Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05655; 6 Dec 93 6:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13169 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19545 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:06 -0600 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:06 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312060952.AA19545@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #801 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Dec 93 03:52:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 801 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC (Bill Mayhew) Re: CD-ROM Telephone Directory (Ken K.P. Lo) Re: Carrier For 800 Number? (Russ McGuire) Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Erik Ramberg) Re: How Many Cellular Carriers in an Area (John R. Levine) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Matthew Landru) Re: AT&T's New Facility (John J. Butz) Re: AT&T _Required_? (Marshall Levin) Re: Instant Modem Banks (Barton F. Bruce) Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (C. Harald Koch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1993 15:01:08 GMT It sounds like just the thing you are looking for is from The Complete PC. There is a product called The Complete Answering Machine as well as a companion product called The Complete Fax Machine. I have had a Complete Answering Machine card for several years. I have an old AT&T 6300 w/o monitor that is dedicated to giving a home to the CAM board. You can connect from your demarcation point to the CAM unit. From the CAM, you can connect all your downstream extensions. If you go off hook for more than five seconds (this is user configurable) without DTMFing or outpulsing, the CAM will automatically disconnect the subscriber loop and start reading you the voice mail menu, giving you the opportunity to key in your mailbox number and password. I've noticed that CAM normally supplies local battery to all the extensions when they are on-hook. The local battery is about 15 volts. I've noticed that my one two-line phone shows the circuit as busy becuase the battery is below the nominal 48 volt on-hook. Unless you have equipment downstream from CAM that guages whether or not the line is busy by sampling the battery voltage, you should not have any troubles. CAM has the ability to support one or multiple mailboxes, which is user-configurable. If you are working with a PBX, you can disallow mailboxes that start with 9 or 0, if necessary. CAM can generate hook flashes and can outpulse or DTMF, so it can do just about anything the big time corporate voicemail systems can do. Namely call forwarding, call transfer, delayed voicemail delivery, etc. One thing CAM will not do is call progess monitoring (at least not in my version). I just blind dials when it does a message forward, then after a delay starts reading your message forward greeting. I really don't care, since I use the message forward to activate my pager. I have a couple of differnet mailboxes set up, so I send a different code to my pager depending on which mailbox received a message. Up to seven CAM boards can be installed in a computer. CAM boards can also daisy chain with a Complete FAX and do automatic routing. I don't know anything about a Complete FAX becuase I don't own one. There are some configuration options in the CAM menu for FAX support. Best of all, it is pretty reasonably priced. I've seen it at the Walmart Sam's Club outlet for about $99. Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu amateur radio 146.58: N8WED ------------------------------ From: KKPLO@ELECTRICAL.watstar.uwaterloo.ca (Ken K.P. Lo) Subject: Re: CD-ROM Telephone Directory Organization: University of Waterloo Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 18:16:32 GMT In article Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544. n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) writes: > Regarding discussion of CD-ROM directories, I have noticed that Bell > Atlantic is now joining the club. BA recently advertised a new > service offering their entire white pages for their seven states on > CD-ROM, with monthly updates available. Do you know how much it costs? Bell Canada here in Ontario and Quebec has one selling for Cdn$10,000, with six bi-monthly updates. Does anyone know why they cost so much? Ken K P Lo S3 Rm 105 Box 460 A Student of University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario (519) 725 - 6332 kkplo@electrical.watstar.uwaterloo.ca ------------------------------ From: Russ McGuire Date: Sun, 5 Dec 93 13:01:26 -0600 Subject: Re: Carrier For 800 Number? In article Gerry Palmer writes: > Is there any way left to easily tell what carrier "owns" a given > 800-number? I'm trying to find out who is carrying 800-950-3535, > and have been unable to get any assistance either my local carrier > (Bell of PA) or my preferred IXC (Sprint). Ideas, anyone? I can easily think of three scenario's: 1. The number currently "belongs" to a company or individual. In this case, I can't imagine why you would care which carrier is being used, unless its your number, and then you would probably know the carrier. 2. A Responsible Organization (RESPORG) has reserved the number. A number can be reserved for up to 60 days in expectation of a certain company or person taking the number. A RESPORG may be a carrier, or may be an individual. If you call any carrier who happens to also be a RESPORG (as most of them are), you can request a certain number. If the number is not in use or reserved, they can get that number for you. If it is reserved, they can tell you which RESPORG has reserved it. 3. The number is not being used and it is not reserved. Any RESPORG/carrier can claim it for any of their customers. Of course, all of this only applies to the US and is only true since 800 portability began earlier this year. Since portability, the 800 number is no longer "owned" by the carrier, but rather by the customer. The customer can move the number between carriers and can even split the traffic for a given number among carriers, based on, for example, percentage, time-of-day, or LATA conditions. Russ McGuire Manager, Product Development WilTel, Inc. russ_mcguire@wiltel.com [Moderator's Note: One thing AT&T is still doing that the FCC is going to make them quit doing before long is reserving numbers for imaginary customers who do not exist. They are doing this with 'good' numbners they want to hang on to. I've tried to get 800 numbers for customers of my service only to have the RESPORG tell me that the number 'belongs to' AT&T. When you dial it, it goes to intercept, and no actual customer ever seems to show up, yet the number keeps getting reserved over and over for sixty days at a time. I recently talked directly to a staff attorney at the FCC who asked me to call him personally with a list of 800 numbers in this category and I am compiling them now. PAT] ------------------------------ From: erik_ramberg@SMTP.esl.com (Erik Ramberg) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number Date: 5 Dec 1993 22:29:06 GMT Organization: ESL Inc. In article , fish@teal.csn.org (Dave Fish) wrote: > I've got a question on how a cellular telephone's serial number is > used by the cellular telephone system. If I change a cellular > telephone's phone number to that of another phone in that system will > I make calls charged against that phone number? Or does the phone > system "know" about a phone's serial number? > [Moderator's Note: The phone's ESN or Electronic Serial Number is > matched with the phone number assigned and the tower will reject your > call if the two do not correctly match. The exception to this rule -- > and they are few and far between -- is that for a few certain phone > numbers, the tower is told to either ignore discrepancies in the ESN > or not to bother checking at all. What types of cellular phone numbers > are exempt from validation? Administrative numbers used by the cellular > carrier itself in customer service, maintainence and technical support. > They want it so the technician going out on maintainence can grab any > phone handy and take it with him. Don't forget 911. You can't legally block that number. Erik [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it. PAT]n ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Dec 93 14:49 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: How Many Cellular Carriers in an Area Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Ok, as long as we are talking about cell phones, here is a question that > I have not seen answered. I understand that in an area there are two > cellular carriers - wireline and non wireline. However, here in NJ I > see advertisements for more than two carriers. It seems you can buy > service from Cellular One, NYNEX, or Bell Atlantic - hey wait, thats > three. ... Actually the answer is about ten. Here's why: The U.S. is divided up into lots of cellular "markets". There are 306 Metropolitan Service Areas, numbered by population starting with 001 in New York, down to 306 for off-shore Lousiana and Texas (lots of oil rigs.) The rest of the country is divided into Rural Service areas, each containing one or more counties. Each MSA and RSA has two carriers, the A carrier which is not related to the local phone company, and the B carrier which is. In New Jersey, the division is entirely by county. There are five MSA's within New Jersey: 134 Atlantic City (Atlantic, Cape May) 070 Long Branch (Monmouth) 062 New Brunswick (Middlesex) 121 Trenton (Mercer) 228 Vineland/Millville (Cumberland) Four MSA's in adjacent states include New Jersey counties: 001 NYC (Passaic, Bergen, Morris, Essex, Union, Hudson, Somerset) 004 Phila (Gloucester, Camden, Burlington) 058 Allentown (Warren) 069 Wilmington (Salem) The remaining three counties are each an RSA: NJ-1 Hunterdon NJ-2 Ocean NJ-3 Sussex OK, what does this actually mean for who the carriers are? Here's a little chart, explanations below: A B 134 Atlantic City 00267 Comcast Cell One 00250 BAMS 070 Long Branch 00173 Comcast Cell One 00022 NYNEX 062 New Brunswick 00173 Comcast Cell One 00022 NYNEX 121 Trenton 00575 Comcast Cell One 00008 BAMS 228 Vineland/Millville 00583 US Cell 00250 BAMS 001 NYC 00025 McCaw (AT&T) Cell One 00022 NYNEX 004 Phila 00029 Comcast Metrophone 00008 BAMS 058 Allentown 00103 Vanguard Cell One 00008 BAMS 069 Wilmington 00123 Comcast Cell One 00008 BAMS NJ-1 Hunterdon 01487 Comcast Cell One 00250 BAMS NJ-2 Ocean 01489 Ocean Co. Cell 00250 BAMS NJ-3 Sussex 01491 Sussex Cell 00022 BAMS? BAMS is Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems. The five digit numbers are cellular system numbers. If two entries have the same number, they're the same system. In some cases, two systems are operated as one, e.g., it is my impression that BAMS operates systems 00008 and 00250 together. In Sussex Co., the B operator is listed as BAMS even though system 00022 is NYNEX New York City. This is probably correct, since BAMS is a minority owner of system 00022 due to a lot of it being in New Jersey. (It also covers all of NYC, Long Island, Westchester, Putnam, and Rockland counties in New York, probably the largest system in the country.) "Cellular One" is a trademark licensed by McCaw to two-thirds of all of the A carriers in the country. It's purely a marketing thing; there's little relationship among McCaw Cell One, Comcast Cell One, and Vanguard Cell one. McCaw recently sold itself to AT&T, and it seems likely that McCaw will switch to the better known AT&T name, so who knows what will become of the rest of the Cell One licensees, maybe they'll sell the name to someone else. So I see ten different carriers in New Jersey. Each of them signs up lots of phone stores in their areas to act as agent for them selling equipment and service (`Bud's Fresh Bait and Cellular Phone'.) In each area, there are indeed only two carriers, but since New Jersey has so many areas near each other, you'll be hearing lots and lots of competing ads. Finally, you'll often find various special roaming arrangements among nearby carriers. I don't know about New Jersey, but for example, here in Boston, I have service with NYNEX, but if I use my phone in Contel territory in Vermont, I pay 52 cents/min rather than the standard roaming rate of 85 cents/min plus $3/day. Some systems even have `home roaming' plans where in some roamer areas you pay the same rate as in your home system. If there is home roaming available, it can be cheaper to get a phone from a neighboring system than at home. It looks like I'd have gotten better rates here in Boston if I'd gotten my phone in Montpelier VT because Contel charges home roaming rates for Boston. On the other hand, my phone would then have a Vermont number, and Contel just sold their Vermont properties to NYNEX who will doubtless fix that little loophole. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 5 Dec 1993 23:25:31 GMT Organization: Project SAVE International In article zeta@tcscs.com (Gregory Youngblood) writes: > [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but > they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence > users they can't. PAT] Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800 number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems. But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump quarters in.) I've contacted both AT&T and Sprint about this. AT&T's response is that they are not responsible for blocking the calls, and that I should talk to the university. (The university's phone "experts", BTW, respond with "what's 10XXX?") Sprint replies with a noncommittal "we'll look into it." I've basically given up. ACUS rates are not exorbitant, and unlike the previous writer's description, AU does not take any markup at all. But I'm offering the information in case anyone wants to fight it. Matthew B. Landry President of Project SAVE mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu [Moderator's Note: Next time they ask you 'what is 10xxx?' tell them to quit talking so stupid and pretending like they don't know anything. Tell them if they don't know what 10xxx is, they have no business operating a large system like that. If you ask, the FCC will send you a copy of the rules; make copies of what you are sent and give it to the 'telecom experts' with a note attached short and sweet and to the point: "How far are you going to push this? Will it have to go to litigation?" See what their answer is to that. I'd also go right on around them to the VP of telecommunications for the University or whatever the person's title is and give them a copy also. Also, make sure the campus newspaper is aware of it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Dec 93 15:09:35 EST From: jbutz@hogpa.ho.att.com (John J Butz) Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility Dave Niebuhr writes: > AT&T announced in yesterday's {Newsday} that it will begin laying > fiber optic cable from Shirley, Long Island, New York (one mile from > my home) to France (I forget the place). This cable will travel > underground from the AT&T site to the Great South Bay where it will be > buried in a one-step operation, thence across Fire Island, and on out > to the 30 foot contour. Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to Washington, DC. After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor. On Friday morning, both vessels were docked. However, on the Sunday return trip, only one boat was still in port. Perhaps to Long Island is where the second ship went? I've been sailing on the Great South Bay out of Islip and it looks deep enough to handle an ocean going vessel. Also, the Robert Moses causeway bridge to Fire Island would definitely provide clearance for a fairly tall ship. However, I've been fluke fishing enough times to tell you that most of the Great South Bay is pretty shallow. Dave, perhaps you could go on a recon-mission and let us know if the AT&T ship is there? 8-) > The late G. Marconi (I can't spell his first name :-( ) had his > transmitting station in Rocky Point prior to RCA taking it over. One of my favorite resting spots on my bike loop is Twin Lights Historic Lighthouse, in Highlands, NJ. Since Twin Lights is one of the highest points on the Atlantic seaboard, it was a natural choice as a site for one of the first commercial Marconi radio towers. The site operated as a relay station between ocean going ships and the ship owners in downtown Manhattan (NYC). Legend has it that market speculators would try to intercept the messages received by the relay station and guess what each ship was carrying. Commodities futures could then be purchased while the ships were still several days at sea. When the ships arrived in NYC to deliver their cargo, prices would rise, but those early "insider-traders" would be able to exercise their futures and purchase goods at the lower price. Pretty sneaky. J Butz jbutz@hogpa.att.com AT&T - CCS ------------------------------ From: mlevin@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Marshall Levin) Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_? Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Mon, 06 Dec 93 07:37:11 GMT > [Moderator's Note: No, you have that wrong. No telephone company or > COCOT or Alternate Operator Service (AOS), or reseller of the local > telephone network can force you to place calls via a certain carrier > or deny you the right to use the carrier of your choice (as long as > that carrier wants your business and operates in your area, etc). That > is the law. There is no such law where the *recipient* of a phone call > is concerned. The *recipient* can choose to accept calls from any > carrier, or only the carrier of his choice. Speedway refuses to accept > calls from other than the AT&T network because AT&T gives Speedway a > commission on the traffic they handle. Speedway, as the *recipient* > of the call, has the right to do that if they wish. In other words, > no one is forcing you to use AT&T to call 503-520-2222, but Speedway > says unless you do (call via AT&T) they don't wish to connect with > you since they are being paid by AT&T for the time you spend on line > with them. Regards the [any carrier <=> any traffic] thing you mentioned, > also exempt are 800 numbers since the recipient is the one paying for > the call, and 900 numbers, again since the recipient is the one who > has the billing arrangements with the carrier of choice. PAT] So, theoretically, I could call AT&T, since they are my carrier, and say I don't want to receive any calls placed via another carrier? And then they have to honor this request, and configure their system to stop other calls? Would the subscriber have to pay for such service? Intersting -- when I tried calling speedway via MCI I just got a busy signal -- is this wat the software tells it to do? Where does it get the signal not to accept -- I'm not really clear on how this works technically -- what sort of signaling system is used? Marshall Levin [Moderator's Note: AT&T does not have to do anything of the sort for you unless they find it to their mutual advantage to go along with your plans. It is your job to identify the source and routing of the calls. Let's say you get a huge amount of incoming traffic; umm .. maybe four or five thousand calls per hour; that is a figure which will put you in a good negotiating position with any carrier. Now for every call a carrier hands off to your local telco to be in turn passed on or delivered to you, they have to pay your local telco some amount of money; let's say five cents per minute to use round numbers. Now you go to the various carriers to cut a deal: You say to them instead of paying the local telco five cents per minute, how about if they bring a T-1 right to your POP (or point of presence) and pay you some amount of money instead? Sprint and MCI offer to give you three cents per minute if they can avoid giving the local telco five cents per minute. But AT&T says they'll give you three and a half cents per minute ... okay! Sold to the highest bidder. The carriers all know that at your volume of traffic you are generating a lot of business for them, and they are more than happy to make another penny or two per minute if they can. So you decide AT&T (or Sprint, MCI, take your pick) has the best offer. The selected carrier then programs their switch in such a way that whenever *they* see a call to your number, they pick it off and route it directly to those new wires they installed next to your building. The local telco never sees the calls. In the meantime, if someone calls via some other carrier, that carrier continues to do as always: hand the call to the local telco who in turn delivers it to you normally via your main directory-listed telephone number. So your 'regular' phone will continue to ring off the hook all day and night just as it always has, but you answer those calls with a recorded message *that you program and are responsible for handling* saying something like "I won't talk to you since you did not call via the carrier I chose. Hang up and dial 10-my-code to get through." The only people who change anything is the carrier you selected to handle your calls; they watch for them to come through the network and pluck them off, and hand them to you directly. Everyone else continues to call your regular number and you refuse to deal with them however you wish. Under the law, the carrier you want to use cannot divert traffic from other carriers; all they can do is agree to watch for traffic to you and give it special treatment. Since you see it coming in on special lines, you know it is from them and accept it. As I said early on in this note, unless you have heavy inbound traffic, none of the carriers is going to be interested. It costs them money to have special lines direct to you. If an analysis of your traffic does not demonstrate to the carrier how they can save many, many thousands of dollars per month a few cents at a time, and split it with you so that both of you make money in the process, they are not going to be interested. And if you are handling inbound traffic of several thousand calls per hour, any carrier would love to have an exclusive on it. Even Speedway, with much less traffic per hour (but longer connect times per call) is very lucrative to AT&T. So you would be doing what the carriers cannot do under the law: force people to call a certain way, and it is quite legal as long as you, the recipient make the decision. When the Amoco Oil/Diner's Club Credit Card office was in Chicago many years ago, the Sales Authorization unit was pulling in that kind of traffic on 800 numbers from AT&T. It is unlikely any residence or most businesses would qualify at all, but you never know these days, given all the changes in the industry. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Barton.Bruce@camb.com Subject: Re: Instant Modem Banks Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society Date: 05 Dec 93 16:23:38 -0500 Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) writes: > In article Martin McCormick datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu> writes: >> In recent postings, several people told of modem banks which can >> be attached directly to a T1 and use DSP to simulate 24 dial-up modems. There are two vendors in this area. Primary Access has been 'it' for years, and their original hardware only included internal x.25 PAD functionality. They do support all sorts of T1 signalling including FG-B and FG-D. They have noticed the demand for something other than x.25, and you should check with them. They probably have product by now. USR is developing a similar product, but allows front-ending with whatever service is currently cheapest. If POTS analog lines make most $ sense, use them. When telco wakes up, swap ONLY the front end card(s) and go to T1. Primary Access does 20 T1s per full RACK. USR does 2 T1s in either 5 1/4 or maybe 7" of rack space (I forget which). USR initially has (yuk) x.25 simply because a LARGE customer needing it was funding development. They are painfully aware that most everyone else calling has comments too rude to repeat about x.25. They may be foolish enough to delay time to market by building the terminal server TOTALLY themselves, or may 'buy' someone's basic design and s/w and build a card to run in their shelf on their busses. Fear/Pride in using NIH components can be very costly. Even DEC uses someone else's LAT code in their latest terminal servers!! And DEC (and about everyone else) is smart enough to use a lot of 'cisco' in their HUB pluggable routers. So we will soon see how smart/stupid USR really is. USR claims that at about $1,000. per port (list -- discounts available, of course) they will be 1/2 the Primary Access price. YUK!! This market needs some more players. You may find that buying s USED Mitel SX200D PBX with T1 cards and ONS line cards and a recent Generic that supports T1 gets you from T1s to pots analog and into a bank of analog modems for less than a used channel bank. But check carefully in "Telcom Gear" because there have been some used channel banks loaded with FXS cards going for very low prices. Rack these up with somthing like piles of ZyXEL 1496E (not even the + ones) and you get a LOT for the $ albeit with a LOT of cables and potential labor and support hassles -- but student labor is inexpensive at .edu sites ... ------------------------------ From: C. Harald Koch Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized Organization: Alias Research, Inc., Toronto ON Canada Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1993 06:07:27 GMT In Mathew Englander writes: > This is news to me. Does this mean that residents of Thornhill, St. > Catharines, etc. can expect to get calls from people trying to phone > Mexicans? > [Moderator's Note: Well, I don't think so unless the caller is using a > very, very old areacode map/index. How long has the code been gone > where Mexico is concerned? Five years perhaps ... PAT] Many Mexican businesses are *still* publishing 905 on letter-head and business cards. So yes, people in the new 905 area code will probably get phone calls destined for people in Mexico ... C. Harald Koch, Network Analyst Alias Research Inc. Toronto, ON chk@alias.com chk@utcc.utoronto.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #801 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa18408; 7 Dec 93 17:45 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11008 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14673 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:05 -0600 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312072010.AA14673@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #802 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Dec 93 14:10:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 802 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Patrick K. Simpson) '94 Conference on Mobile and Personal Communication Systems (J-P. Gaspoz) International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Stewart Fist) Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Alex Cena) Research Assistantship - High Speed Wireless Networking (Joseph B. Evans) MCI on the Move (Vancouver Sun via Sid Shniad) My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Marc Sira) Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (David Gast) 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Gary Huntress) TDD Software Wanted (Michael A. Hoffhinus) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Ron Richolson) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Rich Mintz) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Curtis Bohl) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: xm8@sdcc12.ucsd.edu (patrick k. simpson) Subject: World Congress on Computational Intelligence Date: 7 Dec 93 03:52:47 GMT CALL FOR PAPERS Extended Deadline for Papers December 31, 1993 For the First Time ... The 3 Most Exciting Technologies in Engineering Today Under One Roof Presenting the IEEE WORLD CONGRESS ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ICNN FUZZ-IEEE EC IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation 3 Conferences ... 1 Great Location ... 