker, busy signal detector (Futura-TDD will redial busy numbers), and is near 100% Hayes compatiable. Works best with Futura-TDD. ------- Krown Research Smart Modem: Krown Research, Inc. ($349) 10371 West Jefferson Blvd. Culver City, CA 90232 (800) 833D4968 (Voice/TDD) (213) 839D0181 (Voice/TDD) Notes: Has Pulse/Touchtone dialing. ------- Phone-TTY CM-4: Phone-TTY, Inc. ($349) 202 Lexington Ave. Hackensack, NJ 07601 (201) 489D7889 (Voice) (201) 489D7890 (TDD) Notes: Fastest initializing modem. Fast pulse dialing. Best TDD compatiablity Not Hayes compatiable. -------- I also heard about another modem and software that automatically switches over to 45.5 Baud BAUDOT from normal ASCII mode on an incoming call. This information was provided by Mauro Magnani, also on SilenTalk: "Fulltalk is a software working with a modem called MIC300i. Included with Fulltalk there is FlipTalk, TSR version of FullTalk yhat takes about 40K of RAM and can be popped up over text based applications to provide TDD communications on the fly .... Outstanding features: . answering machine with remote access: pre-record/edit outgoing msgs. . auto detection for TDD or ASCII: and auto set-up . auto redial . infrared interface: great for flashing lights . bulletin board . electronic mail . incoming call flashing . Memo & message editor . scrolling five pages of conversation (18 lines per page) *** MIC300i Internal Modem is NOT Hayes Compatible *** *** Coexist with any 1200/2400/9600/Faxmodem *** Price: 349 $ (modem + software) Address: MICROFLIP, INC. 11211 Petsworth Lane GLENN DALE, MD 20769 TDD: 301 588 0965 VOICE: 301 262 6020 Hope this helps! Paul Cook 206-881-7000 Proctor & Associates MCI Mail 399-1080 15050 NE 36th St. fax: 206-885-3282 Redmond, WA 98052-5378 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 10:35:14 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer koos@kzdoos.hacktic.nl writes: > I was wondering, is this charging of not-completed calls done in any > other country in the world? There have been previous blurbs here about hotel room phones charging after a stated number of ringing signals even if the call is not answered. Also, there were notes in the Digest about the (previous) practice of radio-talk-show host Larry King telling people just to let the line keep on ringing. (That resulted in at least AT&T limiting the number of rings and disconnecting the call if it was still unanswered.) ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Dutch PTT Studies Charging For Busy or No Answer Date: 11 Mar 1993 21:20:44 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article koos@kzdoos.hacktic.nl writes: > I was wondering, is this charging of not-completed calls done in any > other country in the world? I think that there was a message here a year or so ago stating that this is indeed the case in Sweden and/or Norway. In fact, you get local message charges from the time you lift the receiver. The poster stated that just lifting the receiver, getting a dialtone, then hanging up with no dialing, would cause 1 message unit to be charged. Also, both cellular carriers in Los Angeles charge a half-minute of airtime for any uncompleted calls, including those that never leave their switch because of a bad called number or any other reason. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: andrew@herald.usask.ca (Derek Andrew) Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications For Telecommunications in Canada Date: 12 Mar 1993 07:51:50 GMT Organization: University of Saskatchewan Reply-To: andrew@herald.usask.ca From article , by john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon): > From correspondence with Canadians, I have determined that the US has > benefitted greatly for deregulation and divestiture. While Canada > still has step equipment and multi-party lines in rural areas, that > equipment and facility arrangement has all but disappeared in this > country. Bell Canada has no technical superiority with regard to the > typical service provided in the US; and frequently the reverse is > actually the case. I just wanted to point out that Bell Canada only services some of the Eastern provinces of Canada. It probably compares to GTE! Fibre was installed in Saskatchewan at a faster rate than any other North American phone company. We got no stinkin step by steps left and I am not aware of any multi-party lines left. Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskatchewan, Canada, S7N 0W0 Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808, 52 11 23N 106 48 48W Our prayers are with all who stood in Andrew's path. - President Bush. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 23:51 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: NAFTA Implications for Telecommunications in Canada Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk PAT included the paper forwarded by to telecom by Sid Shniad, Burnaby BC : called "The North American Free Trade Agreement and its Implications For the Telecommunications Industry in Canada" In that paper was the assertion that: > Cable and Wireless -- a subsidiary of the giant British Telecom -- > would be free to charge whatever it wants for its services. In case anyone is in any doubt, Cable and Wireless is not a subsidiary of British Telecom. In fact Cable and Wireless owns Mercury Commun- ications, BT's only competitor for long-haul traffic in the UK at the moment ! Richard D G 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 Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #173 