1 Inclusive Registration PLUS ... A Special Symposium Combining the Interests of All 3 Meetings into a Single Comprehensive Forum June 26 - July 2, 1994 Walt Disney World Dolphin Hotel Orlando, Florida IEEE WORLD CONGRESS ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE Orlando, Florida, June 26-July 2, 1994 Sponsored by the IEEE Neural Networks Council The 1994 IEEE World Congress on Computational intelligence consists of three IEEE International Conferences: The Third IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, and The IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation. The registration fee for the Congress covers admission to all three of the Conferences as well as to a special five- day Symposium entitled "Computational Intelligence: Imitating Life." This Symposium will be held Monday, June 27, through Friday, July 1, 10:20 am to 12:40 pm. SPECIAL SYMPOSIUM COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: IMITATING LIFE THE SYMPOSIUM addresses critical and emerging technologies and issues relating to biologically, psychologically, and linguistically motivated models that exhibit various facets of computational intelligence. The paradigms discussed include learning, reasoning, evolution, search, and optimization each of which often uses life imitating metaphors for guiding model building. Machine learning from data, neural and fuzzy information processing, approximate reasoning, and evolutionary computation are examples of computational intelli- gence approaches addressed by Symposium speakers. The Symposium provides a unique forum for cross-fertilization between the areas of neural networks, fuzzy logic, and evolutionary computing. SYMPOSIUM presentations are explicitly targeted toward the identification of challenges, issues, and potential solutions for problems arising in computa- tional intelligence. THE SYMPOSIUM consists of 3 public lectures, 10 plenary talks, and 30 mini- symposia presentations, covering Neural Networks (21), Fuzzy Logic (13), and Evolutionary Computation (9). Contributions include recent research that has implications for further progress, state-of-the-art reviews, and discussions of important applications in fields such as biology, signal and imaging processing, robotics and control. Presenters have been chosen from academia and industry and represent the leaders in their fields from throughout the world. THE SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS "Computational Intelligence: Imitating Life," will be published and available at the Congress for each participant. Proceedings will later be distributed by the IEEE Press. INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL THREE CONFERENCES Papers must be received by December 31, 1993 Papers will be reviewed by senior researchers in the field, and all authors will be informed of the decisions at the end of the review process. All accepted papers will be published in the Conference Proceedings. Please submit the following: - Send one original and five copies of the paper. Six total. - Papers must be camera ready on 8 1/2 x 11 white paper, two-column format in Times or similar font style, 10 points or larger with one inch margins on all four sides. - Do not fold or staple the original camera-ready copy. - Four pages are encouraged, however, the paper must not exceed six pages, including figures, tables, and references. Papers over six pages will not be considered. - Papers must be written in English. Authors are encouraged to use the WCCI LaTex template with the IEEEtran. sty style sheet. (The format is similar to that used in IEEE transactions.) These documents can be FTP'd using the following instructions: FTP FTP.AI.SRI.COM LOGIN: ANONYMOUS PASSWORD: Subject: '94 Conference on Mobile and Personal Communication Systems Organization: EPFL A few collegues of mine are interested in publishing a paper related to the management of Personal Communication Systems (PCS) / Universal Personal Telecommunications (UPT). Are there any conferences covering or addressing these topics scheduled for !94 ? The deadline for submitting the paper should of course not be out-of-date. Thank you in advance. JP ------------------------------ Date: 07 Dec 93 06:33:34 EST From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: International Calls via Cable or Satellite In Australia we use the access code 0011 for voice calls, and 0015 for fax calls. The difference is primarily in the fact that the fax call will always be placed via cable if cable is available. There are also some differences in the fact that bit-stealing is turned off, and some modification to the time-out of the echo cancellation. Stewart Fist ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 09:12:30 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS. But who will be providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for availability. I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T. I'm specifically interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the world. Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest or to me directly? Alex Lehman Brothers acena@lehman.com Opinions are mine not my employers. ------------------------------ Subject: Research Assistantship - High Speed Wireless Networking From: evans@hamming.uucp (Joseph B. Evans) Date: 7 Dec 93 08:37:48 CDT Organization: Elec. Eng. & Comp. Sci., Univ. of Kansas Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) for High Speed Wireless Networking Research University of Kansas Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Telecommunications and Information Sciences Laboratory (TISL) Lawrence, Kansas TISL is looking for qualified, creative individuals with a desire to pursue graduate research and education in high speed wireless link and networking technologies. The position requires an undergraduate or MS degree in EE, ECE, or CS with credentials for admission to the University of Kansas Graduate School. Good communication skills, strong self-motivation, and the ability to work as part of a team are required. A background in communications systems and/or networking is desired. The individual will join a team of faculty and students pursuing sponsored research in high speed wireless communications networks and in the hardware and software development of a prototype high speed wireless Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) system. This position is an opportunity to develop the telecommunications technology of the future. TISL has state-of-the-art communications and computing facilities. We are a founding member of the MAGIC gigabit testbed and have experiential ATM and long distance SONET facilities. Within TISL, faculty and students address challenging research issues in various aspects of telecommunications, ranging from high speed networks to wireless communications systems and advanced spread spectrum techniques. The interaction between the laboratory and the other EECS faculty contribute to the stimulating intellectual environment. The University of Kansas is located in Lawrence, a city of about 75,000 people, which is situated in the rolling hills of eastern Kansas, about an hour's drive from Kansas City. The city of Lawrence has a long history and retains may interesting reminders of its colorful past. The community has 1,257 acres of public parks, indoor and outdoor community swimming pools, an arts center, an historical museum, and an active community education and recreation program. Interested applicants should submit two copies of both a resume and cover letter requesting application forms to: Dr. Victor S. Frost Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering Director, Telecommunications and Information Sciences Laboratory University of Kansas 2291 Irving Hill Road Lawrence, KS 66045-6929 Phone: (913) 864-4833 FAX: (913) 864-7789 e-mail: frost@eecs.ukans.edu ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: MCI on the Move Date: Mon, 6 Dec 93 16:47:42 PST U.S. PHONE GIANT PLANS MEXICAN CONNECTION Don't be surprised to see MCI International link up with a Mexican telecommunications partner to take advantage of expanded free trade, says the president of the New York-based company, Seth Blumenfeld. "We are certainly in the process of exploring options and opportunities in Mexico," Blumenfeld said in a telephone interview, adding that their corporate strategy is to create partnerships with other telecommunications companies. MCI International is a subsidiary of MCI Communications Corp., based in Washington, D.C. It is the second largest phone company in the United States after AT&T and the fifth largest in the world. Canadians recognize MCI as the U.S. partner of Stentor, the alliance of nine Canadian telephone companies that includes BC Tel, and as a partner of British Telecom in the U.K. Blumenfeld said that MCI provides telecommunications services to 18 per cent of the U.S. domestic market, which is worth $60 billion and grows at seven per cent annually. "A one per cent market share is worth $600 million as I calculate it and we've averaged a 1.0 to 1.5 per cent gain each year," Blumenfeld explained. In pursuing a corporate strategy to increase market share in the U.S., MCI also wants to keep its multinational customers happy by providing seamless service across the globe, he said. -- Vancouver Sun -- Sid Shniad ------------------------------ From: aa382@freenet.carleton.ca (Marc Sira) Subject: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Organization: The National Capital Freenet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 00:51:21 GMT I recently replaced my phone with a middle-of-the-line Radio Snack Duofone model (I was given it after my older, better phone gave up the ghost). I've noticed in a gradual awareness kind of way over the last couple of months that this phone makes a little beeping-ticking sound every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Yeah, I should be sleeping at this hour instead of waiting around for my phone to tick. No, it's not particularly loud enough to keep me awake, but I am curious about it. The ringer on the phone does seem to be sensitive to the line condition; taking my modem off-hook or putting it on-hook while it's on the same line produces a similar, louder noise from the phone. I imagine a second extension would have the same effect. So presumably there's a small glitch in the line voltage or something at 4:46 AM nightly. Any ideas what the phone company is doing to the line every night that would cause this behaviour? [Moderator's Note: Telco is doing line testing of the phones on your exchange. Your phone is sensitive enough that it notices this when it occurs. Roll over and go back to sleep. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Reply-To: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 06:58:04 GMT I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo does not work at all either). Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the instruction manual, to have any dip switches. Any ideas what I need to do? Get a new card? Thanks, David ------------------------------ From: ghuntres@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Gary Huntress) Subject: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 17:29:23 GMT I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift. In fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I left. I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones rather than the "bag" type. My in-laws will be travelling between MA and FL using the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and outbound calls (once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!" phase). I'm not worried about standby or talk times of the little phones, but I had not realized that they were 0.6 watts versus three watts for the bag phones. So here is my question: Is the east coast cell coverage sufficient so that 0.6 watts is enough power to always (or virtually always) be able to send and receive calls? None of the sales droids had a clue. Any info appreciated. Gary Huntress huntress@npt.nuwc.navy.mil ghuntres@nyx.cs.du.edu [Moderator's Note: I imagine the east coast is as saturated with coverage as the Chicago area, and here, the 0.6 watt phones do fine. Under rigorous conditions, obviously three watts will give a little more punch as needed, but I've never seen an instance here where the lower power did not do as well. Really, it is a personal preference most of the time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: michaelh@uhunix3.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Michael A. Hoffhines) Subject: TDD Software Wanted Organization: University of Hawaii Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 17:41:30 GMT Is there any software that emulates a TDD (Telecomm Device for the Deaf?). This ought to be straightforward, but my local phone company says that you 'have to buy their TDD hardware'. Say it ain't so! I don't care what kind of computer, although UNIX-based sources would be helpful. Michael Hoffhines michaelh@Hawaii.Edu University of Hawaii ------------------------------ From: rrich@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Ron Richolson) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 7 Dec 1993 08:47:06 -0600 Organization: Kansas State University mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) writes: > In article zeta@tcscs.com (Gregory > Youngblood) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but >> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence >> users they can't. PAT] > Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. > Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T > ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always > the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not > work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800 > number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones > here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems. > But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump > quarters in.) [ stuff deleted ] Here at the campus where I work we have a slightly different arrangement. The state of Kansas requires all of its state agencies to use what is called KANS-A-N. This is a long distance arrangement that was started years ago before there was competition. We are still stuck with it. All of our long distance calls are automatically switched to this system. It is more expensive but we have no choice. We have our own telephone switching system on campus. It is automatic. We are currently building a new dorm (the only one that is on this campus). It will be interesting to see if the students are also required to use KANS-A-N. Ron Richolson Associate Professor amateur call: KA7FYA KSU-Salina rrich@matt.ksu.ksu.edu 2409 Scanlan Salina, KS 67401 (913)-826-2675 ------------------------------ From: rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 7 Dec 1993 15:02:19 GMT Organization: California State University, Chico > [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but > they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence > users they can't. PAT] Yes they can. I lived in a college dorm for two years, and an additional year in college-owned apartments. The first year, I could make 10xxx1 calls with no problem. Then, they blocked it. I complained and talked with the guy in charge here, claiming that it was in violation of the FCC's rules about having to provide equal access to long distance carriers. The administrator here said he knew what I meant but that college campuses fall in a special category by the FCC that don't have this restriction. He said, as it stands now, college campuses will have to provide 10xxx1 dialing by (I think) 1996, and certain groups are lobbying hard against this mandate. At the time I checked here on the net or elsewhere (I don't remember) and what he told me was confirmed. I tried several times to change my 1+ long distance carrier. Sometimes nothing would happen at all, other times I'd get calls from confused representatives at Pacific Bell or the long distance company about the "special status" of my line. 1-700-555-4141 always responded with "AT&T". It blew my mind. In addition to this restriction, we had to pay a per minute charge for LOCAL calls, since because the school dorms fall under the category of a business, that's the rate Pacific Bell resells local service to them. The rep said that outgoing long distance calls are basically routed through whatever LD company they want them to, whenever they want. It's presumably to find the best deal, but they take this option away from the customer. Operator assisted calls were contracted out to Sprint only. If was possible, either by asking the local operator (0) or the LD operator (00) to manually ask to be connected to another long distance company. You could also dial 950-10xx to hook into other LD companies. The problem is that you had to have a phone card or other non-1+ dialing and billing arrangements with that company, and that was always slightly more costly than the 1+ rate they force fed us. The school had just bought the apartments and rewired them all to connect to the school's Centrex system instead of Pacific Bell. I asked if I could stay on a Pacific Bell line, and they said no. The whole situation really made me angry. The school would print out its own itemized bills quoting any long distance prices it chose. Obviously, this excluded me from the discount plans available from being a direct customer of the larger carriers (like the overseas discounts, which would have really been helpful). By the way, I'm at California State University, Chico. If any of you is informed on the current status of this matter and knows for sure that this form of call blocking is illegal, please advise me of such and I will contact our student legal organization. Thanks, Rich ------------------------------ From: EXTMO4H@mizzou1.missouri.edu Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Organization: University of Missouri Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 09:07:38 CST In article mbl@ml7694a.leonard. american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) writes: > In article zeta@tcscs.com (Gregory > Youngblood) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but >> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence >> users they can't. PAT] > Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. > Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T > ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always > the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not > work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800 > number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones > here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems. > But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump > quarters in.) I just checked out our University phone book. They allow alternate access via either 9+ 950-XXXX, 9 + 1-800 numbers or 9 + 10xxx+0. I assume that these only allow calling card access, rather than billed back to the calling number. The university sells residence hall students the same WATS LD service that is used by administration at a flat per minute rate, down to $0.11 / min. Curtis Bohl Computer Programmer/Analyst extmo4h@mizzou1.missouri.edu 4-H Youth Development Alternate: bohlc@ext.missouri.edu Programs (314) 882-2034 University of Missouri-Columbia ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #802 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22190; 8 Dec 93 7:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25335 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:13:03 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25042 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:12:43 -0600 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:12:43 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312081012.AA25042@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #803 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 93 04:11:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 803 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Second Vote Brings Success to c.d.t.t. Advocates (TELECOM Moderator) Windows Telephony 1.0 Country List (Toby Nixon) Broadband Technologies, Inc. (Randy te Velde) From a Qualcomm Press Release (Alex Cena) Union Losing Telco Jobs? (Eric N. Florack) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 03:47:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Second Vote Brings Success to c.d.t.t. Advocates Usenet has decided to have an unmoderated telecom newsgroup. That is their priviledge of course, but expect the signal to noise ratio to go downhill fast. Obviously, none of the -- ahem! they like to call them 'tech' -- messages will get out to the Digest mailing list people unless you have chosen to subscribe the new list they have started for that purpose. I'd like to think that now that the advocates of unmoderating the telecom newsgroup on Usenet have gotten their way that their constant flaming and harassing activities will come to a halt. Beautiful dreamer, I ... there is no doubt in my mind that the flaming will go on for several more weeks at least; that is what so many Usenetters get off on and are nourished by. I think it is almost a kind of spiritual nourishment for many of them. I had forgotten how nauseating it is to read 'news.groups' after having ignored it for a few years until of necessity I had to start scanning it again to keep up with this mess as it unfolded day by day. At least now I can unsubscribe 'news.groups' from my .newsrc and get back to reading more pleasant things. Really, I am happy for them; now they have a place to do their thing. Maybe now I will get to do my thing as well, but something tells me not to count on it very much. Something tells me the Digest will get bombarded with all sorts of cross-postings (but none or few of the replies). I know I certainly do not want TELECOM Digest confused with the unmoderated group, and I'd prefer not to see the articles I run here one day show up there the next as they do now in alt.dcom.telecom, but eliminating all that is going to be very difficult. Anyway, that's where it stands. They'll be doing their own thing henceforth and hopefully permit this Digest the same courtesy without the constant bickering and flaming for which Usenet is famous, and which has caused so much of my time to be wasted in recent months. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: tnixon@microsoft.com (Toby Nixon) Subject: Windows Telephony 1.0 Country List Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 19:53:16 GMT A few months back, I posted a request for help in putting together a list of all the countries in the world, their country codes, and their long distance and international direct dialing procedures. I received responses from many, many people all around the world, for which I am most grateful. Many of you requested that I post the list back to the net when it was completed. Well, I won't claim that it is really complete yet (we're still missing some dialing rules for a few countries), and I doubt it ever will be done considering the continuing national boundary changes, planned dialing rule updates in EC countries, etc., but here is what we shipped in version 1.0 of Windows Telephony (for those of you who are interested in this list but don't want to download the whole 3-megabyte SDK to get it). Note that in the dialing rules "E" means dial the country code, "F" means dial the city/area code, "G" means dial the local number, "I" means dial the city/area code (but they are not defined for all areas of that country), "W" means wait for a second dial tone, "," means wait a fixed period of time before proceeding. If the entry for a country has no rules at all, it most likely means we were never able to get any information on that country; if the "long distance" rule is blank but there is an "international" rule, it most likely means that that country does not use city/area codes and all calls within the country are "local" (in terms of dialing procedures, although probably not in terms of toll charges). Thanks again to all of those who helped to put this list together. Any help you can offer in keeping it updated will be most appreciated by both me and by Windows users around the world. Toby Nixon Program Manager - Windows Telephony Microsoft --------------------------- Country Country Long International Name Code Distance Direct Dial Afghanistan 93 Albania 355 0FG 00EFG Algeria 213 00EFG American Samoa 684 Andorra 33 16WIG 19WEFG Angola 244 0FG 01EFG Anguilla 1 1FG 1EFG Antigua 1 1FG 011EFG Argentina 54 0FG 00EFG Armenia 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Aruba 297 00EFG Ascension Island 247 01EFG Australia 61 0FG 0011EFG Australian Antarctic Territory 672 Austria 43 0FG 00EFG Azerbaijan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Bahamas 1 1FG 0011EFG Bahrain 973 0EFG Bangladesh 880 0FG 00EFG Barbados 1 1FG 011EFG Barbuda 1 1FG 011EFG Belarus 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Belgium 32 0FG 00EFG Belize 501 0FG 00EFG Benin 229 00EFG Bermuda 1 1FG 011EFG Bhutan 975 117EFG Bolivia 591 0FG 00EFG Bosnia and Herzegovina 387 0FG 00EFG Botswana 267 0FG 00EFG Brazil 55 0FG 00EFG British Virgin Islands 1 1FG 011EFG Brunei 673 0FG 00EFG Bulgaria 359 0FG 00EFG Burkina Faso 226 00EFG Burundi 257 90EFG Cameroon 237 00EFG Canada 1 1FG 011EFG Cape Verde Islands 238 0EFG Cayman Islands 1 1FG 011EFG Central African Republic 236 19EFG Chad 235 15EFG Chile 56 0FG 00EFG China 86 0FG 00EFG Christmas Island 672 Cocos Island 672 Colombia 57 9FG 90EFG Comoros 269 10EFG Congo 242 00EFG Cook Islands 682 00EFG Costa Rica 506 00EFG Croatia 385 0FG 00EFG Cuba 53 0FG 00EFG Cyprus 357 0FG 00EFG Czech Republic 42 0FG 00EFG Denmark 45 009EFG Diego Garcia 246 00EFG Djibouti 253 00EFG Dominica 1 1FG 011EFG Dominican Republic 1 1FG 011EFG Ecuador 593 0FG 00EFG Egypt 20 0FG 00EFG El Salvador 503 0EFG Equatorial Guinea 240 00EFG Estonia 372 8,FG 8,10EFG Ethiopia 251 00EFG Faeroe Islands 298 009EFG Falkland Islands 500 01EFG Fiji Islands 679 05EFG Finland 358 9FG 990EFG France 33 16WIG 19WEFG French Antilles 590 19WEFG French Guiana 594 19WEFG French Polynesia 689 19WEFG Gabon 241 00EFG Gambia 220 00EFG Georgia 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Germany 49 0FG 00EFG Ghana 233 00EFG Gibraltar 350 00EFG Greece 30 0FG 00EFG Greenland 299 009EFG Grenada 1 1FG 011EFG Guadeloupe 590 19WEFG Guam 671 011EFG Guantanamo Bay 539 Guatemala 502 0IG 00EFG Guinea 224 00EFG Guinea-Bissau 245 114EFG Guyana 592 19WEFG Haiti 509 0FG 00EFG Honduras 504 00EFG Hong Kong 852 001EFG Hungary 36 06WFG 00EFG Iceland 354 90EFG India 91 0FG 00EFG Indonesia 62 0FG 00EFG INMARSAT (Atlantic-East) 871 EFG INMARSAT (Atlantic-West) 874 EFG INMARSAT (Indian) 873 EFG INMARSAT (Pacific) 872 EFG Iran 98 FG 00EFG Iraq 964 FG 00EFG Ireland 353 0FG 00EFG Israel 972 0FG 00EFG Italy 39 0FG 00EFG Ivory Coast 225 00EFG Jamaica 1 0FG 00EFG Japan 81 0FG 001EFG Jordan 962 FG 00EFG Kazakhstan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Kenya 254 01EFG Khmer Republic 855 Kiribati Republic 686 09EFG Korea (North) 850 99EFG Korea (South) 82 0FG 001EFG Kuwait 965 00EFG Kyrgyzstan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Laos 856 14EFG Latvia 371 8,FG 8,10EFG Lebanon 961 00EFG Lesotho 266 00EFG Liberia 231 00EFG Libya 218 00EFG Liechtenstein 41 0FG 00EFG Lithuania 370 8,FG 8,10EFG Luxembourg 352 00EFG Macao 853 00EFG Macedonia 389 0FG 00EFG Madagascar 261 16EFG Malawi 265 101EFG Malaysia 60 0FG 007EFG Maldives 960 00EFG Mali 223 00EFG Malta 356 00EFG Marshall Islands 692 Martinique 596 19WEFG Mauritania 222 00EFG Mauritius 230 00EFG Mayotte Island 269 10EFG Mexico 52 91FG 98EFG Micronesia 691 Moldova 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Monaco 33 16WIG 19WEFG Mongolia 976 Montenegro 381 0FG 00EFG Montserrat 1 1FG 011EFG Morocco 212 0IG 00EFG Mozambique 258 00EFG Myanmar 95 0EFG Namibia 264 09EFG Nauru 674 115EFG Nepal 977 00EFG Netherlands 31 0FG 09EFG Netherlands Antilles 599 0FG 00EFG Nevis 1 1FG 011EFG New Caledonia 687 1900EFG New Zealand 64 0FG 00EFG Nicaragua 505 0FG 00EFG Niger 227 00EFG Nigeria 234 009EFG Niue 683 Norfolk Island 672 0101EFG Northern Mariana Islands 670 1FG 011EFG Norway 47 095EFG Oman 968 00EFG Pakistan 92 0FG 00EFG Palau 680 Panama 507 00EFG Papua New Guinea 675 05EFG Paraguay 595 0FG 00EFG Peru 51 0FG 00EFG Philippines 63 0FG 00EFG Poland 48 0FG 00EFG Portugal 351 0FG 00EFG Qatar 974 0EFG Reunion Island 262 19EFG Romania 40 0FG 00EFG Rota Island 670 1FG 011EFG Russia 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Rwanda 250 00EFG Saipan Island 670 1FG 011EFG San Marino 39 0FG 00EFG Sao Tome 239 00EFG Saudi Arabia 966 0FG 00EFG Senegal Republic 221 0FG 00EFG Serbia 381 0FG 00EFG Seychelle Islands 248 00EFG Sierra Leone 232 Singapore 65 005EFG Slovak Republic 42 0FG 00EFG Slovenia 386 0FG 00EFG Solomon Islands 677 Somalia 252 19WEFG South Africa 27 0FG 09EFG Spain 34 9FG 07WEFG Sri Lanka 94 0FG 00EFG St. Helena 290 0EFG St. Kitts 1 1FG 011EFG St. Pierre and Miquelon 508 19WEFG St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1 1FG 0EFG Sudan 249 00EFG Surinam 597 002EFG Swaziland 268 0EFG Sweden 46 0FG 009EFG Switzerland 41 0FG 00EFG Syria 963 FG 00EFG Taiwan, Republic of China 886 0FG 002EFG Tajikistan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Tanzania 255 0900EFG Thailand 66 0FG 001EFG Tinian Island 670 1FG 011EFG Togo 228 00EFG Tokelau 690 Tonga 676 09EFG Trinidad and Tobago 1 1FG 01EFG Tunisia 216 0FG 00EFG Turkey 90 9,FG 9,9,EFG Turkmenistan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Turks and Caicos Islands 1 1FG 0EFG Tuvalu 688 Uganda 256 00EFG Ukraine 7 8,FG 8,10EFG United Arab Emirates 971 0FG 00EFG United Kingdom 44 0FG 010EFG United States of America 1 1FG 011EFG Uruguay 598 Uzbekistan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Vanuatu 678 00EFG Vatican City 39 0FG 00EFG Venezuela 58 0FG 00EFG Vietnam 84 0FG 00EFG Wallis and Futuna Islands 681 19WEFG Western Samoa 685 0EFG Yemen (P.D.R.) 969 Yemen Arab Republic 967 00EFG Zaire 243 00EFG Zambia 260 00EFG Zimbabwe 263 09EFG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 17:30:12 EST From: Randy te Velde Subject: Broadband Technologies, Inc. I am seeking information about Broadband Technologies, Inc. (BBT), which is marketing fiber-to-the-curb and video dialtone equipment to the RBOCs, for a study at Polytechnic University in New York. As a potential consumer of switched high-bandwidth digital services, I am particularly interested in the business potential of marketing these services to the home. I think most readers of this news group would enjoy seeing wide deployment of advanced interactive services. Unfortunately, if the business community sees little financial reward in creating the necessary infrastructure for these services, the promise will be a long time coming. BBT is a spin-off company (from Siecor) established in 1988, which is betting its future that fiber-to-the-curb is the deployment method of choice. Thus far, it has not sold equipment in any great quantity, but it has conducted small trials with six of the seven RBOCs, GTE, and a few companies abroad. According to the prospectus occasioning its initial public stock offering (November 3, 1993), BBT believes that by the time it is able to manufacture in quantity, switched video services can be provided to the consumer at the average rate of $1,580 per home passed, including all labor and equipment, not including the cost of retiring current facilities. One assumtion underlying this figure is that an average of eight homes can be served with coax from its "optical network unit", the device that (normally) terminates the fiber loop at the curb. One outside plant engineer told me that the current structure of outside plant facilities would force the average down to four or five homes per ONU. I would enjoy comments about the feasibility of these figures. Also, I am interested in exploring the feasibility of competing technologies. Will we all get stuck with fiber-to-the-node systems, which allow limited interactivity for the consumer? Is ADSL for real? And if so, how will it be switched? Can we get what we want from it (HDTV, high bandwidth interactive services), or will it force us to make due with less? Please direct replies to Randy te Velde ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 17:48:42 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: From a Qualcomm Press Release BUSINESS WIRE 12/07 QUALCOMM uses Coral Systems software to support seamless roaming on wireless networks LONGMONT, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Coral Systems announced an agreement with QUALCOMM Inc. (NASDAQ:QCOM) of San Diego, for the use of Coral Systems' Home Location Register (HLR) software technology. QUALCOMM will use this software to enhance the seamless roaming capabilities of its Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) technology wireless communications systems. The HLR is an intelligent network component that permits routing of calls to wireless users regardless of the user's location, enabling service providers to associate phone numbers with people, rather than places. Currently, the Coral Systems' HLR provides an industry standard method of passing information between wireless networks to deliver calls, authorize service and forward any custom calling features a subscriber may have, such as call-waiting, or three-way calling. This process occurs at the time the call is connected and is in full compliance with the cellular industry's inter-system IS-41 specification, put forth by the TIA TR45.2 Committee. ``The flexible and modular design of Coral Systems' HLR enables us to utilize relevant portions of Coral Systems' software in our CDMA HLR product,'' said Richard Sulpizio, QUALCOMM's senior vice president and chief operating officer. Currently, QUALCOMM and other telecommunications industry manufacturers are preparing products for the implementation of CDMA digital service in the United States and international wireless markets. QUALCOMM will provide both CDMA subscriber phones and infrastructure equipment for CDMA wireless sytems. The HLR stores service profiles, Mobile Identification Numbers and Electronic Serial Numbers for account verification when subscribers are calling from areas served by other carriers. The local cellular network and subscriber's phone exchange signals and the cellular network notifies the HLR of the subscriber's location, so that other cellular networks can deliver calls and subscriber services. "Coral Systems' HLR expands a carrier's core business of connecting subscribers with their calls by providing seamless roaming," said Eric Johnson, Coral Systems president and chief executive officer. "We're proud that QUALCOMM chose software from Coral Systems as the design best suited to the task." QUALCOMM Inc. develops, manufactures, markets, licenses and operates advanced communications systems and products based on digital wireless technology. QUALCOMM's products include the OmniTRACS(R) system and digital wireless telephone systems and products based on CDMA technology. The company also develops and markets a range of VLSI devices. Coral Systems Inc. develops, markets and supports UNIX software applications for the wireless telecommunications industry. Coral's Wireless Intelligent Network products, which include the FraudBuster(tm) fraud detection system, Home Location Register (HLR) and IS-41 Data Message Handler (DMH), are designed to bring realtime capabilities to cellular, ESMR, and emerging personal communications networks. Products are distributed worldwide through strategic partnerships with Sun Microsystems and Computer Sciences Corp. Note: OmniTRACS is a registered trademark of QUALCOMM Inc. FraudBuster is a trademark of Coral Systems Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 12:29:18 PST From: Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com Subject: Union Losing Telco Jobs? shniad@sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) passes on to us an article by Kim Moody, entitled: "How Union Jobs Are Being Lost In an Expanding Industry" The article wails and moans about the loss of union-controlled jobs. > Unlike the old phone companies, the operations in the newer > services are mostly nonunion. Cellular is almost completely nonunion; > cable is about 5% union; broadcasting 15%; and publishing, newspapers > and printing about 30% union. > For all the talk of a new hi tech information industry, the means > of milking telephone are more about dumping union workers than about > technology. What the article fails to point out is that the/ unions themselves/ are responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to represent, out of the market. This, more than any other factor is the reason the old-style unions are fading. Regardsless of any other factor, companies whose primary goal is to make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably move to operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin. Such is the nature of competition in a free marketplace. (This is still America, and not the Worker`s Paradise that Marx wanted ...) > In the long run, it proposes a new national regulatory agency to > oversee the entire information industry. In practice, however, the CWA > has sometimes supported those aspects of deregulation that allow the > Bells into new services. Gee, bigger government. More regulation. /Just/ what we need. Why doesn`t the union understand that more regulation means FEWER jobs in the long run, because of hurt business? > Also, as District 1's Peres points out, the workers in cellular > and cable perform the same type of work as phone company workers, but > for about $4-6 an hour less. And how much of that $4-$6 dollars goes directly to /union coffers/? How much of that increase is the paying consumer suposed to deal with, without finding a better, cheaper company with which to do business? /This is helping the workers?/ At every turn, the CWA and other similar unions have sought to limit the free marketplace, in favor of their own powerbase, regardless of the consequences to it`s own rank and file, let alone anyone else who might be affected. > As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for > Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for > 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping > opportunities the new technology promises.<< Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV? Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the free market. No sale. /E ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #803 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26036; 8 Dec 93 17:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14145 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:48 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15812 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:24 -0600 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:24 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312081911.AA15812@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #804 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 93 13:11:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 804 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Local Loop Deregulation in California (Russell Blau) Async/ENET Bridge Router Solution For 14.4 (Sam Ghandchi) Voice Response Hardware/Software (Jeff Kenton) New Numbering Plan in the Works? (Eric Valentine) Making a PBX (Henry Alan Segal) Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (A. Padgett Peterson) Caller ID Approved in Wisconsin (Milwaukee Journal via Gary Breuckman) Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Sharif Torpis) Help Needed With Cellular Connection (James R. Brosnahan) Needs PC Add-on Card For Voice-Mail (Yee-Lee Shyong) Calling Cards, 'Easy Access' and PBX's: Answers (Kriston J. Rehberg) Re: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK (David Hough) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Tim Tsai) Re: 900mhz Cordless Protocols (Ralph Sprang) Re: Tropez 900Mhz Digital Cordless (Patri Friedman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 18:24:07 EST From: Russell Blau Subject: Local Loop Deregulation in California Replying to: Note 39954 in newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom From: pushp@nic.cerf.net (Pushpendra Mohta) > On what date will multiple telcos be able to provide the local loop in > California? > [Moderator's Note: To the best of my knowledge, there is no scheduled > date for this where residential or small/medium size businesses are > concerned. In some cities, large businesses have a service called > Metropolitan Fiber available to them and they can justify the cost. Pat, first off, I won't commercialize the "net" by mentioning that MFS Telecom (formerly Metropolitan Fiber Systems) does operate in the Los Angeles and San Francisco business districts and is expanding to San Jose and Silicon Valley. :-) Second, the California PUC order that opened up intra-LATA toll competition also contained a provision authorizing competition in the provision of PBX trunks and Centrex "loops"; these are the services used by most mid-to-large size businesses (say, more than five or ten phone lines) to obtain dial tone. As you probably know, however, that order was withdrawn due to the controversy over parts of it having been written by Pacific Bell, so it is not known at this time when (if ever) it will actually take effect. I would anticipate that, if and when the PUC clarifies its policy and if the provision allowing competitive Centrex/PBX stands, there will likely be an announcement from MFS shortly afterwards regarding the offering of competitive local dial tone services for small business customers (five to thirty-five lines) in those areas the company serves. Russell M. Blau Swidler & Berlin, Chtd. rblau@cap.gwu.edu Washington, D.C. Tel: 202-424-7835 Fax: 202-424-7645 [Moderator's Note: Don't worry in the least about 'commercializing the net'. Usenet now has their own unmoderated telecom newsgroup, and on this list I don't care what you talk about as long as it is not absolutely blatantly commercial. PAT] ------------------------------ From: samg@netcom.com (Sam Ghandchi) Subject: Async/ENET Bridge Router Solution For 14.4 Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 21:26:54 GMT I am looking for a bridge router with multiple ASYNC ports and one or more Ethernet ports which can handle 2400 to 14.4 mps traffic. I need to route IP and IPX. OSPF support is also a plus. I have heard of BReeze1000 and DR BOND, but I do not know how reliable those products are. Any feedback is appreciated. TIA, Sam Ghandchi samg@netcom.com Please forward any information to: Sam Ghandchi 966 Westlynn Way, Unit 1 Cupertino, CA 95014 samg@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: jkenton@world.std.com (Jeff Kenton) Subject: Voice Response Hardware/Software Organization: Kenton Systems Corporation, Weston MA Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:25:58 GMT Does anyone have any recommendations for voice response hardware and software? What I want is a system that can answer the phone, ask some pre-recorded questions, get some input from the keypad, and produce a recorded response (depending on the input, of course). Has anyone used this sort of system before? Jeff Kenton (617) 894-4508 jkenton@world.std.com [Moderator's Note: Have you considered the BigmOuth package? It does what you are asking for and seems to work okay. I use it on one of my phone lines here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: etxelv@eua.ericsson.se (Eric Valentine) Subject: New Number Plan in the Works? Date: 7 Dec 1993 14:45:20 GMT Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden Reply-To: etxelv@eua.ericsson.se Having worked in the Class 5 market over there for awhile, I should know this, but don't. My understanding is that the current numbering scheme, while being patched in the short run when an area code gets overloaded, is due for a "complete" revamping In The Not So Distant Future. As far as I know, this goes beyond the extension of IC codes but I don't know how far or if, indeed, this is an industry equivalent of an urban legend. Isn't Bellcore responsible for handling the number plan and aren't they trying to shift the responsibilty for it back to the Feds because of the fear of legal hassles with the independents? Does anyone have the Straight Poop or know what the number migration strategy might be? ------------------------------ From: segalh@ecf.toronto.edu (SEGAL HENRY ALAN) Subject: Making a PBX Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 20:11:53 GMT I would like some advice. (I am in computer engineering at University of Toronto.) I have been offered a summer job here at U of T to build a small "PBX" for a number of offices here. Each office has one telephone line going into the room with five about people in each office. Currently, there is only one telephone in the room -- this is obviously a major inconvenience. The solution would seem to be a system that would: 1 - Answer the phone; 2 - Play a message stating "Press 1 for Mr. Smith, 2 for Mr. Johnson, ..."; 3 - Interpret the number that is pressed; and 4 - switch the phone to the appropriate line. 5 - If time permits, make a mailbox service. ("To leave a message for Mr. Smith, type 7".) I believe this is called a PBX. (Am I right?) Questions Q1) To answer the phone, what must I detect? Is it simply that one of the four incoming wires goes to a high voltage? Is the system, in general, a digital system or an analog system? Q2) To play a message, I would send the sound along the wires. Is this sound in digital form or analog? Which wires would be involved here? Q3) How do I interpret when a number is pressed? Also, how could I detect a number being pressed WHILE I am playing my message. (This would be done by impatient callers who already know what the message will say.) Q4) As for the switch, can I implement this with a simple transistor-representing-a-switch ? (I am envisioning writing a program in assembly language, downloading to a Programmable Logic Array, and using Memory-Mapped-I/O to set the gate of one of the transistor-switches to high thereby turning on that transistor.) Are there any problems with this approach? I have practically no experience with telephones, but I know some electronics, particularly digital electronics. Is this type of project finishable in a summer by a student, or should I turn down the job and recommend that they buy a PBX from NT or some other company? (And how much would that be?) Any comments would be much appreciated. [Moderator's Note: I think if you proceed with this you will be trying to re-invent the wheel. There are lots of hardware cards and software programs out there doing this now. Two which come to mind are BigmOuth for somewhat smaller applications and the Dialogics card for larger, more heavy duty use. Both have the ability to answer the phone, play the messages you described and transfer calls around. If you want to make a little money for yourself, buy one of these pre-packaged, set up the prompts and routing of calls as desired for your client and sell it to them at a nice mark up. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:38:32 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com writes: >> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for >> Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for >> 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping >> opportunities the new technology promises.<< > Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV? > Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the > free market. Do not think this is apples vs oranges. Cable worked because it filled a need that local programming was not. Right now I am paying U$300.00 per year for "basic" service (not the brain-dead economy service but also no "premium" channels) this gives me about 40 tunable channels of which I usually watch 9 (TNT, TLC, Nickelodean, USA, AMC, BRAVO, Family, Sci-Fi, and Comedy). This is *enough* (C). Other channel watching is usually limited to occasional movies and Jeopardy. Somehow, I doubt that adding another 460 channels would change my habits much and, since the foregoing is *enough*, would not be willing to pay any more. At one time I subscribed to Prodigy but dropped it for lack of benefit. Of course since I live in Orlando 8*), home shopping has no advantage; EVERYTHING is cheaper here. (Last Christmas my wife wanted to be able to exchange video tapes with her cousin Debbie who lives in England so she needed a PAL-NTSC converter. After pouring over TV magazines and calling all over the country, the most cost effective one with decent viewing quality -- an AIWA -- was found about two miles from my home. Now they are happy -- except now they want ham radio sets to cut down on long distance telephone costs ...) The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel listing ? Channel 9 is the "listing" channel and takes about two minutes to scroll through the next hour and a half. Same comment. I suspect that this is part of the problem that has kept satellite receiver sales down, sensory overload. Why else whould the Internet Gophers, Archies, and WWW retrieval mechanisms be so popular -- and these people are probably the "brightest and the best". So for 500 channels to work, a listing would have to be downloaded (daily ?, weekly ?) to a storage device that could be set up for selective retrieval. Could it be done -- certainly. Will it ? Enough, Padgett ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Caller ID Approved in Wisconsin Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 06:02:15 PST From the _Milwaukee Journal_ (two articles, 12/2/93 and 12/3/93) (WI) Ameritech Caller ID plan wins approval from PSC Unless opponents go to court, Wisconsin residents soon will be able to see the phone numbers of whoever is calling them. The state's Public Service Commission on Thursday approved a caller identification phone service -- generally known as caller ID -- that Ameritech and PTI Communications Inc. have asked to sell in Wisconsin. The service is to be offered for about $6.50 a month. [ The article goes on to explain blocking approved ... Ameritech will offer per-call blocking to everyone by dialing a code, and per line permanent blocking for law enforcement and social service agencies.] State Senator Lynn Adelman (D-Town of Waterford) says he will sue to block the PSC decision. Adelman and the American Civil Liberties Union want phone companies to offer per-line blocking to everyone free of charge. ------------------------------ From: storpis@kaiwan.com (Console Cowboy) Subject: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number Organization: Anarchy in the U.K. Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 01:12:45 GMT I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800 number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why? Sharif Torpis Senior Consultant storpis@kaiwan.com Black Lodge Engineering [Moderator's Note: Has it continued other than that one burst of calls? Getting to the bottom of these things is next to impossible without a lot of research, but if it continues, let's look into it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jrb@datascope.com (James R. Brosnahan) Subject: Cellular Connection Organization: Datascope Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 08:28:19 GMT Has anyone had experience dialing into a Motorola Cellular with S1936C cellular connection? I am able to establish the carrier (ie:2400bps), yet no protocol (ie:LAPM). Any comments or suggestions? Thanks, jimb internet: jrb@datascope.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 11:21:24 From: apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) Subject: Needs PC Add-on Card For Voice-Mail Can anyone provide me any information about PC added-on card for voice mail? CAPABILITY: 1. Two lines per card (better) 2. records direction/introduction message directly from handset 3, DTMF receiver 4. voice file replay [Moderator's Note: Gee, this is the day for voicemail products to comm- ercialize the net. Try the Dialogics people. I think they are in Parsippany, NJ. Their card handles up to four lines at a time. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Calling Cards, 'Easy Access' and PBX's: Answers Reply-To: Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 09:54:19 EST From: V2ENA81%OWEGO@zeta.eecs.nwu.edu There has recently been some misinformation blowing around the Telecom Digest about calling cards and "Easy Access" numbers regarding PBX's at universities and businesses. Here's a copy of my notes from a phone conversation last night with an AT&T customer service rep at 1-800-CALL-ATT. I am in no way endorsing AT&T. In fact, I don't use AT&T calling cards anyway. 1) It is currently NOT necessary for PBX's owned by businesses, universities, and other institutions to provide 10 + XXX + 0, generally known as an "equal access" number, for telephone cards. This is currently in litigation, and the obligation to do so has not yet become law. However, "equal access" numbers have been required for pay phones and regular home phones for some years now. Most phone companies maintain a 1-800 number for people who can't get 10 + XXX + 0 access on their desk telephone. However, it is still possible to find customer operated coin operated telephones (COCOT's) that will BLOCK access to both the 10 + XXX + 0 code and will silence touch-tone access to an 800 number such as AT&T or MCI's alternative 1-800 number which they provide for people without access to 10 + XXX + 0. (This happens to be illegal for public phones and you should call AT&T or your local branch of the Public Service Commission for more information if you find such a telephone). 2) AT&T says that the rates for calling card calls are the same whether you use the 1-800 contact number, the 10 + XXX + 0 number, or direct 0+ dialing on a private phone. 3) AT&T rates for calling card calls are whatever the direct dialing rate is for normal calling plus $0.80 surcharge per call. The rates are the same whether you dial through 1-800-321-0288, 10 + ATT + 0, or 0+ dialing. 4) AT&T is not permitted (reasons unknown) to add a calling card account to an *existing* VISA/Mastercard/Discover card account in the United States unless you get a *new* "Universal" brand VISA/Mastercard (which are both co-issued by AT&T and a large bank) which you can link to your phone credit card. MCI, on the other hand, can link its phone credit card to an existing VISA card at one, particular large bank (you can research this yourself). You can, however, get an AT&T card either as a traditional credit phone card or as a pre-paid debit card but the credit card requires an application process with a check of your credit rating, BUT, thankfully, these cards are NOT tracked by credit reporting agencies. That's all. Kriston J. Rehberg | Internet: krehberg@vnet.ibm.com Associate Programmer/Analyst | IBM Internal: V2ENA81 AT OWEGO ENSCO, Incorporated | or (AFS): v1ena81@legend.endicott.ibm.com IBM Corporation, Owego, NY USA | phone: (607) 751-2180 or tie: 662-2180 ------------------------------ From: dave@llondel.demon.co.uk (David Hough) Subject: Re: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 16:31:23 GMT In article Mary Anne Walters writes: > I am interested in information on Internet connections in the UK. > Since there is a charge per minute for even local calls, what kind of > charges are we talking about for SLIP, if the modem is hooked up all > day? I've been told there is some kind of dialback option offered from > Internet providers (as an aside: who else other than PSI offers > connectivity in Britain?) and would like specifics on that. There are a couple of thousand (based on the last figures I saw) customers using Demon Internet Services, me being one of them. Most users are not on-line all day; I tend to dial up in the morning when it is nice and quiet, which leads to a better response from the Demon machines. It is possible to get Demon to dial up when email arrives, but I wouldn't expect many private users take advantage of it. There is a list of UK Internet providers in /pub/archives on ftp.demon.co.uk if anyone is interested (I haven't looked, but I have seen mention of it). > I was also told "no one" has more than one phone line over there. Is > this true? And if so, how do people hadle internet access from home > and still be able to use the phones? Quite simple really ... when I am on-line, no one can phone me up. Not that I would want to talk to anyone at 6am anyway! I know a few people who have two lines, although the second one tends to be a dedicated fax line in such cases. You will find that most UK households manage perfectly well with only one phone line -- if it is in use then tough, ring back later. A residential line costs 80-100 pounds a year so a second one would need a fair bit of justification in most household budgets. I have to admit that from this side of the Atlantic it is amusing to see the perceived need in the US to have more than one phone line at home. Do people in the US use the phone more than people over here, or is it just that everyone in the house needs their own phone as a status symbol? I daresay that cost plays a big part in the different outlooks in the US and the UK. Dave G4WRW @ GB7WRW.#41.GBR.EU AX25 dave@llondel.demon.co.uk Internet g4wrw@g4wrw.ampr.org Amprnet ------------------------------ From: imt2691@acf4.nyu.edu (Tim Tsai) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Date: 8 Dec 1993 09:35:09 GMT Organization: New York University I got a flyer from Escort just the other day and they are now selling the Escort 9000 direct for $299 (express shipping free) until 12/22/93. I'd buy one in a heartbeat if I am not so broke.. :-( Apparently they have a "EscortPlus Club" and you get 10% off all their items if you join the club. Tim ------------------------------ From: rsprang@Internet.cnmw.com Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 09:08:28 EST Subject: Re: 900 Mhz Cordless Protocols Benjamin McLemore recently posted re: 900 Mhz Cordless Protocols: > 1: Are any of the digital cordless phones direct-sequence spread > spectrum? What advantages does this actually have over > frequency-hopping (AT&T, Tropez)? The Escort 9000 (900 mhz cordless phone) is a direct sequence spread spectrum product. The advantages of direct sequence over frequency hopping systems are more a function of the implementation, rather than inherent superiority of either approach. The Tropez product is not spread spectrum, according to a review in "Spread Spectrum Scene" magazine. To our knowledge, our product is the only 900 mhz spread spectrum phone currently available. > 2: Given that Cylink manufactures the spread-spectrum chip for the > Escort phone (from the Economist article), and that Cylink is recently > in the news as a manufacturer of the Clipper chip, what does this mean > for the security of the new cordless phones to law enforcement > scanning? Were they designed to be easily broken from the beginning? Cylink does not manufacture the spread spectrum chip used in the phone, but does hold patents covering some aspects of this technology. Cincinnati Microwave has licensing agreements with Cylink, allowing us to use their technology in our part. The Escort phone was not designed to be "broken" by law enforcement agencies, and does not contain a "clipper" chip or equivalent device. Spread spectrum communications are inherently difficult to decode, and the Escort phone provides an extremely high level of security. > 3: Just how much information can be digitally spread out into the > 900-928 frequency range? Given Metricom 56Kbps modems and cordless > phones, when will the error rates get too high for this band to be > useful? One key advantage of a direct sequence system is high immunity to jamming. While other transmissions in this band do interfere with the transmitted signal, these "jammers" are processed out when the received signal is despread. As a result, our telephone is very resistant to interference from other signal sources, including other Escort 9000 telephones (each phone has a unique spreading sequence). Our product is the only US designed and assembled 900 mhz phone on the market. We are currently running a holiday sale on the phone. Call (800) 433-3487 for more information. Ralph Sprang Staff Engineer Cincinnati Microwave ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Tropez 900Mhz Digital Cordless From: tsa@cellar.org Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 17:02:52 EST Organization: The Cellar electronic community and public access system Has anyone had any experience with the Tropez 900mhz digital cordless phones? They cost about 200$, are digital, have passwords, and all that neato stuff. Anyway, has anyone used them? If so, what was your maximum range before degradation became unacceptable? Could max range be increased by putting the base antenna above the house? I am looking for a cordless phone that will operate at a range of approx. 1/2 mile. Is this completely impossible? Or if I get a good 900mhz, mount a directional (I only need it to work at long range in a single direction) antenna, is it possible? Patri Friedman Libertarian, atheist, techno-rat, in-line hockey player, SCAdian, HS Senior, SysOp, and occasional dreamy-eyed romantic. -=-=-Free backrubs to qualified individuals!-=-=- [Moderator's Note: Welcome to the Digest, Mr. Friedman. I don't recall seeing you here before. We've had some recent messages on 900 mhz phones and it could be you'll find some answers in recent back issues. On the subject of welcomes to new readers, I wave my hand to the couple dozen new participants now on line with us via utsa.lonestar.edu who have signed up for the mailing list. Welcome aboard, one and all. Remember, to use the Telecom Archives by email, you need to send your *formatted* text to the email service. If anyone needs a help file for this, just let me know. And Mr. Friedman, next time you are in Chicago I really could use one of your backrubs, thanks! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #804 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26438; 8 Dec 93 18:32 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10424 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:56 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18828 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:29 -0600 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:29 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312082031.AA18828@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #805 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 93 14:28:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 805 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Chaos Communication Congress 1993 (Bjoern Kriews) Re: How About IntraLATA/Limited InterLATA Toll Competition? (John R. Grout) Cable TV Local Monopoly (David Devereaux-Weber) Starting up a 900 Number (Rich Mintz) Take Care of Your Telephone Credit Cards (Nigel Allen) Response to Anti-Union Messages in the Digest (Sid Shniad) Wanted: Centralized Software Upgrade Management for User Net (P. Knighton) Dual Mode (was Re: Roaming, CDMA, TDMA etc.) (Phil Price) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bjoern Kriews Subject: Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 18:29:43 MET "Ten years after Orwell" 10th Chaos Communication Congress, Hamburg, Germany The Chaos Computer Club invites the global community to participate in the Chaos Communication Congress in Hamburg and celebrates the tenth anniversary of this convention. This hackers' meeting, taking place annually at the end of December, has become a traditional event which is characterized by a colorful mixture of absolute chaos, serious discussion and detailed presentation. Computer enthusiasts, scientists from well-known institutions, lawyers, politicians, artists and, of course, hackers as well as data-travellers and Internauts from many countries are going to meet at the 'Eidelstedter Buergerhaus' on December 27th-29th for an interdisciplinary exchange of data and other experience. Not only concentrating on technical topics, political and social issues will be focal points of discussion this year. After ten years of creative future concepts the time has come to look for achieved goals and new visions for the future. This year's list of topics: The so-called "great peep attack" (a proposed law reform allowing state authorities to listen in, even in private rooms, in order to fight organized crime) affects every German citizen and is considered one of the most important issues of the year. - What is technically possible? - What is planned and/or wanted politically? - How do the right of privacy and ban of encryption software fit together? Well-informed speakers talk about state-of-the-art technology and legal limits. Public discussion forums invite you to form your own opinion. Money always serves for interesting talk: - How can we improve Electronic Cash? - How to print your own money; - How to wash it if it's dirty; - How to open electronic cash machines without damaging them; It's up to you to add to this list ... Hardly noticed by the public, the female part of the hacker scene is growing. Female hackers' activities have become a regular part of the congress, the workshop on feminine computer handling is one of the key events. For the first time, there will be a Women Only room with lots of equipment to try out, opportunity to ask and learn as well as to discuss and create. Other highlights: Discussions and workshops on - citizen networks and electronic democracy; - ISDN, MODACOM (german mobile radio data network) and Beepers; - Bluebox versus Telekom; - Electronic Warfare; - Chip- and other cards; - inventory differences; - underground radio stations; - Computer recycling; - lockpicking; - MIME and *ostscript viruses; - copyright law and the GNU generation. Furthermore: the Hackcenter, the Chaos Cafe, the Chaos Archive, the movie theatre (among others: educational propaganda films by the former East German Ministry of State Security), a Zerberus BBS, the Internet-FreePort and lots of other things we forgot to mention. Feel free to contribute more interesting topics, workshops or presentations. Anyway, the hottest news for computer enthusiasts and hackers will be those you won't find in the press. What: 10th Chaos Communication Congress When: December 27th - 29th 1993 Cost: DM 42,- Three-day-ticket Where: Eidelstedter Buergerhaus Alte Elbgaustr. 12 D-22523 Hamburg +49-40-5710523 Contact: Chaos Computer Club Schwenckestr. 85 D-20255 Hamburg Germany Phone: +49-40-4903757 Fax: +49-40-4917689 E-Mail: ccc93@t42.ccc.de Press contact: Phone: +49-161-2447146 (european afternoon, please) For reservations in an inexpensive hotel (approx. DM 30,-/night), mail to: sleep@drdhh.hanse.de #!/bin/thanks to P. Kane for the word 'InterNaut'. ------------------------------ From: grout@sp96.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: How About IntraLATA/Limited InterLATA Toll Competition by LEC's? Reply-To: j-grout@uiuc.edu Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:40:52 GMT goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > In article ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack > Decker) writes: >> My idea is this: Allow local telephone companies to carry toll calls >> to ADJACENT LATA's only, on the condition that LEC's must compete with >> each other and the IXC's for intraLATA traffic. In other words, on a >> call to an adjacent LATA, you'd have the option of using a 10XXX code >> to force the call to go via your LEC rather than your long distance >> carrier. On an intraLATA call, you'd have the option to your your >> LEC, or any other LEC operating in your LATA that has toll >> capabilities (for example, as a GTE customer I'd be able to select >> Ameritech [formerly Michigan Bell] to handle my intraLATA calls by >> dialing Ameritech's 10XXX prefix). Note that no defaults would >> change ... if you didn't dial a 10XXX code, your call would be handled >> as it is now.... >> What do you think of this idea? > I've had the same thought for some time now. One really annoying > problem with the LATA rules is that they create "Chinese walls" along > their boundaries. Is Nashua to Lowell really that different from, > say, Lowell to Boston? The latter are farther apart but within a > LATA. The LATA boundaries were set up to, more or less, represent the actual LEC equipment to provide local service and (to an extent) first level toll switch equipment which existed at that time. Admittedly, all the local areas which are in interstate LATAs (e.g., the Kansas part of the Kansas City, Missouri LATA, the part of Greenwich, CT in the NYC LATA) were placed there because much of their _local_ service was provided by interstate facilities ... so, even if NET had equivalent facilities between Lowell and Nashua and Lowell and some other equivalent point southwest of it in the Boston LATA (which I doubt), the LATA boundaries wouldn't recognize that. However, if people want to serve _parts_ of contiguous LATAs_ (in effect, partially redrawing LATA boundaries now) ... > A blanket waiver for contiguous LATAs does a lot to solve this. If such a waiver made an LEC serve _all_ of a contiguous LATA with a mileage-oriented tariff, it does _not_ help much. For example: New Jersey Bell offers competitive (and low-priced) toll service to NYC proper and Philadelphia proper from the adjacent NJ counties ... but, since they don't serve _all_ of the NYC and Philadelphia LATAs, they can restrict their investment and price their service appropriately. If they were required to serve _all_ of those adjacent LATAs with a mileage-oriented tariff (e.g., to charge the same for a call right across the Hudson upriver from Old Tappan to Tarrytown as one downriver from Jersey City to Lower Manhattan), they would probably have to charge _more_ for calls to NYC and Philadelphia proper. If an LEC isn't allowed to serve _parts_ of a contiguous LATA (or charge lower rates for part of a LATA than for another based on the cost of facilities, or some other market-oriented cost), in effect, the LEC would be operating a captive IXC and be forced into performing the same kind of cross-subsidization that mileage-oriented IXC tariffs do already ... removing much of the incentive to provide competitive inter-LATA service of their own. There is _one_ relatively minor incentive for an LEC to provide inter-LATA competition ... the "coin factor". As far as I know, the only place in the country in which AT&T faces competition for _any_ coin-paid DDD inter-LATA calls are those NJB service areas mentioned above ... would more LEC inter-LATA competition help keep down the rates for relatively short coin-paid DDD inter-LATA calls? I think so. John R. Grout INTERNET: j-grout@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 10:29:34 CDT From: weberdd@clover.macc.wisc.edu Reply-To: weberdd@macc.wisc.edu Subject: Cable TV Local Monopoly In Volume 13 : Issue 795, Trenton del Rey Gallowglass writes: > *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access? > I read somewhere that in the few communities (in the US) that have > more than one local cable operator that there are more channels, > better service, and lover prices than elsewhere. Many cable TV franchises are non-exclusive, which means the franchise authority would allow a second operator in. However, most operators comply with an unwritten code that says that they won't compete with each other in a market. Furthermore, if an operator wanted to compete, it would be difficult to find a lending institution to loan them money to do so. > I also don't understand why the courts (I think it's them) don't seem > to be moving faster in allowing competition for the local dial tone. Local telephone service is regulated at the federal level by the FCC and at the state level by a state public service commission. Competition will not be easy, nor will it solve all phone problems and make all service cheaper. If competition is allowed, will companies also be able to pick and choose markets? Would it be fair to mandate that the former regulated company must provide service to anyone who asks, but new "cream skimmers" can come along and skim the high volume customers? If that scenario should happen, the old company would need to raise rates to make up for the losses; resulting in even more defections, until the only customers left are the highest cost, lowest revenue customers, in whom the "skimmers" have no interest (like homes seven miles outside of town, and residential customers on fixed income). Some people who live in dense urban areas feel that they shouldn't have to support higher-cost rural customers. However, one of the good things about our telephone system is that 99% of the people and companies are accessible by phone. If we start losing phone customers, the value of phone service to the remaining customers is diminished. Furthermore, as more competitors come online, the pressure on the numbering plan gets greater. We are running out of area codes and prefix codes. More competitors will accellerate the problem. I also believe that competition will be good for consumers and the industry, but we've got to implement the changes carefully. David Devereaux-Weber (608) 262-3584 (voice) MACC Communications; B263 (608) 262-4679 (FAX) 1210 W Dayton St. weberdd@macc.wisc.edu (Internet) Madison, WI 53706 ------------------------------ From: rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) Subject: Starting up a 900 Number Date: 8 Dec 1993 15:09:50 GMT Organization: California State University, Chico I'm looking into offering a 900 service. So far, it looks like to start out I'll need to contract with a "service bureau" which leases T1 lines from the long distance carrier. I'd greatly appreciate it if any users with experience in this area would email me information they think would be useful to me about starting such a service. I'd be especially interested to know of positive and negative experiences with particular service bureaus. Also, with such an arrangement, is it possible to have the service bureaus forward calls to a number going into my home? I'd like to include some PC-based automated voice services. Many thanks, Rich [Moderator's Note: One person you should contact for more information on this is former Digest participant John Higdon . He's been in the 900/976 racket for years, and made a bundle at it with 'services' directed toward the gay community. I'm sure he could explain the way service bureaus work in detail. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Take Care of Your Telephone Credit Cards From: nigel.allen@canrem.com (Nigel Allen) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 07:04:00 -0500 Organization: CRS Online (Toronto, Ontario) Here is a press release from AT&T. AT&T SAYS 'TIS THE SEASON TO BE CAREFUL WITH CALLING CARDS For further information, journalists should call: Jon Mellor 908-221-5017 (office) 908-874-8964 (home) BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- AT&T warns consumers that calling- card-number thieves love the holiday season, too. As shoppers and travelers use their long-distance calling cards in malls and transportation hubs, they should be aware that their calling-card numbers are at the top of some criminals' wish lists. Consumers should protect their calling cards as they would protect credit cards or cash. AT&T offers the following tips: o When entering calling-card numbers on public phones, obscure the card, keypad and hand movements from prying eyes. If possible, use a phone that reads the magnetic strip on the back of your calling card. Most AT&T public phones are equipped with a card-swipe or card-insert feature. o A criminal will pretend to have a conversation on one public phone to hear what's being said at the next phone. If you must read your card number to an operator, speak softly to avoid being overheard. o Customers should call their calling-card providers to learn what safeguards those companies offer. For instance, AT&T Personal Choice Calling Card customers can easily memorize their card numbers, so they don't need to carry or expose their cards to place calls. And all AT&T calling-card customers can put restrictions on their cards that prevent the cards from being used for international calls--the favorite use of calling-card thieves. o Report stolen calling cards or suspicion of fraud to your long-distance company immediately. The company will cancel the calling-card number and issue a new card to you. AT&T Calling Card customers should call 1-800-CALLATT. For a free brochure detailing these tips and other ways for consumers to protect themselves, call AT&T on 1-800-851-0439. [Moderator's Note: Indeed, it is the season for fraud. Statistics from mercantile and business associations show that the biggest day each year for fraud where stolen credit cards and bad checks are con- cerned is ... you guessed it! December 24, Christmas Eve. The fraud artists will start coming out of the woodwork all next week and the week after. Be alert. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: Response to Anti-Union Messages in the Digest Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:18:16 PST I am responding to Eric Florack's diatribe that seems to have been generated by reading the Labor Notes article I uploaded. (I ignored some similar anti-union shots that came across earlier.) "What the article fails to point out is that the unions themselves are responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to represent, out of the market." Eric doesn't adduce any evidence to substantiate this claim. In fact, real, inflation-adjusted wages -- in the unionized telephone industry and other sectors -- have been declining for more than ten years. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good diatribe. Let's just use this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless accusations. "This, more than any other factor is the reason the old- style unions are fading. Regardless of any other factor, companies whose primary goal is to make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably move to operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin. Such is the nature of competition in a free marketplace. (This is still America, and not the Worker`s Paradise that Marx wanted ...)" If news about unions and their views of developments in the telecommunications industry is going to generate rabid responses, perhaps it was wrong to have sent it to this list. I thought -- perhaps mistakenly -- that folks on this list might be interested in information like this story from Labor Notes. "Gee, bigger government. More regulation. Just what we need. Why doesn`t the union understand that more regulation means FEWER jobs in the long run, because of hurt business?" This is an interesting argument. Regulation kills jobs. Ergo, regulation is bad. What evidence is there that regulation kills jobs? None provided here. Yet another leap of faith in workings of The Free Market. However, when the normal workings of said Free Market generate staggering loss of jobs -- for example, a recent {Wall Street Journal} article reported that the Fortune 500 employed 16.2 million people in 1990, versus 11.8 million in 1993 -- then this is treated as just a natural unfolding of the workings of the world. > Also, as District 1's Peres points out, the workers in cellular > and cable perform the same type of work as phone company > workers, but for about $4-6 an hour less. "And how much of that $4-$6 dollars goes directly to union coffers? How much of that increase is the paying consumer suposed to deal with, without finding a better, cheaper company with which to do business? This is helping the workers?" If one didn't know better, it might appear that you have something against unions, Eric. Do YOU have any idea how much of the $4-$6 goes into union coffers? From your argument, I gather you believe that two major sources of high prices in the US economy are inflated union dues and wages. But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it that companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas expansion, takeovers, etc.? How did they manage to hide the profits they are using in these ventures from the rampaging red hordes in their unionized ranks? Forgive me for having disturbed the folks on this list with stories that disturb their consideration of the technical aspects of the communications industry. I will not trouble you with such material in the future. Sid Shniad [Moderator's Note: Part of -- maybe the majority of -- the 'rabid responses seen here come from the Dungheap Net (Usenet). They can get pretty far out sometimes. As you know Sid, I sent you a separate note a few minutes ago noting that most of the readers here like to see two, or three or four sides to every story. No, I don't think we want a constant flow of union announcements any more than I want a constant flow of AT&T press releases. But some of each a better and more well-rounded journal help produce. Anyway, the Usenet people now have their very own unmoderated telecom forum to trash out, so maybe they will quit spilling their venom here for a change. PAT] ------------------------------ From: P.Knighton@axion.bt.co.uk (Paul Knighton) Subject: Wanted: Centralized Software Upgrade Management for User Network Date: 8 Dec 1993 17:51:35 GMT Organization: BT Labs, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, UK Reply-To: P.Knighton@axion.bt.co.uk Does anyone know of any software to meet the following requirements:- Consider a range of software products which evolve and must be released and distributed to a growing network of users, many of whom are potentially accessible via modem. Each user may use some/all of these products and records are kept of which products they currently use (and at what release). Currently, the upgrade medium is magnetic tape and transport the GPO. A utility is required which can:- i) Maintain a customer database (name, company, address, networking connection mechanism (if available) including authentication) on some central host. ii) Using the customer database, remotely upgrade one/some/all customer's remote hosts, i.e. for each product with a new release which they also use, upload an upgrade to them via modem. ii) For each customer effected subsequently update the customer database as appropriate. All help/advice much appreciated. Regards Paul A. M. Knighton Network Modelling: Sales & Support Group Software Development Division, MLB 5 51, BT Laboratories, Telephone : (+44) (0)473 649156 Martlesham Heath, Facsimile : (+44) (0)473 640279 Ipswich, IP5 7RE, Suffolk, ENGLAND. Email (Internet) : pknighto@axion.bt.co.uk ------------------------------ From: pprice@qualcomm.com (Phil Price) Subject: Dual Mode (was Re: Roaming, CDMA, TDMA etc.) Date: 8 Dec 1993 10:15:36 GMT Organization: Qualcomm Inc. In article , lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) wrote: > [ lots of interesting technical stuff deleted here] > I understand roaming and have done so in a couple of occasions within > the US. Sorry to misunderstand you. > My home company is GTE Mobilnet of Northern CA. I also have > been told that I could roam in many countries that used AMPS and had > roaming agreements I guess. > My question really was, not all phones are dual mode, in fact I wasn't > aware that many were. Perhaps most of the new ones are but there must > be a large inventory of existing phones out there which are not. But > for argument's sake, let's say they are. Does that mean, that no > matter which of the digital technologies being promoted now, your > phone (if dual mode) will work anyway given that roaming agreements > are in place? Or is it that the cellular company will offer both forms > of transmission (AMPS and one of the digital ones) and if you have a > phone capable of digital transmission then it will work anyway and > since it's likely to be dual mode, it will work when digital is not > available. That's about right. BUT, the phones are usually programmed to use digital if it is available -- the main driving force for the introduction of digital systems is (from the perspective of the service provider) to increase the available capacity for users (i.e. more money for the same bandwidth ;-). AMPS is supported because of the existing subscriber base. Actually, TDMA, E-TDMA and CDMA all rely on the AMPS system for access functions (i.e. setting up calls etc.) -- initially, signalling is done on the analog channels and the base station tells the phone to switch over to one of the digital modes or use analog if there is no support available for the digital mode. CTIA were working on an all-digital system (like GSM), but I lost track of that about a year ago -- anyone know anything about it? Hope this helps, Phil ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #805 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00382; 9 Dec 93 10:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03920 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for eweinberger@gn.apc.org); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:20 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28678 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:00 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312090702.AA28678@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #806 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 01:02:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 806 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (David Leibold) CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes (Jeff Robertson) European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 (D.E. Price) Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company (Jack Decker) Four-Bit ADPCM (Stewart Fist) NAPLPS and RIP Inquiry (Jim Choate) Telecom Mouse Standard? (Jim Choate) Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Jason Demarte) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 00:45 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (djcl note: the Canadian telecom regulator, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, made the following decision last week. Needless to say, business groups in Canada are not particularly enthusiastic about the idea of local measured service after a given monthly calling allowance. In summary, the scheme will not be in effect until at least 1995, which is when Bell Canada expects to have its digital switching and billing systems in place. Business groups like the CBTA mentioned in the decision are warning that residence customers will be next to get hit with local measured service. Without further ado, the decision text (subject to the odd typo, official version available from CRTC) ....) [from text of CRTC decision] Ottawa, 2 December 1993 Telecom Letter Decision 93-18 To: Bell Canada Interested Parties Re: Bell Canada - Tariff Restructuring for Business Access Services On 22 April 1991, the Commission wrote to the telephone companies referring them to the February 1991 finding of the Terminal Attachment Program Advisory Committee (TAPAC) that, owing to technological development, mutually exclusive technical definitions of PBXs and key telephone systems (KTSs) were no longer practical. The Commission noted that rates for PBX trunks and KTS access lines were generally dependent on the classification of equipment on which they terminated, and that the TAPAC finding called into question the relevance of tariffs based on that distinction. As a result of the Commission's letter, the telephone companies filed tariff revisions or reports of plans to set rates independently of terminal equipment type (with the exception of AGT Limited and the New Brunswick Telephone Company Limited, whose rates did not depend on the type of terminal equipment). The Commission has since approved tariff revisions for BC TEL, and Newfoundland Telephone Company, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited and Newfoundland Telephone Company Limited. By letter dated 25 November 1992, the Commission denied tariff revisions proposed by Northwestel Inc., and directed the company to file proposed tariff revisions that would be revenue neutral. Bell Canada (Bell) filed reports setting out three approaches to restructuring its tariffs for Business Access Service. These approaches are described below: Blended Rate: This approach provides for a common rate for individual lines and PBX trunks. Bell rejected this approach because of its effect on customers, specifically, individual-line rates would climb by 4% to 63%, while PBX trunk rates would drop by 10% to 43%. In addition, rates for services related to individual lines and PBX trunks would be affected and, in order to achieve revenue neutrality, further rate increases would be required. Sliding Scale: The sliding scale approach would entail replacing PBX and individual line rates with an ascending rate scale. The scale would vary with the size of the channel groups (1, 2-5, 6-10, 11-20 and over 20 channels). Each rate increase along the scale would be based on the value of incremental PBX trunk rates. Bell submitted that the sliding scale approach assumes that higher efficiency (i.e., increased usage volume and decreased blocking) is achieved with greater capacity. Illustrative rates developed to achieve revenue neutrality indicate that KTS customers would be subject to increases of 13% to 44%, while PBX trunk customers would see decreases of 11% to 27%. The ascending scale could be applied only to access line groups equipped with hunting. Lines from a customer's terminal not equipped with hunting would thus be rated at the lowest level, although, when terminated on sophisticated equipment, they can generate high outgoing usage to the public switched telephone network. Threshold Pricing: Under this approach, a business customer would pay a flat rate for the access channel and a specified amount of usage, i.e., the threshold. Outgoing calls exceeding the threshold would be charged for on a per-minute basis. The threshold would not apply to the user's incoming traffic. The threshold would vary by rate group bands to take into account usage differences. Bell based the thresholds for the illustrative rates on a six-month subscriber line-usage study, commenced in April 1992, of 24,000 business access lines of various types. Based on Bell's illustrative rates, 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line and 10% of PBX trunk customers would pay increased charges. As indicated above, Bell rejected the blended rate approach because of its impact on customers. Bell submitted that threshold pricing is more appropriate than the sliding scale approach because it takes into account large differences in usage. In particular, Bell submitted that it ensures billing certainty for the majority of customers, while reflecting a user-pay philosophy. Bell stated that implementation costs would be higher than for the sliding scale approach, but that threshold pricing would permit the introduction of usage sensitive local business services, which could provide additional revenues to help offset the local access shortfall. Bell proposed to file a final rate structure in the fourth quarter of 1994. The Commission received comments on Bell's reports from the Canadian Business Telecommunications Alliance (CBTA), the Government of Ontario, Smart Talk Network (STN) and Unitel Communications Inc. (Unitel). The Commission is of the view that threshold pricing is the most equitable of the three approaches. Blended rates would result in rate increases for small users in excess of 70%. The sliding scale approach would result in increases for KTS cutsomers of up to 45%, while PBX customers would see