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25747; 12 Mar 93 5:51 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07809 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 03:26:50 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00367 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Mar 1993 03:26:16 -0600 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 03:26:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199303120926.AA00367@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #174 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 93 03:26:15 CST Volume 13 : Issue 174 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell &c (W. J. G. Overington) Wired (was Hacked Cellular Phones) (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Bell Canada Applies to Hike Local Rates (Mark Brader) Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Carl Livecchia) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: esx038@cck.coventry.ac.uk (W. J. G. Overington) Subject: Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell &c Organization: Coventry University Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 11:35:20 GMT Telesoftware defined; a representation to the European Broadcasting Union and an overview of Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell and 1456 object code. Issue 1.0 8th March 1993 W. J. G. Overington Management Division, School of Engineering, Coventry University, Coventry, CV1 5FB United Kingdom. Telephone: +44 203 838655 (within UK Telephone: 0203 838655) Fax: +44 203 838949 (within UK Fax: 0203 838949) e-mail: esx038@cck.coventry.ac.uk The word telesoftware is defined as follows. TelesoftwareL The concept of producing a remote access computer system by means of the unidirectional cyclic broadcasting of software and its selective use by an unlimited number of independent terminals each having its own processing element and each characterized by a reception only telecommunications facility. Concept invented and word coined by W. J. G. Overington in 1974. Telesoftware is interactive with no return information link whatsoever to the central broadcasting computer. The symbol of telesoftware is the rete of an astrolabe in cyan upon a red field. * * * I make the suggestion that the European Broadcasting Union add to its teletext specification a feature that I suggest be called The EBU Shell. The EBU Shell. Where information upon a notionally displayable teletext page is intended for processing by a local computing system, be it a computer as such or a microprocessor system that is part of an intelligent television system, the local computing system should look for, and be able to act upon, keywords that begin with three characters 5/10, that is ZZZ in the ordinary character set. The following keywords are specified in the EBU shell: ZZZFILE: The keyword ZZZFILE is always followed by a space and then the name of a computer file. It provides a convenient common way of designating any file to which the incoming information should be sent. Its use is optional, as incoming software may be being dynamically obeyed rather than stored in a file. ZZZSYSTEME: The keyword ZZZSYSTEME is always followed by a space and then an Independent Infrastructure Name. After that, the information is in the format of the named independent infrastructure. The local computing system may well only act on a subset of the possible independent infrastructures, but should be capable of recognizing all EBU shell keywords. A process of consultation should aim at a fairly small collection of EBU shell keywords as a common collection of keywords recognizable by all such local computing systems. I suggest that the following could be added: Any person, who may, but need not, be representing an organization, may deposit with the European Broadcasting Union an Independent Infrastructure Name together with such other information as appears reasonable to act as a short overview and provide details of how to obtain further information. The European Broadcasting Union will maintain a collection of such deposited information and may, from time to time, publish it in such form as it sees fit. For example, such a list would contain the following: ZZZSYSTEME 1456: 1456 object code. A portable object code intended for compilation and translation to the local code of the local computing system, designed specifically for telesoftware. An open system available for general use. ZZZSYSTEME COVENTRY: Coventry Telesoftware Teletext Open Shell. The short name is Coventry shell. A forth-like language with powerful high level constructs and specialist libraries. Capable of having 1456 object code routines embedded within it. All keywords begin with a triple letter sequence (but not ZZZ to avoid conflict with the EBU shell). An open system available for general use. These are two systems designed by the present author and are, in fact, open systems for general use. This is because I feel that my own role is to work on open systems and publish papers. It would be entirely possible that some entries for independent infrastructures would contain sentences such as "A proprietary system, details of which are not published" or "A proprietary system, details of which are only available to customers of this company" and so on. I suggest, however, that the inclusion of such statements in an EBU list of independent infrastructures would be helpful for identification purposes and engineering management. * * * The Coventry shell contains powerful structuring commands