reductions of up to 27%. Threshold pricing, on the other hand, can be implemented with no increase in customer billing for the vast majority of customers. Indeed, based on Bell's illustrative rates, threshold pricing would lead to increases for 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line customers, and 10% of PBX trunk customers. Unitel objected to the threshold pricing approach, relying on BC TEL's response to a Commission interrogatory related to that company's access filing. In that response, BC TEL concluded that a report by Economics and Technology, Inc. (ETI) on local/access pricing indicates that local usage- based costs are dropping to the extent that usage-based pricing is not justified. The Commission disagrees with this interpretation of the ETI report. The report provides views both for and against usage-based pricing. In fact, the report states that, because the evidence is ambiguous as to whether there are gains to be realized from using local measured pricing as a principal means of cost recovery, most U.S. regulators have chosen a combination of flat-rate and usage-based pricing. While the Commission agress that usage-based costs are in decline, it considers that they remain a factor in the local service market. In this context, the Commission notes that threshold pricing includes both flat-rate and usage-based components, with the latter applicable to heavier users. The Commission therefore considers threshold pricing to be consistent with cost recovery requirements in a market where usage-based costs are declining, but have not been eliminated. In addition, this approach may afford customers a certain flexibility in controlling their local access costs. STN and Unitel suggested that threshold pricing targets and penalizes high- volume users, particularly alternative long distance providers, whose access service costs would rise. Bell stated that trunk-side access/equal ease of access arrangements will be in places before any threshold pricing scheme. As to the targeting of market segments, the Commission notes Bell's statetement that differences between light and heavy users exist across the whole local market, i.e., no particular market is targeted. Based on Bell's six-month subscriber line usage study, and using its illustrative rate structure, 16% of users would exceed the threshold and pay usage-based charges. In the Commission's view, pricing approaches that recover greater revenues from the heaviest users should not necessarily be regarded as 'targeting' a market segment. CBTA and Unitel submitted that threshold pricing would eliminate predictability for users generating amounts of traffic large enough to trigger usage-based charges; as a result, their ability to forecast and control their telecommunications costs will be curtailed. The Commission notes that such users have considerable experience in controlling their costs for usage-priced services like Message Toll Service and Wide Area Telephone Service. STN and Unitel submitted that the costs of implementing threshold pricing are too high. Unitel argued that BC TEL's Small Business/ Standard structure should be imposed because it can be implemented more quickly and at a lower cost. The Commission agrees that the implementation time for threshold pricing is lengthy; however, it is tied to the implementation of Bell's new billing system. It is Bell's new billing system, which includes local usage-based billing capability, as well as the provision of digital switching to all its business customers by mid-1995, that enables Bell to apply its proposed rating structure. BC TEL will not be so equipped. The Commission also notes that BC TEL, in reply to interventions filed in support of the Small Business/Standard pricing approach, stated that its criticism of usage-based pricing is based on its own specific circumstances, and that the company may consider usage-based pricing in the future. In addition to the above, the Commission notes that Bell and BC TEL differ in terms of existing rate relationships. The Commission notes Bell's evidence that, based on the illustrative rates, imposing BC TEL's approach in Bell's territory would cause the rates of KTS users to rise by 30% to 80% or more. The Commission also notes that even the smallest users would benefit from no increases in rates, while the smaller users would see substantial increases. Under Bell's threshold approach, only the heaviest users would see the increases. In light of the above, the Commission directs Bell to file proposed tariffs, in the fourth quarter of 1994, to implement threshold pricing. The Commission further directs Bell to provide the following: (1) justification for any differences between the proposed rate structure and rate structures for its other exchange access tariffs; (2) a full subscriber impact analysis; and (3) the effect of the proposed rates on the difference in total compensation paid to the telephone company for line-side versus trunk-side access for competitive long distance providers. Allan J. Darling Secretary General ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 20:49:47 EDT From: DIMBIT@delphi.com Subject: CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes Bell Canada has won approval for a rate charge that would introduce a pay-per-use charge for outgoing local phone calls for its largest business customers. Companies would be billed on a pay-per-use basis once their monthly volume of local calls exceeded a yet to be determined threshold. The new system will go into effect in two years and mean higher phone bills for Bell's biggest business customers, and its long distance competitors. The new pricing scheme proposed by Bell Canada would eliminate the different trunk costs of $48/month and $80.50/month for loop and ground start business lines. It would be one charge for all business customers allowing unlimited incoming call, but a fixed amount of outgoing local calls. Any outgoing local calls beyond the threshold would be charged by the minute. However, none of the new charges, including the access rate, the threshold level and the usage charge have been determined yet. The CRTC told Bell to file the rates by the fourth quarter of 1994. The new rates will likely take effect in late 1995 or early 1996, the utility said in a news release issued yesterday (Tuesday Decemeber 8/93). Six other federally regulated phone companies have adopted alternative schemes that do not have usage-sensitvie charges. -------------------------- Is this the first step toward billing personal calls by the minute? If so, my grandmother (and her rotary phone) may kick the bucket! Jeff Robertson DIMBIT@DELPHI.COM Toronto, ON, Canada ------------------------------ From: dap@aber.ac.uk (D E Price) Subject: European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:12:33 GMT Telecommunications 'World Firsts' at EURIE '93 ============================================== UK Universities have joined forces with British Telecom to bring the European ISDN Event to six locations within the regions and nations of the United Kingdom. Integrated Services Digital Network. ISDN, or Integrated Services Digital Network represents the state of the art in Pan European communications and supports many new applications like Videophones, high quality, high speed facsimile transfer and inter computer communications. The solution provided by ISDN is relevant to almost all sectors of the economy from the smallest companies to International organisations. Business Solutions for Europe '93. The European ISDN Event (EURIE '93) is being held simultaneously in over 70 sites in most European Countries and is being supported by 22 network operators. The event has the full backing and support of the Commission of the European Communities. EURIE is the biggest ISDN event the world has yet seen. The UK National Event, being titled `Business Solutions for Europe '93' occurs simultaneously at six locations. The locations are: BT Business Centre in London Docklands, England; BT Business Centre in Birmingham, England; BT Business Centre in Glasgow, Scotland; University of Salford, Manchester, England; University of Ulster, Londonderry, Northern Ireland; University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales. Worlds Largest ISDN Videoconference as Opening Ceremony. EURIE '93 will be opened by Mr Jean-Pierre Jouyet, deputy head of Cabinet of President Delors accompanied by Mr Michel Carpentier, Director General of DGXIII of the CEC. The opening ceremony will take place in Brussels and will be transmitted by ISDN to a total of 22 centres across Europe. This will be the world's largest ISDN videoconference. Santa Claus, Live from Lapland. As part of Telecom Finland's contributions to EURIE '93, they have arranged for Santa to be accessible live from Lapland via videophone. As we all know, Santa's grotto is based in the town of Rovaniemi on the Arctic Circle in Lapland. He will be talking to his friends from all over Europe. Conference Talks. Some sites will feature conferences in addition to an exhibition of products and services. Further Information. In the UK can be acquired from the British Telecom ISDN Helpdesk Freefone 0800 18 15 14 Elsewhere in Europe, contact your nearest Telecom Operator. ------------------------------ From: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company Date: 9 Dec 1993 04:48:21 GMT Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net Reply-To: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) According to {USA Today Update}, Ameritech has filed a request with the Justice Department asking that they be allowed to offer long distance service starting in 1995. A direct quote from the news item: "William Weiss, Ameritech chairman and chief executive officer, says the plan will mean customers can choose to get local and long-distance communications from a single provider." What this item does not say is whether Ameritech is willing to open up local phone service for competition. If so, and if it's done in such a way that even residential customers have the option of getting their dial tone from someone other than Ameritech, I would be all for it. Somehow, though, considering the way that Ameritech has behaved in the past (for example, totally eliminating unmeasured local service wherever a wimpy PUC would allow it), I doubt that they are really going to do anything that might give their captive customers other options. Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong, and that Ameritech really is going to allow true competition for the proverbial "last mile"! In any case, if anyone comes across more details on exactly what Ameritech has proposed, I for one would be interested in hearing about it. Also, I wonder if the Justice Department will be taking public comments on this? Jack ------------------------------ From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Four-Bit ADPCM Date: Thurs, 9 Dec 1993 00:02:00 I've just come across a reference on fax problems which says the problems in transmission are often caused by: > "4-bit encoding" 32 K bit/sec ADPCM systems which are unsuitable. > 16 K bit/sec or 8 K bit/sec ADPCM systems. I know that most voice trunk calls in Australia (supposedly 80%) are made over 32-bit/sec ADPCM trunks, and fax seems to travel over these quite successfully. But the quote marks around the "4-bit encoding" phrase above, seems to suggest that there are a number of different versions of 32 kbit/sec ADPCM. Is this correct? I had assumed that 32 Kbit/sec ADPCM always used 4-bit codes since it only transmitted the 'difference' between two adjacent samples, rather than the sample size itself. But perhaps I've got it wrong. Is there, perhaps, a variable length (Huffman-like) code being used here? I'd also appreciate a quick outline of 16 Kbit/sec and 8 Kbit/sec ADPCM. I understand that the 16 Kbit/sec version is now widely used in Transatlantic cables, so it must be a reasonably 'lossless' compression system. Does anyone happen to know if it is also used in association with DCMS/DCME or bit-stealing techniques? ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim Choate) Subject: NAPLPS and RIP Graphics Inquiry Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:54:33 GMT Hi everyone, I am interested in contacting anyone about using NAPLPS or RIP graphics for increasing the resolution of online communications. At present I run a small non-inet bbs which supports both of these. Please respond via e-mail. Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu ASCII-ANSI-NAPLPS-RIP 512.458.6084 ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim choate) Subject: Telecom Mouse Standard? Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:55:40 GMT Are there any standards relating to passing pointing information over a modem? In particular I am looking for any discussions on standards if they exist. Please respond via e-mail. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST From: Jason Demarte Subject: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted Organization: Penn State University I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD. If anyone has some any information on this please post me a response, thanks. ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 05:42:29 PST In article gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not. The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the results. Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that can be set separately), or it might not be working. You might also be having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING. So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ... 2->3 (transmit to receive), 4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send), 20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect). Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be echoed back -- if not, the port has a problem. These are the pins for a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 and 1. If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults. It just might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port. For Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches, the command is 'AT&f&w'. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #806 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01256; 9 Dec 93 12:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00773 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for vmorgan@gnu.ai.mit.edu); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26996 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:10 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:10 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312090814.AA26996@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #807 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 02:14:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 807 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Jack Decker) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Randal Hayes) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Chas. Frankston) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Matthew Landru) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Richard Chin) Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Bill Mayhew) Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Carl Oppedahl) Re: Skokie, IL, and Telephone History (James J. Menth) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 9 Dec 1993 01:21:00 GMT Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV :-) , so what follows is my opinion only. In the matter of whether college students must be given access to other carriers, this would really depend on several things: 1) The FCC rules on equal access, especially as they apply to aggregators. 2) Whether a university is put into a special classification that exempts them from FCC rules. Now, assuming for the moment that either the FCC rules don't require universities to give "10XXX + 1 +" access, or that universities are for some reason exempt from such requirements, the next question is whether students have the right to get residential phone service directly from the university. This, in my opinion, skirts around another, much larger legal question: Do universities have the right to require that students live in university housing as a requirement of attending the university? Somehow I cannot imagine that this has never been tested in court, but at the same time, I'd be hard pressed to understand the legal justification for this requirement. It would seem to me not only to violate a student's rights, but to constitute a restraint of trade, wherein the university in competing with other rental housing in the same area and is unfairly requiring students to live on campus in order to keep the university's housing full (which means that they can in turn charge any rental fee they like). To me, this constitutes bundling of services in such a way that the consumer cannot opt to take one service (education) separate from the other (housing). As I say, this may have been litigated in the past, but I would love to know what the court's rationalle was for allowing this sort of thing. But anyway, you're stuck in the university-owned housing and they've decide to run their own phone service in, and disallow you from obtaining phone service directly from the local telephone company. Now another set of questions needs to be answered: 1) Do your state's tariffs require landlords to give telephone companies access to rental units? In other words, if you rented an apartment on the tenth floor of a private apartment complex, and the landlord said, "I refuse to allow the telephone company (or anyone else) to run phone wiring in my building; you'll either have to use a cellular phone or do without", would there be a law or tariff section requiring him to allow the telephone company access to his building for the purpose of installing subscriber equipment for tenants? I suspect that the answer varies by state (or perhaps NO state requires this). If your state does not require this, then basically the university is free to do what it wants in the apartments it owns and operates. 2) If your state DOES require landlords to give the phone company access, are universities specifically excepted from this requirement? If not, then it seems to me that they are obviously in violation of this law when then refuse to allow students to get phone service from the telephone company. 3) Is university housing different, in a legal sense, from other housing? Again, this would probably vary from state to state. Consider that in many areas, you probably would not be able to force a motel operator to let you have a residential phone line run into a motel room, even if you planned to rent it for an extended period. My point is that all housing is not alike, and there may be different rules for housing that is intended to be used by transitory tenants. 4) Are universities or university housing specifically mentioned in any telephone tariffs, or telephone-related legislation in your state? If not, then they probably have to follow the same rules as any other landlord. 5) Is there any prohibition, in law or tariff, on landlords reselling telephone service to residential users in your state? If so, are universities specifically excepted from that prohibition? I think you see what I'm getting at ... find out what is required of landlords in general (you may not have any right to phone service at all!), and then find out if there is an exception for universities. This should all be in either the tariffs, or the legislation governing provision of telephone service in your state. Now, if the laws of your state aren't really helpful, you might still be able to argue that since the university requires you to live on campus, your freedom of speech is inhibited if you cannot get phone service from whomever you wish, or that some other constitutional right is violated. In effect, you'd be asking the judge to find a right to receive phone service from your chosen provider in some provision of the constitution. While this is a really long shot, it certainly wouldn't be the first time a judge has "found" some right in the constitution (that the founding fathers probably never intended in the first place). If you try this, try to get your case heard by a Clinton apointee! :-) :-) And if all that doesn't help, I'd start calling the smaller long distance providers and see if you can find one that offers phone service at "Dial 1" rates even if you use a "950-" access number. Hint: If you're in a smaller town, look in the yellow pages of a nearby large city to find such providers, or call your phone company and ask which long distance carriers offer service in your area. Smaller providers don't always advertise in the yellow pages of every community where they offer service (many offer service throughout an entire LATA, but only advertise in their home city or the larger cities in the LATA). And one final tip: If the earlier suggestion of dialing 950-1022 to see if you get MCI's dialtone (to see if you can access 950 numbers) doesn't work, try prepending a "1" or an "0" first. Some older electromechanical exchanges will allow you to connect to long distance providers via "950" numbers, but only if you dial a "1" or "0" first (the call to the "950" number is still toll-free in this case). Also, if a particular carrier thinks you should be able to reach their "950" number from your exchange and you cannot (and it's being blocked by your local telephone company and not your university's PBX), try lodging a complaint with the PUC -- there are an amazing number of switches that are mis-programmed in such a way that 950 calls don't go through, and calling repair service about these is generally an exercise in frustration. Jack [Moderator's Note: Everywhere I can think of, the telephone company has easement rights which allow them access to your property when there are wires or cables in common serving various subscribers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: HayesR@uihc-telecomm-po.htc.uiowa.edu Date: 8 Dec 93 08:27 CST Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Initially, I must express my opinion that there is NO excuse for a university to charge students MORE than AT&T rates, whether by per-minute charges, or some type of surcharge. With the large traffic volume, it is easy to offer some type of discount, roughly equivalent to the lower rates students could get on their own, and still allow for a reasonable "profit" to help subsidize the telecom department's operation. Anyone who has to gouge their customers to make ends meet should simply be considered less-than good managers. However, I believe I posted information here a while back regarding the aspects of 10XXX blocking/unblocking per the Operator Services Act of 1990. Essentially, those systems that could make 10XXX-0 dialing accessible immediately via simple reprogramming had to do so by March 16, 1992. For those who could modify their systems for $15/line or less to allow 10XXX, they were required to do so by March 15, 1993. And, those installations who required major equipment purchase or upgrade to allow 10XXX have until April 17th, 1997. You must also remember that a switch has to be able to program this out to 10XXX-0XX to disallow international direct dialing, or the institution would have all kinds of non-university business international calls billed to it. Hopefully, no colleges or universities are improperly hiding behind this schedule to avoid upgrades at this time. A simple challenge to the telecom staff (with emphasis that the FCC will be notified) should hopefully get you a legitimate response as to why 10XXX is not currently allowed, and when it will be allowed. > The administrator here said he knew what I meant but that college campuses > fall in a special category by the FCC that don't have this restriction. WRONG! ACUTA (Association of College and University Telecommunications Administrators) attempted to have colleges and universities exempted from the definition of "aggregator" in the verbage of the ACT. I had stated they did not have a chance, since they were dead center in the definition of aggregator as stated in the ACT. The FCC denied ACUTA's request, specifically ruling that colleges and universities were indeed "aggregators" as defined, and were subject to the Operator Services Act of 1990. Th bottom line is -- before someone states publicly that an entity is doing something illegal, I suggest they check out what the legality is, as in the case of the 10XXX/Operator Services Act of 1990, some institutions may simply be following the law to the letter! All of this babbling is simply the opinion of Randal J. Hayes, and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employer (although they may selectively claim the opinions that they like!) randal-hayes@uiowa.edu ------------------------------ From: Charles_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:56 -0400 In article mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) writes: > Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. > Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of When this topic last came up in the Digest, I asked a friend of mine who works in the MIT telecom department what their policy is. Bear in mind, that until MIT installed one of the first private 5ESS exchanges in the country around 1985, all MIT dormitory rooms had intra-campus telephone service provided via a largely student labor maintained step-by-step system. The dormitory rooms, as well as offices, labs, etc. were all connected to the 5ESS, except that the dorms only got analog service. Anyway, here's my friend's comments. Since I didn't get a chance to ask him permission I'm not identifying him by name: Well, it has been a while since I was in the telephone "loop" here. However here is what I recall of our policies (which we used when we negotiated with the LD providers). I write these from the MIT point of view addressed more or less to a prototypical LD provider wishing to get our business. 1) MIT wishes its students to have access to LD calling services from the MIT owned phones in their rooms. 2) MIT (to NET) wishes (and got) unlimited residential rates (billed by NET to MIT) for local calls within NETs local calling areas (i.e., we have residence trunks going into our 5ESS). We had to win a case in front of the DPU to get this. (Mass. DPU 86-13). 3) MIT will not be a phone service re-seller. All arrangements for LD service are between the student and the LD provider. 4) MIT will *not* block access to other services (for calling card calls). 5) MIT will cooperate and provide technical support to reduce fraudulent calling (i.e., access PINs and Automatics Number Identification). 6) MIT will *not* withhold degrees or in any way take action against students who are in default with the LD provider. Basically MIT wishes to be neutral with respect to any relationship between the LD provider and the student. 7) MIT requests that the LD provider give students a discount. Why? Because we believe that our students, as a subset of the population, are more credit worthy as a group then a similar sized subset of the general population. 8) Service by LD to student must be offered in a non-onerous way. We learned this one the hard way. The first LD company we did business with setup an onerous cash-in-advance debit system of bill paying (i.e., Student had to maintain a positive balance with the provider, or be cut off). We terminated this contract (and all other MIT business with that provider) at the first legal opportunity. [They are *still* burning because of this :-) ]. I believe that our students get a good deal from the LD provider (which is currently AT&T). I don't know if AT&T offers them the various discount plans though. They can always use 950 (or 800) numbers to bypass our arrangement with AT&T. Keep in mind that students do not have a telephone account with MIT, the phone is simply part of their room. I wonder if any of the posters you whose stuff you forwarded to me has the option of opting out of the system and just getting a phone from the local telco? Last I checked (and I'll double check tomorrow during business hours when people are in) MIT students could elect to get their own phone from NET (just like in the days of dormphone). So in essence students have the ultimate choice of ignoring MIT Telecommun- ications and going directly to NET. ------------------------------ From: mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 8 Dec 1993 23:23:34 GMT Organization: Project SAVE International In article rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) writes: > If any of you is informed on the current status of this matter and > knows for sure that this form of call blocking is illegal, please > advise me of such and I will contact our student legal organization. I am writing this just to advise people that I am currently waiting to hear back from the FCC about this matter. I called their office (being right in Washington DC helps with that :) ) and no one has (as of yet) returned the call. I'll let everyone know if and when I get a straight answer from them. Matthew B. Landry President of Project SAVE mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:36:26 PST From: Richard Chin Three or four years ago when I was a student living on campus at Stanford, the university decided that it would be better to own and operate its own phone system. Students (like myself) who lived on campus were compelled to buy both local and long distance service from the university. I believe that AT&T was the carrier for long distance calls but that the university acted as a resller. At the time there was a considerable uproar over the lack of carrier choice for long distance calling, particularly since many students had friends and family overseas. A group of law students challenged the university in court and before the California Public Utilities Commission. The students lost in both forums although I do not remember why. While 10XXX access to carriers of choice would be nice on university campuses, I have not heard of a single precedent in which students have overturned a university's restriction of 10XXX access where the phone system is owned by the university. Richard Chin (these comments are my own) ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:07:17 GMT The difference in power ratio between a 600 mW and 3.0 watt phone is about 7 dB. It is easy to obtain at least as much effective signal gain by attaching an exterior antenna to your phone. Here in northeastern Ohio, Cellular coverage is pretty good in metropoletan areas as well as in corridors surrounding major interstate highways. Cell towers near interstates have shaped patterns that favor improved reception in zones paralleling the road. Where you run into toruble is in country areas that have hilly topology that can block a weak signal. In town and on the highway, I get pretty good results with a 600 mW Motorola phone OEM version that I bought from GTE. What I have is called, "America Series." It is like a flip phone Microtac without the flip down mike; sort of fat and stubby. Despite the dimutive size, audio quality is very good. If you buy service from GTE, the phone is about $179; I got mine from Sears & Roebuck. The phone runs for about 12 hours on a charge. 12 hour batteries are about $30 at Cellular One (same battery as the flip phone). There is a nickel metal hydride battery that gives up to 24 hours of operation. If you use the NiMH battery, you need to use the desk charger -- about $80 bucks. I'm just using the regular NiCd pack, but decided to get the rapid charger anyway. Cellular One had the best price on the charger locally. The America Series does NOT have an external antenna jack unless you use an external cradle / amplifer system that has an outrageous price something like $350. Basically, the cradle amp is an entire cell phone except for the CPU and microphone, hence the cost. If you want power and external antenna, you might as well get any one of the bag type phones that go for around $50 if you purchase service. A few of the hand-held phones can use an external antenna when you use an adaptor cable that isn't expensive; be sure to check that out if you want a hand-held phone but anticipate spending time in rural areas. One other thing about service providers. GTE seems to have available anywhere, a follow-me option that lets you key in *18 in any roaming area to have your calls automatically forwarded from your home area -- at your cost of LD, of course. Cellular One has "Ohiolink" here in-state that is $2/mo that automatically logs you anywhere you roam without having to enter a code; you pay LD charges to the roaming point. For an additional couple bucks (I didn't opt for it) you can get Nationlink that automatically logs you anywhere. Over-all, GTE is probably better if you don't mind pressing *18 when you get to your destination. They say that it might take up 30 minutes for the registration to get back to your home area for forwading. Seems to happen faster than that. The Ohiolink on Cellular One seems to be virtually instantaneous, save a slight delay of a couple of seconds before somebody calling you hears ringing. The air time rates for either carrier are about the same. It pays to check out carefully for any incentive packages. You can play one carrier off the other by mentioning a quote you got. They may offer a few feature for a while to sweeten the pot, etc. GTE has better coverage in the rural parts of Ohio. Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu amateur radio 146.58: N8WED ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? Date: 8 Dec 1993 20:14:38 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In ghuntres@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Gary Huntress) writes: > I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift. In > fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I left. > I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones rather than > the "bag" type. My in-laws will be travelling between MA and FL using > the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and outbound calls > (once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!" phase). > I'm not worried about standby or talk times of the little phones, but > I had not realized that they were 0.6 watts versus three watts for the > bag phones. So here is my question: > Is the east coast cell coverage sufficient so that 0.6 watts is enough > power to always (or virtually always) be able to send and receive > calls? > None of the sales droids had a clue. Any info appreciated. > [Moderator's Note: I imagine the east coast is as saturated with > coverage as the Chicago area, and here, the 0.6 watt phones do fine. > Under rigorous conditions, obviously three watts will give a little > more punch as needed, but I've never seen an instance here where the > lower power did not do as well. Really, it is a personal preference > most of the time. PAT] What most people don't realize is that the specification for analog North American cellular permits the network to command a particular cellular telephone to reduce its RF output level to any of several reduced levels. The idea is to force the telephone to transmit with only just barely enough power to reach the cell antenna, so that the channel may be reused one or two cells away. It is commonplace for a three-watt telephone to be transmitting at only 1.2 watts or 600 milliwatts or one of the levels below 600 milliwatts, for the simple reason that the network told it to do so. In such an area it will be appreciated that the person who happens to have a three-watt unit will only sometimes be better off than the user of a 600-milliwatt unit. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers) Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 ------------------------------ From: jjm@lru3b.att.com (James J. Menth) Subject: Re: Skokie, IL, and Telephone History Organization: AT&T-Little Rock Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 16:11:53 GMT In article pjb@23kgroup.com writes: > When Western Electric's Teletype Corp. was located in Skokie, the > plant (on Touhy Ave.) was the largest open area manufacturing facility > in the world. At it's peak, well into the '70, they received more > orders for Teletype machines in a month than they could build in a > year. It was a very interesting place to visit. I left Chicago in > the early sixties and have no idea what happened to the area. Does > anyone know the fate of the Teletype complex ? In 1956, when Model 28 was king, some of the subassembly operations were moved from Skokie to a facility in Little Rock, Arkansas. This facility was in leased space but land was purchased and 650,000 square feet of air conditioned manufacturing space (largest in the state at the time) was completed in 1972. The Little Rock plant gradually replaced the Skokie facility with the last manufacturing operations, printed wiring boards and LSI manufact- uring, phasing out in the middle 80's. Another milestone was the retiring of the Western Electric and Teletype names after the 1984 divestiture. The last facility at the Skokie location was the Research and Development organization, Teletype's version of Bell Laboratories. The last time I visited R&D (can't recall exact date) the shopping center now on the site had already encroached over half the old tract. I still remember my first visit to Skokie in 1977. It reminded me of a General Motors plant with parts of model 33 machines moving on roof mounted conveyers, coming together at the final assembly area. This triggered lots of memories but I don't have time now for more reminiscing but I will look at the rest of the Digest for responses before submitting again. Jim Menth at Little Rock jjm@lru3b.lr.att.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #807 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01673; 9 Dec 93 13:07 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31249 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30854 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:18 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:18 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312091002.AA30854@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #808 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 04:02:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 808 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T _Required_? (Russell Blau) Re: AT&T _Required_? (Marshall Levin) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (John A. Romano) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (John R. Levine) Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response (Ed Greenberg) Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response (Danny Padwa) Re: PC to Alpha Pagers! (Sam Noonan) Re: PC Pursuit; Also Inexpensive 14.4k FAXmodem (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Finally Got REAL Phone Service (Martin McCormick) Re: Call Waiting 14.4 Mod (Laurence Chiu) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 18:26:13 EST From: Russell Blau Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_? In a series of recent articles, you have discussed the fact that some customers are rejecting inbound calls that are not being carried by the recipient's preferred carrier. The articles are too lengthy to quote, but the gist was that you stated that the recipient is free to accept or reject whatever calls it wants, even when the caller is paying. As a lawyer specializing in common carrier regulation, I am not aware of any law or decision that either supports or contradicts the position you took. I don't think that either the FCC or the courts have addressed this question yet. But I don't think the issue is as cut and dried as you suggested. As you described it, the customer in question orders a telephone line (which comes with a number) from their friendly local telco. Then they arrange with their preferred LD carrier to screen inbound calls dialed to that number and route them over a dedicated terminating access facility, not over the telco's lines. Any call that comes into this number over the telco's lines is given a busy signal or a recording by the *customer's PBX*, not by the telco. Now, what happens when an ignorant user (like me) tries to dial this magic telephone number using the "wrong" LD carrier; or, for that matter, as a local call? The recipient's PBX sends back busy signal or a recording. It may or may not also send answer supervision; if it does, I will be charged by my carrier for a one-minute call. If that happens, I will be mad as hell and will complain to the FCC that this is illegal! On the other hand, if it does not send answer supervision, then I won't get billed for the call but my LD carrier *will* get billed by the local telco for access charges for the time it was using the telco's network. (The LD carriers pay for all "access minutes" they use, whether or not a call is completed, as opposed to us lowly end users who only have to pay for "conversation minutes.") It would seem to me that the LD carrier, if it wanted to make a stink, would have grounds to go to the FCC and complain about this arrangement too, since it has no way of knowing that the "magic number" will be blocked by the recipient and therefore will incur excessive liability for calls that can't be completed. Of course, the major LD carriers may be unwilling to make such a complaint because each of them has this type of arrangement with some of their high-volume customers. There might be some smaller resellers out there, though, who don't have such conflicting interests and would want to raise the issue in order to trim their access costs. (This could be an interesting case to handle on a _pro bono_ basis.) Of course, there are relatively few kinds of businesses that could get away with setting up an *exclusive* terminating access arrangement like this. Each of the examples that I know of involve an Internet access provider; in this case, the caller has already subscribed to the recipient's service and is paying to use it, and so is not likely to complain too loudly about having to use a particular LD carrier. However, most businesses wouldn't want to take the risk that the recording telling the caller to hang up and use a different LD carrier would annoy a potential customer/client, and so they would continue to accept incoming calls from the telco's lines in addition to the preferred carrier's dedicated facility. Russell M. Blau Swidler & Berlin, Chtd. rblau@cap.gwu.edu Washington, D.C. Tel: 202-424-7835 Fax: 202-424-7645 [Moderator's Note: Actually, Internet service providers are only a small part of the scene. Almost all the organizations doing it are providing sexual 'hot chat' phone services. It has been noted in this Digest in the past that all the long distance carriers love 'hot chat'; the idea of a guy and a woman, or two guys or whatever who are otherwise perfect strangers hanging on the long distance telephone for a half hour to an hour in the middle of the night getting each other off is what the carriers like :) The eager participants cruise on someone's 900 or 976 conference bridge at an early hour in the morning and an exhorbitant fee per minute -- like one of the bridges John Higdon operates out of his home and has installed in a few other places around the USA -- they like what they hear and one or the other gives out his phone number; names are not necessary nor desired. The one calls the other and they talk about whatever they want, but at direct dial overnight rates to avoid further (high) payment to the bridge tender and his 900/976 line. AT&T likes that as does Sprint/MCI. When 900 got very problematic for the bridge tenders what with all the deadbeats wanting to have their fun but not pay for it later on and convincing the telcos to charge it all back, etc, the carriers (and they are all nothing more than keepers of disorderly houses, as the old police complaints read years ago; electronic madams if you will) thought up the 'recipient chooses/denies carrier' scheme. It has obvious advantages over 900/976: as regular numbers, they cannot easily be blocked on PBXs; the revenue per minute is less but the guarentee of collection is almost assured a hundred percent, since telco CAN cut you off for non-payment of tolls even if they CANNOT cut you off for non-payment of 900 billings; and well, all around it just works out better. Since about all the services using this arrangement are sex-oriented I guess the proprietors figure the customers aren't in any position to make a stink about getting billed for a busy signal. Anyway, a message *is* delivered (rather than a busy signal) by most of the services: they say "We will not talk to you unless you hang up and redial using 10xxx plus the number you originally dialed." The law is on their side. No one has to come to the phone and speak with you merely because you are paying for a call to them. Yeah, I would say AT&T knows all about how these things work. An ad in one of the Chicago 'alternative lifestyle' newspapers awhile back showed these two guys with whips, chains, handcuffs, the whole routine. And the caption said 'Make new friends using the AT&T network. Just dial 10288-1xxx-xxx-xxxx. No extra fees; just toll charges.' You bet! PAT] ------------------------------ From: mlevin@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Marshall Levin) Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_? Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 21:14:01 GMT > building. The local telco never sees the calls. In the meantime, if > someone calls via some other carrier, that carrier continues to > do as always: hand the call to the local telco who in turn delivers > it to you normally via your main directory-listed telephone number. > So your 'regular' phone will continue to ring off the hook all day > and night just as it always has, but you answer those calls with > a recorded message *that you program and are responsible for handling* > saying something like "I won't talk to you since you did not call > via the carrier I chose. Hang up and dial 10-my-code to get through." Hmm. When I called Speedway via MCI to see what would happen, it was simply always busy. Thanks for your explanation. Marshall [Moderator's Note: It could be Speedway always leaves that line off the hook. Some use that method of dealing with callers via non-approved carriers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: smiley@hecate.umd.edu (John A. Romano) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 8 Dec 1993 13:39:24 GMT Organization: University of Maryland, College Park P. Calvert (calvert@eos.ncsu.edu) wrote: > A friend of mine lives in a university-owned apartment. A few months > ago the university took over the phones and now he has to pay the > university for long-distance calls instead of being able to select a > long distance company. He is forced to use AT&T, and the school > charges a rather exorbitant mark-up over AT&T's rates. And to force > you to use their system, access to other networks (like MCI and > Sprint) is blocked. > Does anyone now of any legal alternatives to get around this? One > idea is to use a calling card and call a toll-free access number. > However, the usual calling cards would probably be too expensive -- > unless there exists some competitor's card that has reasonable rates. > Any suggestions? This issue goes back to the FCC ruling which took effect in March. Universities with student residents (dorms, etc) were considered "aggregators" just like hotels and are required to provide "equal access". It's a pretty legally complicated docket to read but I think 10xxx access isn't the only way to provide equal access, but maybe someone who knows the FCC rulings better than I do can fill that in. We decided to set up 10xxx access via a dial access code so anyone who doesn't feel like using ACUS can use there own calling cards. (NOTE: this applies ONLY to student resident phones; administrative phones do not have to have equal access). There is some outrageous fine like $10,000.00 a day if you are caught by the Feds, although there is some doubt about how strictly it will be enforced. I also heard that the FCC had stayed its ruling to give people more time to unblock access. I haven't heard whether its in effect, although we took the safe route and have complied. Maybe someone else can fill in the detail ... John Romano Telecommunications Engineer University of Maryland - College Park Eyes: jromano@umdacc.umd.edu Ears: (301) 405-4430 ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk Date: 9 Dec 1993 05:27:01 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article CDCS37@email.mot.com (Comroe-CDCS37 Rich) writes: > Fred R. Goldstein writes: >> Well here I am, posting my first note over my BRANDY-SPANKIN' NEW ISDN >> RESIDENCE LINE! I had an ISDN line before as part of a trial, but >> this is a genuine tariffed line provisioned by New England Telephone >> from my local central office, the same one that provides analog dial >> tone to the analog home >phone. > ... I'm curious if the two residential ISDN owners cited above > have 'residential service' or business service to the home ... or was > IBT all wet with the story that it wasn't available (the residential > service agent didn't know what ISDN was, and had to find a supervisor > to informed me that it wasn't available.) To restate: My ISDN line is under RESIDENTIAL tariff. I can make free calls any time of day within a 20-mile radius, under an obscure and limited-availability residential calling plan that New England Telephone never thought could carry 56 kbpd data (but it does; witness this connection). Business lines here in Metro Boston are always measured. This is not the case in all states. New England's ISDN tariff is quoted as a surcharge over any other service, residence or business. Some states treat it as a different service, which may be business only. Of course you can have a business line in the house (we do here, for a real business, but it's an analog line) if you're willing to pay the freight. Fred R. Goldstein k1io goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 12:21 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > I'm curious if the two residential ISDN owners cited above > have 'residential service' or business service to the home ... or was > IBT all wet with the story that it wasn't available Fred lives here in Massachusetts where the NET, under considerable regulatory prodding, offers residential ISDN for $8/mo above POTS. There are a few little warts. The worst is that the last I heard they still don't promise digital connections outside of the local CO, so it's only useful if you have ISDN friends in the same town. Also, the charging for calls is a bit strange. Voice calls are charged the same as voice POTS calls, which within the local calling area are free. Data calls are charged message rates, about 2 cents/minute. So anyone with the brains of a papaya adjusts his equipment to mark everything as voice and lives with 56K rather than the clear 64K promised on data calls. I considered ISDN for my Internet link (the POP is indeed here in Cambridge), but it ended up being cheaper and easier to set up a wireless link to a friend's house and share his existing DDS connection. The cable company says they'll have 500Kb IP for $100/month early next year, which if true (we're all very sceptical) would make ISDN moot. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:11 GMT In article oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) writes: > Anyway, here is what I heard back. It seems clear that NYTel is > cream-skimming -- serving only the highly profitable areas that want > ISDN, and leaving the unprofitable areas to others. That is exactly > the opposite of what common carriers are supposed to do. Somebody ought to explain to these guys that service needs to be available at both ends in order to be useful. If I put my business office in the "cream" CO, that doesn't help me to do, let's say, telecommuting over ISDN, if my employees don't live where it's offered. Ed Greenberg edg@netcom.com Ham Radio: KM6CG ------------------------------ From: padwad@psd.gs.com (Danny Padwa) Subject: Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response Organization: PARA Systems Development - Goldman, Sachs & Co. Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 16:32:07 GMT In article Barton.Bruce@camb.com writes: > The BIGGEST rub may be training their joke-grade sales force. The > answer to that is to ONLY sell it through their 'authorized' agents -- > even for home ISDN. NYNEX seems to have century old labor relations > policies and enjoys worker moral/quality to match. The agents are > outside companies and can do a much better job and train faster. > An example of their weak sales ability is their frame relay product > which is great, but only the larger accounts served by select quality > sales staff use it. They need to let the rest of the customer base in To give them credit, NYNEX does appear to have some (at least one) knowledgeable sales-droid. I called yesterday to ask about switching my service when I move (three blocks on Manhattan's West Side). I asked if I would be able to keep my phone number, and if (when) I would be able to get ISDN at my new location. While I was disappointed by the answers (no and no), I was surprised by the knowledgeable response given by the service rep. He was willing to explain the reason I couldn't keep my number (my three block move crosses CO boundaries), and the details of ISDN availability ("The new CO has two switches, a 1A that can't support it, and a 5ESS that maybe can, etc, etc"). All in all a shockingly knowledgeable sales/customer rep. Side question if the ISDN thing doesn't pan out (I've heard guesstimates of May '95 for ISDN in the new CO (Manhattan Ave), as opposed to "a few more months" for the old one (W 73 St). Since the distance involved is so small (I'm really only moving three blocks!!) how likely do y'all think it is that NYTel will be willing to run a slightly longer wire for me?? Especially if it is a "business circuit" (employer-billed line for dialup)?? Thanks, Danny Padwa padwad@psd.gs.com Note: These are not necessarily the opinions of my employer ------------------------------ From: snoonan@netcom.com (Sam Noonan) Subject: Re: PC to Alpha Pagers! Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 18:18:52 GMT Steve Lamont (smlamont@hebron.connected.com) wrote: > Several people have posted questions about sending messages to alpha > numeric pagers. I just saw an announcement for *free* software, > called MessageFlash, to send messages from any PC with Windows and a > modem. All they charge is $7.50 for S&H. The number to call is > 1-800-99FLASH or e-mail your address and credit card data to: > info@mccaw.com. There is also Software on AmiNet FTP sites called CyberPage for the Amiga computer. From what I have seen, I have a friend who I can use this software to page or I can call the system directly and do it by hand. All you need is the Phone # of the system. The one I call is at 300 baud 7E1. So check your service for a modem number to call. ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: PC Pursuit; Also Inexpensive 14.4k FAXmodem Date: 08 Dec 1993 21:51:23 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) Global Access which was or maybe still is on SprintNet offering a service about like PCP has started moving over to BT's Tymnet which has a lot more indials as well as outdials. It might be worth looking into because I believe BT has 9600 outdials. It does not support Data Commpression though, I found that out because I use it for my Homebanking. ------------------------------ From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu (Martin McCormick) Subject: Re: Finally Got REAL Phone Service Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 21:02:31 GMT In article ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) writes: > may recall that I posted a list of changes I had noted, including this > one: >> 1) My on-hook line voltage increased from ~15 volts to ~44 volts DC. >> Also, the tip/ring polarity reversed from what it had been when I was >> on the carrier. When the line is fixed, it might be interesting to see if the on-hook voltage is any higher than 44 volts. It could be that the pinched spot with the addition of a little moisture began to conduct slightly. Maybe, at first, it was a few thousand ohms. With a little more water, it may have dropped down to a low enough resistance to start causing real problems. The green color could have been either corrosion or electrolisis caused by the current flowing between the two conductors through the liquid. The increase in voltage would definitely speed up this process and cause metal to gradually break down from the cathode or negative wire and migrate to the positively-charged wire. It is just like what happens in the electroplating process. I remember as a young boy trying to plate copper from Pennies, (yes, I know, shame on me), onto my mother's table knives, a combination domestic/federal crime. I never succeeded in doing anything more than making a mess of things, but it was quite interesting. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ From: lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Call Waiting 14.4 Modem Date: 08 Dec 1993 21:01:00 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access In a message, chris@loncps.demon.co.uk said: >> If it is important to be able to reach you when data calls are in >> progress, I recommend a second telephone line. > Not exactly the tip of the century but I my have my phone set up to > divert on busy to my cellular phone. The drawback is that I pay for > the diverted call but as I have the cellular phone anyway it's > cheaper than a second line. A useful tip in some circumstances. The trouble is, in the U.S. you pay for incoming calls on your cellular line. These cost me $0.75/c minute any time of the day with my calling plan. So I would be paying for the call to the cell phone (though this might be a local call -- I haven't checked yet) and for receiving the call on the cell phone. This is something I would rather not do. They can always calls back or if they wait long enough, the ringing will usually drop the carrier. People do comment that it does take an inordinate amount of time for me to answer the phone though! Laurence Chiu Walnut Creek, California Phone(Work) : 510-215-3730 Internet: lchiu@crl.