such as zzzdefine which can specify new keywords containing zzzif zzzthen zzzelse zzzelseif zzzendif and so on within their definitions. There is strong typing of variables, with words such as III+ and III* available for adding and multiplying integers respectively; together with words such as CCC+ and CCC* for manipulating complex numbers. Various keyword triple letter keys are used in different ways. For example, some, such as III and CCC are used for manipulation of typed variables; keywords beginning with fff are freely defineable for use as database field names, such as fffquantity, fffprice and so on; keywords beginning with ppp constitute the Turquoise Lattice library to control programmed learning presentations, with words such as pppDisplayText (which needs a file name following it) and pppGetOneCharacter and so on. * * * Here is a short introduction to writing software in 1456 object code. An interesting feature of 1456 object code is that the actual codes broadcast are the normal way of writing 1456 object code. That is, although there is an assembler equivalent, it is not regarded as the main way of writing 1456 object code, as 1456 object code is designed for ease of being directly written. Consider the following assembler style language program. It is not for any particular processor, but, if you have used assemblers, you will probably recognize the general flavour of a label field, which may be left empty, an operation code field and a parameter field, which may or may not have anything in it, depending upon the particular operation code. START LOAD #3 ADD #2 STORE ALPHA HALT ALPHA DATA 0 For the avoidance of doubt, this program loads the immediate data of value 3 into a register called 1456A, adds the immediate data of value 2, stores the result in the data storage unit at the label ALPHA and then halts. Consider now rewriting the program so that there is not a separate label field, but that instead there is a pseudo-operation called LABEL, that generates no code, but merely informs us where the label is located. LABEL START LOAD #3 ADD #2 STORE ALPHA HALT LABEL ALPHA DATA 0 Consider now using numbers instead of names for labels. The program can now be written as below. LABEL 1 LOAD #3 ADD #2 STORE 2 HALT LABEL 2 DATA 0 In most, possibly all, microprocessor assembly languages that I have studied, the operation codes for LOAD IMMEDIATE and LOAD FROM MEMORY are different, but which of these operation codes is used in assembling any given use of a LOAD instruction is determined by examining the parameter field, not the LOAD instruction itself. For example, LOAD #$40 and LOAD $40 respectively, and not, say, LOAD# $40 and LOADM $40 In 1456 object code, each operation code is either one letter, or two characters, the first of which is ! (in speech "super"). There are 100 operation codes available, namely, A .. N, P .. Z, a .. k, m .. z, !A .. !N, !P .. !Z, !a .. !k, !m .. !z The letters uppercase O and lowercase l are omitted in order to avoid confusion between uppercase O and the figure 0 and between lowercase l and figure 1. The LOAD IMMEDIATE is w in 1456 object code and the LOAD FROM MEMORY is W with the argument being a label number, in octal. In 1456 object code there is also what I call software punctuation. These are items that in an assembler language would be called pseudo-operation codes. This software punctuation consists of label identification, generation of data spaces and so on. So we may convert our example to something approaching 1456 object code, though as we shall see, there are a few extra steps yet. : 1 w 3 p 2 S 2 H : 2 / 0 In order to avoid, when assembling the above, having to look beyond the length of the last digit in the parameter, because one does not know that it is the last digit of the parameter until one has already looked beyond it, the order of the operation code and its parameter, if any, are reversed. This means that a parameter, which must be a number, in octal, is ended by the operation code that uses that parameter. We thus have the following. 1 : 3 w 2 p 2 S H 2 : 0 / We also convert all numbers to being in octal format, though, as the numbers in this example are all of value less than 8, there is not any observable difference in doing that here. A space character and a return character have no significance in the code thus produced, so it is perfectly acceptable to place it in free format on as few or as many lines as is desired. We need to add an = sign, to signify that that is the end of the program, and we could then have, 1:3w2p2SH2:0/= but that is somewhat confusing to a human, so it is conventional to separate each operation by a space character, though it is usual to omit the space after a : symbol, so as to reinforce the fact that the : is but a label and is not assembled to give output code of itself. 1:3w 2p 2S H 2:0/ = In the above example, note that the figure 2 appears three times. In the first usage it is immediate data, because p uses it as immediate data; in the second usage it is the use of a label address, because S uses it as a label address; in the third usage it is the definition of label 2, because : is used to define a label. Comments can be included in 1456 object code between a * character and a ; character. The 1456 object code system supports separate compilation of modules in a program. This is performed by using a + character to signify the end of the module. Compilation of a 1456 object code program is by two pass assembly. When a module is separately compiled, both passes of tha