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #808 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04570; 9 Dec 93 19:19 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08223 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30188 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:05 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312091011.AA30188@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #806 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 01:02:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 806 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (David Leibold) CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes (Jeff Robertson) European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 (D.E. Price) Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company (Jack Decker) Four-Bit ADPCM (Stewart Fist) NAPLPS and RIP Inquiry (Jim Choate) Telecom Mouse Standard? (Jim Choate) Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Jason Demarte) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 00:45 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (djcl note: the Canadian telecom regulator, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, made the following decision last week. Needless to say, business groups in Canada are not particularly enthusiastic about the idea of local measured service after a given monthly calling allowance. In summary, the scheme will not be in effect until at least 1995, which is when Bell Canada expects to have its digital switching and billing systems in place. Business groups like the CBTA mentioned in the decision are warning that residence customers will be next to get hit with local measured service. Without further ado, the decision text (subject to the odd typo, official version available from CRTC) ....) [from text of CRTC decision] Ottawa, 2 December 1993 Telecom Letter Decision 93-18 To: Bell Canada Interested Parties Re: Bell Canada - Tariff Restructuring for Business Access Services On 22 April 1991, the Commission wrote to the telephone companies referring them to the February 1991 finding of the Terminal Attachment Program Advisory Committee (TAPAC) that, owing to technological development, mutually exclusive technical definitions of PBXs and key telephone systems (KTSs) were no longer practical. The Commission noted that rates for PBX trunks and KTS access lines were generally dependent on the classification of equipment on which they terminated, and that the TAPAC finding called into question the relevance of tariffs based on that distinction. As a result of the Commission's letter, the telephone companies filed tariff revisions or reports of plans to set rates independently of terminal equipment type (with the exception of AGT Limited and the New Brunswick Telephone Company Limited, whose rates did not depend on the type of terminal equipment). The Commission has since approved tariff revisions for BC TEL, and Newfoundland Telephone Company, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited and Newfoundland Telephone Company Limited. By letter dated 25 November 1992, the Commission denied tariff revisions proposed by Northwestel Inc., and directed the company to file proposed tariff revisions that would be revenue neutral. Bell Canada (Bell) filed reports setting out three approaches to restructuring its tariffs for Business Access Service. These approaches are described below: Blended Rate: This approach provides for a common rate for individual lines and PBX trunks. Bell rejected this approach because of its effect on customers, specifically, individual-line rates would climb by 4% to 63%, while PBX trunk rates would drop by 10% to 43%. In addition, rates for services related to individual lines and PBX trunks would be affected and, in order to achieve revenue neutrality, further rate increases would be required. Sliding Scale: The sliding scale approach would entail replacing PBX and individual line rates with an ascending rate scale. The scale would vary with the size of the channel groups (1, 2-5, 6-10, 11-20 and over 20 channels). Each rate increase along the scale would be based on the value of incremental PBX trunk rates. Bell submitted that the sliding scale approach assumes that higher efficiency (i.e., increased usage volume and decreased blocking) is achieved with greater capacity. Illustrative rates developed to achieve revenue neutrality indicate that KTS customers would be subject to increases of 13% to 44%, while PBX trunk customers would see decreases of 11% to 27%. The ascending scale could be applied only to access line groups equipped with hunting. Lines from a customer's terminal not equipped with hunting would thus be rated at the lowest level, although, when terminated on sophisticated equipment, they can generate high outgoing usage to the public switched telephone network. Threshold Pricing: Under this approach, a business customer would pay a flat rate for the access channel and a specified amount of usage, i.e., the threshold. Outgoing calls exceeding the threshold would be charged for on a per-minute basis. The threshold would not apply to the user's incoming traffic. The threshold would vary by rate group bands to take into account usage differences. Bell based the thresholds for the illustrative rates on a six-month subscriber line-usage study, commenced in April 1992, of 24,000 business access lines of various types. Based on Bell's illustrative rates, 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line and 10% of PBX trunk customers would pay increased charges. As indicated above, Bell rejected the blended rate approach because of its impact on customers. Bell submitted that threshold pricing is more appropriate than the sliding scale approach because it takes into account large differences in usage. In particular, Bell submitted that it ensures billing certainty for the majority of customers, while reflecting a user-pay philosophy. Bell stated that implementation costs would be higher than for the sliding scale approach, but that threshold pricing would permit the introduction of usage sensitive local business services, which could provide additional revenues to help offset the local access shortfall. Bell proposed to file a final rate structure in the fourth quarter of 1994. The Commission received comments on Bell's reports from the Canadian Business Telecommunications Alliance (CBTA), the Government of Ontario, Smart Talk Network (STN) and Unitel Communications Inc. (Unitel). The Commission is of the view that threshold pricing is the most equitable of the three approaches. Blended rates would result in rate increases for small users in excess of 70%. The sliding scale approach would result in increases for KTS cutsomers of up to 45%, while PBX customers would see reductions of up to 27%. Threshold pricing, on the other hand, can be implemented with no increase in customer billing for the vast majority of customers. Indeed, based on Bell's illustrative rates, threshold pricing would lead to increases for 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line customers, and 10% of PBX trunk customers. Unitel objected to the threshold pricing approach, relying on BC TEL's response to a Commission interrogatory related to that company's access filing. In that response, BC TEL concluded that a report by Economics and Technology, Inc. (ETI) on local/access pricing indicates that local usage- based costs are dropping to the extent that usage-based pricing is not justified. The Commission disagrees with this interpretation of the ETI report. The report provides views both for and against usage-based pricing. In fact, the report states that, because the evidence is ambiguous as to whether there are gains to be realized from using local measured pricing as a principal means of cost recovery, most U.S. regulators have chosen a combination of flat-rate and usage-based pricing. While the Commission agress that usage-based costs are in decline, it considers that they remain a factor in the local service market. In this context, the Commission notes that threshold pricing includes both flat-rate and usage-based components, with the latter applicable to heavier users. The Commission therefore considers threshold pricing to be consistent with cost recovery requirements in a market where usage-based costs are declining, but have not been eliminated. In addition, this approach may afford customers a certain flexibility in controlling their local access costs. STN and Unitel suggested that threshold pricing targets and penalizes high- volume users, particularly alternative long distance providers, whose access service costs would rise. Bell stated that trunk-side access/equal ease of access arrangements will be in places before any threshold pricing scheme. As to the targeting of market segments, the Commission notes Bell's statetement that differences between light and heavy users exist across the whole local market, i.e., no particular market is targeted. Based on Bell's six-month subscriber line usage study, and using its illustrative rate structure, 16% of users would exceed the threshold and pay usage-based charges. In the Commission's view, pricing approaches that recover greater revenues from the heaviest users should not necessarily be regarded as 'targeting' a market segment. CBTA and Unitel submitted that threshold pricing would eliminate predictability for users generating amounts of traffic large enough to trigger usage-based charges; as a result, their ability to forecast and control their telecommunications costs will be curtailed. The Commission notes that such users have considerable experience in controlling their costs for usage-priced services like Message Toll Service and Wide Area Telephone Service. STN and Unitel submitted that the costs of implementing threshold pricing are too high. Unitel argued that BC TEL's Small Business/ Standard structure should be imposed because it can be implemented more quickly and at a lower cost. The Commission agrees that the implementation time for threshold pricing is lengthy; however, it is tied to the implementation of Bell's new billing system. It is Bell's new billing system, which includes local usage-based billing capability, as well as the provision of digital switching to all its business customers by mid-1995, that enables Bell to apply its proposed rating structure. BC TEL will not be so equipped. The Commission also notes that BC TEL, in reply to interventions filed in support of the Small Business/Standard pricing approach, stated that its criticism of usage-based pricing is based on its own specific circumstances, and that the company may consider usage-based pricing in the future. In addition to the above, the Commission notes that Bell and BC TEL differ in terms of existing rate relationships. The Commission notes Bell's evidence that, based on the illustrative rates, imposing BC TEL's approach in Bell's territory would cause the rates of KTS users to rise by 30% to 80% or more. The Commission also notes that even the smallest users would benefit from no increases in rates, while the smaller users would see substantial increases. Under Bell's threshold approach, only the heaviest users would see the increases. In light of the above, the Commission directs Bell to file proposed tariffs, in the fourth quarter of 1994, to implement threshold pricing. The Commission further directs Bell to provide the following: (1) justification for any differences between the proposed rate structure and rate structures for its other exchange access tariffs; (2) a full subscriber impact analysis; and (3) the effect of the proposed rates on the difference in total compensation paid to the telephone company for line-side versus trunk-side access for competitive long distance providers. Allan J. Darling Secretary General ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 20:49:47 EDT From: DIMBIT@delphi.com Subject: CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes Bell Canada has won approval for a rate charge that would introduce a pay-per-use charge for outgoing local phone calls for its largest business customers. Companies would be billed on a pay-per-use basis once their monthly volume of local calls exceeded a yet to be determined threshold. The new system will go into effect in two years and mean higher phone bills for Bell's biggest business customers, and its long distance competitors. The new pricing scheme proposed by Bell Canada would eliminate the different trunk costs of $48/month and $80.50/month for loop and ground start business lines. It would be one charge for all business customers allowing unlimited incoming call, but a fixed amount of outgoing local calls. Any outgoing local calls beyond the threshold would be charged by the minute. However, none of the new charges, including the access rate, the threshold level and the usage charge have been determined yet. The CRTC told Bell to file the rates by the fourth quarter of 1994. The new rates will likely take effect in late 1995 or early 1996, the utility said in a news release issued yesterday (Tuesday Decemeber 8/93). Six other federally regulated phone companies have adopted alternative schemes that do not have usage-sensitvie charges. -------------------------- Is this the first step toward billing personal calls by the minute? If so, my grandmother (and her rotary phone) may kick the bucket! Jeff Robertson DIMBIT@DELPHI.COM Toronto, ON, Canada ------------------------------ From: dap@aber.ac.uk (D E Price) Subject: European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:12:33 GMT Telecommunications 'World Firsts' at EURIE '93 ============================================== UK Universities have joined forces with British Telecom to bring the European ISDN Event to six locations within the regions and nations of the United Kingdom. Integrated Services Digital Network. ISDN, or Integrated Services Digital Network represents the state of the art in Pan European communications and supports many new applications like Videophones, high quality, high speed facsimile transfer and inter computer communications. The solution provided by ISDN is relevant to almost all sectors of the economy from the smallest companies to International organisations. Business Solutions for Europe '93. The European ISDN Event (EURIE '93) is being held simultaneously in over 70 sites in most European Countries and is being supported by 22 network operators. The event has the full backing and support of the Commission of the European Communities. EURIE is the biggest ISDN event the world has yet seen. The UK National Event, being titled `Business Solutions for Europe '93' occurs simultaneously at six locations. The locations are: BT Business Centre in London Docklands, England; BT Business Centre in Birmingham, England; BT Business Centre in Glasgow, Scotland; University of Salford, Manchester, England; University of Ulster, Londonderry, Northern Ireland; University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales. Worlds Largest ISDN Videoconference as Opening Ceremony. EURIE '93 will be opened by Mr Jean-Pierre Jouyet, deputy head of Cabinet of President Delors accompanied by Mr Michel Carpentier, Director General of DGXIII of the CEC. The opening ceremony will take place in Brussels and will be transmitted by ISDN to a total of 22 centres across Europe. This will be the world's largest ISDN videoconference. Santa Claus, Live from Lapland. As part of Telecom Finland's contributions to EURIE '93, they have arranged for Santa to be accessible live from Lapland via videophone. As we all know, Santa's grotto is based in the town of Rovaniemi on the Arctic Circle in Lapland. He will be talking to his friends from all over Europe. Conference Talks. Some sites will feature conferences in addition to an exhibition of products and services. Further Information. In the UK can be acquired from the British Telecom ISDN Helpdesk Freefone 0800 18 15 14 Elsewhere in Europe, contact your nearest Telecom Operator. ------------------------------ From: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company Date: 9 Dec 1993 04:48:21 GMT Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net Reply-To: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) According to {USA Today Update}, Ameritech has filed a request with the Justice Department asking that they be allowed to offer long distance service starting in 1995. A direct quote from the news item: "William Weiss, Ameritech chairman and chief executive officer, says the plan will mean customers can choose to get local and long-distance communications from a single provider." What this item does not say is whether Ameritech is willing to open up local phone service for competition. If so, and if it's done in such a way that even residential customers have the option of getting their dial tone from someone other than Ameritech, I would be all for it. Somehow, though, considering the way that Ameritech has behaved in the past (for example, totally eliminating unmeasured local service wherever a wimpy PUC would allow it), I doubt that they are really going to do anything that might give their captive customers other options. Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong, and that Ameritech really is going to allow true competition for the proverbial "last mile"! In any case, if anyone comes across more details on exactly what Ameritech has proposed, I for one would be interested in hearing about it. Also, I wonder if the Justice Department will be taking public comments on this? Jack ------------------------------ From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Four-Bit ADPCM Date: Thurs, 9 Dec 1993 00:02:00 I've just come across a reference on fax problems which says the problems in transmission are often caused by: > "4-bit encoding" 32 K bit/sec ADPCM systems which are unsuitable. > 16 K bit/sec or 8 K bit/sec ADPCM systems. I know that most voice trunk calls in Australia (supposedly 80%) are made over 32-bit/sec ADPCM trunks, and fax seems to travel over these quite successfully. But the quote marks around the "4-bit encoding" phrase above, seems to suggest that there are a number of different versions of 32 kbit/sec ADPCM. Is this correct? I had assumed that 32 Kbit/sec ADPCM always used 4-bit codes since it only transmitted the 'difference' between two adjacent samples, rather than the sample size itself. But perhaps I've got it wrong. Is there, perhaps, a variable length (Huffman-like) code being used here? I'd also appreciate a quick outline of 16 Kbit/sec and 8 Kbit/sec ADPCM. I understand that the 16 Kbit/sec version is now widely used in Transatlantic cables, so it must be a reasonably 'lossless' compression system. Does anyone happen to know if it is also used in association with DCMS/DCME or bit-stealing techniques? ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim Choate) Subject: NAPLPS and RIP Graphics Inquiry Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:54:33 GMT Hi everyone, I am interested in contacting anyone about using NAPLPS or RIP graphics for increasing the resolution of online communications. At present I run a small non-inet bbs which supports both of these. Please respond via e-mail. Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu ASCII-ANSI-NAPLPS-RIP 512.458.6084 ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim choate) Subject: Telecom Mouse Standard? Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:55:40 GMT Are there any standards relating to passing pointing information over a modem? In particular I am looking for any discussions on standards if they exist. Please respond via e-mail. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST From: Jason Demarte Subject: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted Organization: Penn State University I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD. If anyone has some any information on this please post me a response, thanks. ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 05:42:29 PST In article gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not. The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the results. Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that can be set separately), or it might not be working. You might also be having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING. So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ... 2->3 (transmit to receive), 4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send), 20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect). Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be echoed back -- if not, the port has a problem. These are the pins for a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 and 1. If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults. It just might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port. For Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches, the command is 'AT&f&w'. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #806 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04890; 9 Dec 93 20:08 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15760 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for jgfrancis@genvax.glamorgan.ac.uk); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:23:01 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24764 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:22:41 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:22:41 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312091822.AA24764@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #809 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 11:08:09 CST Volume 13 : Issue 809 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Commercial OSI Products for SPARCstation (Phil Price) ISDN - Another Voice (William Hugh Murray) POCSAG/GOLAY Message Formats? (Mike Detlef) Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting (Koos de Heer) For Your Amusement, if Possible (Patrick Tufts via Mark Brader) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pprice@qualcomm.com (Phil Price) Subject: Re: Commercial OSI Products for SPARCstation Date: 9 Dec 1993 11:01:09 GMT Organization: Qualcomm Inc. In article , tru@kddnews.kddlabs.co.jp (Tohru Asami) wrote: > Does anyboy know a commercial version of OSI tool kit which supports > up to OSI Presentation Layer? The following is a collection of articles recently posted to comp.protocols.iso - the scope is slightly larger than Sun, but I thought that other people may also be interested (and I didn't want to edit it ;-) ... Phil From: marben@nic.cerf.net (James Schontzler) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso Subject: Re: OSI Stack Availablity Date: 1 Dec 1993 21:38:34 GMT Organization: Marben Products Inc. In article <1993Nov30.214629.23924@bnr.ca> Donald Coombs writes: > I am looking for an OSI stack for a Unix environment. > Has anybody compiled a list of OSI stacks, their capabilities (CMIP, > FTAM etc), and what platforms they run on (OS2, Unix )? > I am familiar with several: > Touch/Marben > Retix > HP OTS9000 > Both the Touch/Marben and the Retix run on Unix, OTS9000 runs on HP's > HPUX 8.0 or higher. Just to update the story on Marben in the US ... Touch Communications, which used to resell the Marben OSI products, is no longer in business. Marben's OSI products are now distributed and supported throughout the USA by Marben Products Inc., a California corporation owned by MARBEN in France. Also, Marben's OSI software is typically distributed in source code form to computer manufacturers. The source code comes with its own kernel and a generalized porting kit that allow it to be ported to a variety of platforms from single board embedded computers to workstation to mainframes. Thus, although Unix is the most common target it is not the only OS that works with the portable Marben code. In fact the stack can run stand-alone without any OS. Runtime OSI products are available from Marben for certain configurations. In addition Marben's OSI technology is OEM'ed by MOST of the major Unix workstation manufacturers in the US (I'm not sure I am allowed to publicly disclose their names). Hope this information is helpful. James Schontzler Marben Products, Inc. 3 1/2 N. Santa Cruz Ave., Los Gatos, CA 95030 Internet: james@marben.com voice: 408-399-8888 fax: 408-399-8890 From: john@citr.uq.oz.au (John Gottschalk) Date: 3 Dec 1993 16:18:34 +1000 Organization: CiTR, University of Queensland The following should be added to the list of other replies: Novell's Unix System Laboratories OSI products run on Unix and some non-Unix environments. The following are available: OSI WAN products, offering the transport layer interface OSI LAN products, offering the transport layer interface OSI upper layers, offering the X/Open ACSE/Presentation layer interface (XAP) FTAM, including an FTAM to ftp gateway CMIP ASN.1 compiler X.400 OSI Transaction Processing (which is available with Tuxedo) These products are now being sold by Firefox, who also have an X.400 (1988) product suite. I have the contact addresses for the company, in case anybody is interested. John Gottschalk, john@citr.uq.oz.au Project Manager, CiTR, +61 7 365 4321 (phone) Gehrmann Building, +61 7 365 4399 (fax) The University of Queensland, 4072, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, From: thomas@lkg.dec.com (Matt Thomas) Date: 2 Dec 1993 23:20:25 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation In article <2dhsph$64q@disuns2.epfl.ch>, ppvx@litsun36.epfl.ch (Patrick Pleinevaux) writes: > A few OSI stacks available on UNIX: > AEG Computrol PC/AT SCO UNIX MMS > Bull DPX 2000 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (DP=MAP) > Bull DPX 2 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (IS) > HP HP 9000/800 series MMS, FTAM > IBM RS 6000/AIX MMS (already available ?) > Motorola Delta Series MMS, FTAM > Olivetti LSX 5000 FTAM, X.500, X.400 > Siemens Nixdorf PC SCO UNIX MMS > Siemens Nixdorf MX 300 FTAM, X.400, RDA, MMS Digital ULTRIX V4.2 or later MMS, VT, FTAM, X.25, (VAX or MIPS) X.400, X.500 Digital DEC OSF/1 (Alpha AXP) VT, FTAM, X.25 (X.400, X.500, MMS soon) Matt Thomas Internet: thomas@lkg.dec.com U*X Networking UUCP: ...!decwrl!thomas Digital Equipment Corporation Disclaimer: This message reflects my own Littleton, MA warped views, etc. From: martineau@MacMartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca (Alain Martineau) Organization: Hydro Quebec Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 12:26:29 GMT You have any idea of the price tag of DECnet for OSF/1 ? We are in the process of procuring an energy management system with about 140 OSF/1 workstations. The specification said it should be UCA ( now IGOSS ? ) compliant. At $3500 CAN each, that makes $490 000, when TCP/IP comes for free, and does more ( multicast is required, for instance ). That was a shock, as I am used to get DECnet for free with VMS, and adding TCP/IP is far from being that expensive. These days, that kind of expense is not justifiable, especially when OSI nodes are nowhere to be seen, and with that kind of pricing, it's likely to stay that way. Alain Martineau Hydro Quebec martineau@macmartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca From: robert@gar.no (Robert Andersson) Date: 6 Dec 1993 17:22:05 +0100 Organization: Gallagher & Robertson A/S In martineau@MacMartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca (Alain Martineau) writes: > At $3500 CAN each, that makes $490 000, when TCP/IP comes > for free, and does more ( multicast is required, for instance ). That > was a shock, as I am used to get DECnet for free with VMS, and adding > TCP/IP is far from being that expensive. > These days, that kind of expense is not justifiable, especially when > OSI nodes are nowhere to be seen, and with that kind of pricing, it's > likely to stay that way. DEC is far from alone in doing this. Sun, HP and IBM all do the same thing. I'm sure a lot of the other major players in the Unix market also do. One vendor I believe bundles OSI transport with the base OS is NCR. Almost all vendors bundle TCP/IP with the base OS these days. The only exception seems to be vendors of Unix for the Intel x86 platform like SCO and Novell, but I expect them to bundle TCP/IP pretty soon. And while this happens we continue to pay through the nose for OSI. I believe that this is one of the major reasons for OSI's fall in the marketplace. If this fall is a good or bad thing is a religious discussion, please don't start that one again :-) Regards, Robert Andersson Voice +47 22418551 Gallagher & Robertson A/S robert@gar.no Fax +47 22428922 Kongensgt. 23, 0153 Oslo, Norway From: tozz@cup.hp.com (Bob Tausworthe) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1993 01:00:42 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Patrick Pleinevaux (ppvx@litsun36.epfl.ch) wrote: > A few OSI stacks available on UNIX: > AEG Computrol PC/AT SCO UNIX MMS > Bull DPX 2000 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (DP=MAP) > Bull DPX 2 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (IS) > HP HP 9000/800 series MMS, FTAM Good list! To update this, it should read: HP HP 9000/800+700 series MMS, FTAM, X.400, X.500, CMIP Just trying to stay accurate. I won't turn this into an ad. If you want more information (API support, profiles, conformance, etc) drop me a line and I'll forward it to the proper people. Bob Tausworthe Hewlett Packard 19420 Homestead Rd Cupertino, Ca 95014 (408) 447-2873 tozz@cup.hp.com From: jbrady@deepriver.East.Sun.COM (John Brady - SunNetworks Consultant) Date: 3 Dec 1993 13:32:55 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Another "commercial" OSI stack for UNIX... SunLink Product Line... SunLink OSI Solaris 1.x & 2.x FTAM, VT SunLink X.25 Solaris 1.x & 2.x X.25 SunLink MHS Solaris 1.x & 2.x X.400 John Brady Network Management Consultant SunNetworks, A Sun Microsystems, Inc. Business (703) 204-4859 john.brady@East.Sun.Com From: dfauvarq@vulcain.France.Sun.COM (Daniel Fauvarque - SunConnect ICNC) Date: 3 Dec 1993 15:11:39 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. To be added: SUN Connect SunOS 4.X X.400, FTAM Solaris 5.X X.400, Mime Gateway, FTAM, CMIP, VT From: dsgrieve@jhawk.b30.ingr.com (david s. grieve) Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville AL Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 16:00:24 GMT Also... Intergraph CLIX FTAM, MHS, VT, TP0,2,4, ES-IS David S. Grieve dsgrieve@jhawk.b30.ingr.com Integraph Corp. Phone: 205-730-3142 MS GD3005 Fax : 205-730-3038 Huntsville, AL 35894-0001 Bldg 30, Room 128U From: ag129@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) Organization: University of Cambridge Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 17:49:48 GMT Just out of curiosity, does anyone, anywhere, have JTM? From: thomas@lkg.dec.com (Matt Thomas) Date: 5 Dec 1993 21:59:37 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Lower layers (bottom up): HDLC, LAPB, DDCMP (VAX ULTRIX only), FDDI, Ethernet, TokenRing (OSF/1 only) LLC2 CLNS, X.25 (over either LLC2 or LAPB) & CONS, DECnet Phase IV OSI Transport (classes 0, 2, and 4), RFC1006 (TP0 over TCP) ULTRIX implementation is US and UK GOSIP'ed. OSF/1 implementation is in the process of being GOSIP'ed. Matt Thomas Internet: thomas@lkg.dec.com U*X Networking UUCP: ...!decwrl!thomas Digital Equipment Corporation Disclaimer: This message reflects my own warped views, etc. Littleton, MA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 10:49 EST From: WHMurray@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL Subject: ISDN - Another Voice I have listened with interest the discussions on ISDN. While I have learned a lot, I feel that one important point has been missed. I suggest to you that there is nothing in the world quite so useless as one telephone. Even two telephones have limited value. The value of a telephone rises along an s-shaped curve with the number of potential connections. Incidentally, as its value rises along this curve, its price tends to fall. The problem with ISDN is not simply that it costs too much, but that there is no one to talk to. The price of a 9600 modem has recently fallen to under a $100- and that of a 14.4 to under $200-. The effective speed of the 14.4 approaches that of ISDN. The difference is that with the modem there are lots of people to talk to. Why would I want to pay five times the cost of the modem for an ISDN card when no one that I want to talk to has one. For ISDN value to be comparable to that of a 14.4 modem, the number of people using them would have to be comparable. Note that I made the same argument when comparing ISDN to 2400 modems, which were no where near the speed of ISDN. The number and price of 14.4s is getting better much faster than ISDN. Much of the discussion here has been about the use of ISDN for the last mile connection to the internet. Here, even the one advantage that ISDN really has, fast call setup, is lost. I will leave it to the reader to figure out at what point one might be willing to give up the scarce slot that his 14.4 is using to put an ISDN card in it. I am sure that I want high speed digital connections to the home more than most people. My personal comm bill runs about a thousand dollars a month, so I am about as likely to pay for it as most. But it still seems to me that ISDN is a day late and a dollar short. I find it much easier to forsee the cross over between modems and packet switched on CTV broadband than that between modems and ISDN. It may well be that George Gilder is right and low-power, spread-spectrum, digital RF will beat modems, ISDN, and CTV. William Hugh Murray, Executive Consultant, Information System Security 49 Locust Avenue, Suite 104; New Canaan, Connecticut 06840 1-0-ATT-0-700-WMURRAY; WHMurray at DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL [Moderator's Note: Thanks for pointing out what is so often overlooked when comparing technological advances and pricing in telecom services when compared with other 'utilities' as one example or devices and gimmicks: unlike virtually everything else, the telephone and its peripherals take two to tango. I don't care where you get your cable television; I don't care whose computer and software you purchase. None of it affects me. Wire it however you like; use expensive or cheap and worthless components ... but if your telecom equipment is of poor quality then it affects my use of my telecom equipment. Only the telephone matters in this respect: we all have to do it the right way, else everyone else's service is degraded as a result. Because of this, you can't quite apply the pricing and scale of economics to telecom that you can to other 'electronics' or 'computer equipment'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: detlef@se01.elk.miles.com (Mike Detlef) Subject: POCSAG/GOLAY Message Formats? Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:35:23 GMT I'm getting ready to start a home project that will involve sending coded numeric pages to a smart box that decodes them and prints a "grocery list" for a remote user. The two formats that seem to be most prevalent are POCSAG and GOLAY. Can anybody provide me with 1) details or 2) pointer to a source for details on either of these? Thanks, Mike ------------------------------ From: cvitoa!koos@uunet.UU.NET (Koos de Heer) Subject: Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 11:45:17 GMT Organization: Centrum Voor Informatieverwerking, Utrecht, The Netherlands In FOO@BUVAX.BARRY.EDU (G. Trevor Foo) writes: > Help! I am doing some research on telecommuting and its effects. My > research requires that I determine the percentage of the U.S. > workforce that is potentially suitable for telecommuting. > I am trying to find "a list" of all job classifications that will > fulfill the requirements for a potential telecommuting job. Due to newsreader problems I didn't see your question earlier. I am involved in a telecommuting project in The Netherlands. One of the problems is finding out when it will and when it will not 'work'. A few pilots are running. In general, full-time tele- commuting is seldom a succes. Usually the telecommuting portion of a job varies between 20 and 60% (one to three days per week). This requires also a different way of dealing with office space -- but that is too far away from telecommunications to discuss here. Another question is how to define telecommuting. How about the salesperson who writes reports from the car or from home at the end of the day and sends them to the office by modem or network? How about the worker who takes some extra work home and does that on the privately owned PC in the evening? There are other border-line cases and they are hard to ignore for the number of people involved. I don't have the list you are looking for -- unsure if one exists but also unsure if it is wise to create one. Aren't jobs changing continuously? In my opinion it is better to look at criteria that make it possible or impossible to telecommute. Then you can try to estimate a percentage. But certainly that percentage will not be fixed - my view is that it will grow substantially over time as our work changes and technology develops. Criteria that we have come up with so far (some quite obvious): - work has to be mainly desk work (research, writing, telephoning or faxing, data entry, and the like), or in other words: aimed at the creation, processing or retrieval of information; - job should not require frequent contact with co-workers; - organization has to be able to deal with remote workers, which means that management has to control output of workers rather than presence in the office (for many managers, this is a problem!); - worker has to _want_ to telecommute; - worker has to be able to work independently (this is very important when one works at home; working in a telecommuting center near home requires less discipline); - when working at home: home situation has to be fit for working (small space with two young kids around could be problematic); - the information and communication aspects of the work have to be highly automated (workstation network, phone/fax, videoconferencing etc. rather than books, binders and live meetings); Recently, I read about research in the US (no source was given) that estimated the number of telecommuters in the US at 8 million and growing by 25% per year. Dutch research in 1992 showed that in the near future 25 to 33% of the total working population will be telecommutable, i.e. meeting the above criteria. Hope this is of some help, I am interested in further comments of course. > Thank you. Pleasure. koos de heer koos@cvi.ns.nl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:24:31 -0500 From: msb@sq.com Subject: For Your Amusement, if Possible [Moderator's Note: Found in alt.config by our correspondent and passed along. PAT] Newsgroups: alt.config From: zippy@cs.brandeis.edu (Patrick Tufts) Subject: Newsgroup proposal: alt.sect.telecom Organization: Brandeis University Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 19:48:08 GMT twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes: > Please consider alt.religion.islam rather than alt.sect.islam. There > is already an alt.religion hierarchy in place, and it follows the > model set by alt.dcom.telecom, alt.sources, etc. for having an > unmoderated alt group with a parallel name to a moderated Usenet group. alt.sect.telecom - its time has come. Tim Pierce twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) [Moderator's Note: So true, so true. The scandalous thing about the Dungheap Net is that its not just the formation of the unmoderated newsgroup they are now using for telecom; its *any* group they start there. The battles go on and on and on. Well, their time is drawing nigh ... watch what happens when the new Plantation Masters MCI and Sprint -- operators of backbone sites everywhere -- crack their whip and raise the rates for transmission to the point that the anarchists flee in terror. Sites will start getting severely truncated news feeds (all they'll be able to afford); absolutely no one will bother getting a full news feed any longer; the Sunday afternoon in the park analogy by Gene Spafford will turn into a ride on the New York Subway late on a Saturday night during a hot summer, etc. I predict Usenet will go through something like the CB craze of the late 1970's: everyone will be connected, the noise will be so awful that everyone gives up on it and admins will be severely pressured by their superiors to either eliminate it due to the increasing costs or at least severely cut back on it. And God help the poor devils, if Usenetters were told "you have a final 24 hour period to say something significant and make a substan- tial difference in the world via this medium before the plug is pulled once and for all," most of them would spend the 24 hours flaming about the proper way to set up a newsgroup and whether or not someone was making a couple dollars on the side from it. Its interesting though that a certain highly-placed netter who has much to say about which groups are created and which are not is never called to account for the fact that his employer UUNET definitly stands to benefit from the increased traffic via charges to their clients. Ooops, I was not supposed to say that, was I ... :) See ya tomorrow! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #809 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07594; 10 Dec 93 5:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06995 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:27 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02895 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:04 -0600 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312100812.AA02895@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #810 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Dec 93 02:12:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 810 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cable TV Meets Telecom (Dave O'Shea) Cable Channels (was Quantum Economics) (David L. Kindred) ATM Conference Jan '94/Vancouver Update (Mark Fraser) Reflections of a Phone Company Boss (Vancouver Province via Sid Shniad) Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Neklan Brozensky) FTP'able EIA/TIA/IS-54B? (Wade Stone) Are ORA Hands Free Car Kits Any Good? (Pete Helme) Phone System/Voice Mail Recommendations Wanted (Bryan Gonderinger) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dave_oshea@wiltel.com (Dave O'Shea) Subject: Cable TV Meets Telecom Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:21:44 EST padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) writes: >>> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for >>> Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for >>> 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping >>> opportunities the new technology promises.<< >> Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV? >> Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the >> free market. > Somehow, I doubt that adding another 460 channels would change my > habits much and, since the foregoing is *enough*, would not be willing > to pay any more. You're working under the assumption that Cable TV will continue to simply add more broadcast channels with all this extra capacity. First, the "500 channels" figure is possibly misleading. It was tossed out in reply to a reporter's question by the president of TCI (Tele communications, Inc., a good-sized cable operator) when he was asked what kind of capacity these systems might have. Reporters (and most consumers) can't relate things like mbit/s, DS3, Sonet, and ATM to useful measures. That bandwidth could be used to carry a number of different things. A couple that come to mind are interactive games, information services, and possibly tele/videoconferencing services. Who knows what other things will be dreamed up in the decade or so that it will take to implement all this. Now, remember, that is just the bandwidth carried into your home. Some sort of switching system, like distributed mini-CO's, may be able to take portions of an even bigger data pipe and selectively feed it to consumers on demand. It may come to pass that the distinction between your phone service and your cable service becomes a little hazy. Bill "Who could ever use 640k?" Gates didn't think anybody could use more capacity than he provided, either. :-) > The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think > "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad > enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now > requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for > the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel > listing? Suppose the listing were piped into a cable converter that had a few pages of video memory, and allowed you to scroll through the guide, perhaps filtering on new-release comedy movies starting at 9:00pm? Or offering a $3.00/hr multi-player game which would be your computer would be the client for? It wouldn't be at all difficult to put an ethernet connector on the back of a cable box, and the price of a router might drop the way pocket calculators did in the '70s with mass production and LSI technology. > I suspect that this is part of the problem that has kept satellite > receiver sales down, sensory overload. Why else whould the Internet > Gophers, Archies, and WWW retrieval mechanisms be so popular -- and > these people are probably the "brightest and the best". Well, there's also price (low end units are still expensive), you need to be fairly technically sophisticated to be able to understand where to located programming, and many people (apartment-dwellers, folks in towns with scrict zoning regulations) simply have no place to put a dish. The trick is to make retrieval of useful information practical for a non- technical person. Archie amd related services are great, but you still need a large base of knowlege and skills before you can use it or interpret the information it provides. > So for 500 channels to work, a listing would have to be downloaded > (daily ?, weekly ?) to a storage device that could be set up for > selective retrieval. Could it be done -- certainly. Will it ? No reason to expect it won't. Scientific Atlanta, General Instrument, and several other companies have surely seen the value of such a service. (As have most of the RBOC's, I'm sure.) Dave O'Shea dos@wdns.wiltel.com Sr. Network Support Engineer 201.236.3730 WilTel Data Network Services ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 09:20 EST From: kindred@telesciences.com (David L Kindred ) Subject: Cable Channels (was Quantum Economics) A Padgett Peterson writes: > Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com writes: >> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R >> for Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to >> pay for 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home >> shopping opportunities the new technology promises. > this gives me about 40 tunable channels of which I usually > watch 9 (TNT, TLC, Nickelodean, USA, AMC, BRAVO, Family, > Sci-Fi, and Comedy). This is *enough* (C). Your point is well made, however there is one thing you have overlooked, and that is that although each us may only watch nine or so channels, it is quite possible that we each want nine DIFFERENT channels. My cable company has about 45 channels of capacity, which means that there are channels I want that I can't get, as they also have to accommodate everyone else. (BTW, I only get four of the channels you listed, and would like at least three of the others). The advantage of a "500" channel system would be that each of us can select what we want, without preventing our neighbor from doing the same. Hopefully the implementation of these new systems would allow us to pay for what we wanted, and let us leave the rest behind. Dave ------------------------------ From: mfraser@vanbc.wimsey.com (Mark Fraser) Subject: ATM Conference Jan '94/Vancouver Update Date: 9 Dec 1993 09:42:17 -0800 Organization: Wimsey Information Services January 27-28,1994 Vancouver, BC, Canada Rapid adcances in switching and transmission technologies are propelling fast-paced developments in high speed communication networks that are capable of achieving transfer speeds in excess of 150 Mbps. Canada is at the forefront of this exciting development with companies such as MPR Teltech, Newbridge, Northern Telecom, Bell- Northern Research (BNR), and others doing research and developing products in the Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) arcs. ATM is a major technology focus in high speed networking. The purpose of this conference is to bring together major ATM players from industry and academia to talk about the technology -- its past, present, and future. This conference is the first of its kind in Canada. The specific objectives of this conference are: To provide a gathering of technology developers, service providers, network operators, and researchers who are deeply involved in high speed communication networking to describe the state-of-the- art in ATM networks, covering topics in technology, hardware, software, standards, trials, and innovative applications. Emphasis will be focused on both current developments and near future trends. To provide a forum for developers and providers to meet with application user groups and government policy planners to exchange views and insight on ATM networking. To promote a meeting of the minds so that a better understanding of the needs and problem of the user communities can be accomplished, resulting in products and services more tailored to meeting those needs and solving those problems. To provide a starting point for building a community of interest in ATM high speed networking with representation from all interested parties. The target audiences include: Technology developers Product developers Service providers Researchers Network operators Application users Industry observers Company executives Government policy planners The conference is co-sponsored by six research institutes: Telecommunications Research Laboratories (TRLabs), the National Wireless Communications Research Foundation (NWCRF), , the Ottawa Carleton Research Institute (OCRI), the Telecommunications Research Institute of Ontario, the Telecommunications Consortium of Canada (TCC) and the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers and supported by: Canadian Institute for Telecommunications Research (CITR). There will be three keynote speakers, about 15 invited speakers, and a lively panel discussion. The conference will have academics talking about their research, as well as industrial representatives discussing equipment developments, standards, trials, etc. in a vendor neutral way. For registration and For Technical Program Conference Information Information: John Mele Dr. Carey L. Williamson ATM Conference Coordinator Co-Chair, ATM Technical Committee NWCRF TRLabs Suite 450, 1122 Mainland St. 108 - 15 Innovation Boulevard Vancouver, BC, CANADA Saskatoon, SK, CANADA V6B 5L1 S7N 2X8 Tel: (604) 687-7644 Tel: (306)668-8204 Fax: (604) 687-7563 Fax: (306)668-1944 e-mail: mfraser@wimsey.bc.ca e-mail: carey@cs.usask.ca Request for refunds must be received prior to January 20, 1994. Refunds are subject to a $50.00 administration fee. Participants with confirmed registrations who fail to attend or notify NWCRF of cancellation prior to the refund date, are subject to the full fee. Substitutions are allowed at any time. Registration Form Early Registration $495.00 +GST = 529.65 (must be received prior to January 3rd, 1994) After January 3rd, 1994 Members* $550.00 +GST = 588.50 Non-members $625.00 +GST = 668-75 Students $200.00 +GST = 214.00 *open to employees of member companies of sponsoring organizations Method of Payment _____ Cheque/money order _____ VISA Card # ______________________ Expiry date _________________ IEEE #___________________________ Name ___________________________________________ Title ___________________________________________ Organization ___________________________________________ Address ___________________________________________ City/Prov ___________________________________________ Postal Code ___________________________________________ Tel __________________ Fax ___________________ e-mail ___________________________________________ Please make cheques payable to: NWCRF ATM: Technology, Standards, Trials and Applications Agenda Thursday January 27, 1994 9:00 am Keynote Session I James Mackie, Vice President, Business Development, Newbridge 10:30 am Session I: Technology Overview Chair: Carey Williamson, TRLabs ATM Networking - Alberto Leon-Garcia, University of Toronto, CITR CITR Projects on Broadband Networks and Services - Johnny Wong, U. of Waterloo/CITR 12:00 Lunch 1:00 pm Keynote Session II ATM: Issues and Challenges Ahead - Raj Jain, DEC Parallel Session 2:00 Session II: Technology - Hardware Chair: Norm Dowds, MPR T.B.A. - Norm Dowds, MPR Teltech A Parallel Host Interface for ATM - Mark McCutcheon, UBC A Desktop T1 Interface to ATM - Dave Dodds, TRLabs 3:30 Session III: Technology - Software Chair: Gerald Neufeld, UBC The Xunet II Native Mode ATM Protocol Stack - Srinivasan Keshav, AT&T High Speed Protocols for ATM - Gerald Neufeld, UBC Dynamic Incremental Reconfiguration of Virtual Paths - Mike MacGregor, TRLabs Parallel Session 2:00 Canarie: Status and the Way Ahead TBA, Canarie 3:00 OCRInet: Research Networks in the Ottawa-Carleton Region - First Impressions TBA, OCRI 3:30 Panel Discussion: ATM Research Networks - Edgar Froese, RNet - Brian Unger, President, Western University Research Network - TBA, Quebec Network Friday, January 28, 1994 8:30 am Keynote III Does 'ATM' Equal 'Broadband' - John Bourne, BNR 9:30 am Session IV: Standards Update Chair: Karen Kobierski, BNR International Standards Update - Richard Vickers, BNR ATM Traffic Management - Dave McDysan, MCI The AAL-5 Adaption Layer Standard - Craig Partridge, BBN ATM Signalling Standards - Gregg Ratta, Bellcore 11:00 am Session V: Applications and Trials Chair: Peter Briscoe, Newbridge The Viewstation: An ATM-Based Environment for Media-Intensive Applications - David Tennenhouse, MIT SaskTel's Residential Multimedia Broadband Trial - Perry Gray, SaskTel Traffic Management and Congestion Control in ATM Networks - Chuck Kalmanek, AT&T 12:30 Lunch 1:15 pm Session VI: Panel Discussion Chair: Rick Bunt, TRLabs - Raj Jain, DEC - John Bourne, BNR - Johnny Wong, U. of Waterloo/CITR - T.B.A. 2:15 pm Closing Remarks Parallel Session 9:30 Strategic Alliances: An Instrument to Build a Canadian National Information Infrastructure - Allan Kennedy, President, Telecommunications Consoritum of Canada 10:00 Panel Discussion: Initiatives in ATM Networks in the US - Matt Kuhn, North Carolina ATM Network - TBA, NII PacBell Research - TBA, Network Nielson 11:30 Initiatives in Europe - SuperJanet TBA 12:00 Lunch 1:15 Panel Discussion: Canadian Federal/Provincial Government Initiatives - Jocelyn Ghent Mallett, Industry Canada - Gordon Gow, Ontario International Corporation - TBA, Quebec - TBA, BC 2:15 Closing Remarks ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: Reflections of a phone company boss Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 11:34:58 PST Values lost along that bottom line -- by Doug Hockley Have you ever had a little rational bubble float to the surface of your consciousness that leaves you with a twinge of conscience? I've experienced a few of them recently and they concern the importance of people versus corporate profits. There are intrinsic Canadian values as we passively tolerate a concerted corporate lobby for a globalized marketplace in what used to be our country. Ours as in yours and mine, not some foreign money and management force that has taken over. Every day I read about companies reaping a profit margin unheard of in former times -- and at the same time I see more job erosion. I watch the evening news and hear how governments wonder where to cut social programs. We should start questioning the presumptuous corporate realm and our own misguided assumption that making money is more important than rights of an individual or the family. And we should start questioning all political parties that would give away our national integrity for the sake of foreign interests. I've heard that we can't build a wall around our country and I look at Switzerland and say why not? Why not experiment with a Canadian job tariff? Every job exported in the name of NAFTA could have a tariff imposed that would be transferred to unemployment insurance and job retraining programs. Let's not lose sight of the fact that we have an extraordinary array of natural resources and an abundance of renewable resources. Our population is relatively small in comparison to other countries and our land reserve is virtually untapped. ... And here's a radical thought: Why is half my income taxed away while corporate taxes remain incomprehensibly low? Considering the profits being made and the willingness of companies to increase my tax burden by manufacturing offshore, their tax rate should be doubled. Ask yourself this: How many multinational stop to consider the impact of their strategic objectives on citizens? I think we're overdue for a re-evaluation of what is fundamentally important to us as Canadians, otherwise we're going to lose what in the world envy. Let us not allow "our home and native land" to be given away for the sake of some corporate bottom line. _____ --Doug Hockley is the Employee Assistance Manager at the British Columbia Telephone Company. He deals with employees' difficulties related to alcoholism, drug abuse, stress, and family problems. This article ran in the {Vancouver Province}. Sid Shniad ------------------------------ From: a03431@giant.rsoft.bc.ca (Neklan Brozensky) Subject: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line Date: 10 Dec 1993 00:07:36 GMT Organization: MIND LINK! Communications Corp Hi Netters, I have a Unix background. Recently I've taken a job which involves IBM AS/400 and dedicated long distance data comunications, niether of which I've had tons of previous experince with. I'd like to get an outside opinion on a company-internal comunications question. I'm a systems administrator in a branch office. We have currently 30 terminals/printer unit attached to our head office's AS/400 in Colorado Springs accross a leased analogue line. The remote controller unit is attached to an IBM 5866 9600 baud modem. We are planning to totally upgrade the connection because our office is growing rapidly and even more terminals will be required. However in the mean time I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a v.32bis type modem would be a fast inexpensive way to increase throughput untill the issues around a more permanent faster solution got sorted out. The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary solution. Their chief arguments are: 1. The are uncertain that the line will support a faster line speed. That there may be problems with the line that only manifest them selves at the faster rate. and if they occur, too much time will be spent fooling around tyring to solve that. 2. They don't think that the solution will result in the antiscipated payoff of increased response for keyers at dataentry terminals. The guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times for a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the DSU/CSU). At that time he only got a 10% increase in resposiveness. I think something is wrong here. Keeping in mind that this dedicated line is going from Vancouver, Canada to Colorado Springs, I still think that the line is not going to be taxed that much more if the modem is signalling at 14400 instead of 9600. In fact our local telco repesentative suggested even using a v.fast type modem accross the line. I have even less reason to buy their second argument. Making the assumption that SNA (or what ever the communications protocol is for the AS/400s to comunicate with our remote terminals) can be compress almost as well as you average ascii text, then there should be a significate speed up taking place. What are people's thoughts here about this ... what reply would you guys make to these claims. Are they resonable technical objections? Are they being intransigent? Thanks for any insights you can provide. Neklan Brozensky a3431@mindlink.bc.ca ------------------------------ From: wstone@netcom.com (Wade Stone) Subject: FTP'able EIA/TIA/IS-54B? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 01:57:38 GMT Is there some public domain version of this meaty spec? If you know of, have heard of, or think you might have heard of availability of this (other than Global Engineering [US$218] or the local public library [microfiche 310 pages at US$0.25/page]), then I thank you for any info. Please follow up on this thread or e-mail me. Thanks in advance, Wade Stone wstone@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: pvh@apple.com (Pete Helme) Subject: Are ORA Hands Free Car Kits Any Good? Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 20:21:46 GMT Organization: Apple Computer Inc. I was thinking of getting an ORA hands free kit for my NEC P600. Are they any good? Do they recharge the battery as well as just power it? Thanks, pvh@apple.com ------------------------------ From: bjg@shaman.nexagen.com (Bryan Gonderinger) Subject: Phone System/Voice Mail Recommendations Wanted Date: 9 Dec 1993 16:39:52 -0700 Organization: NeXagen.com We've outgrown our current phone system/voice mail combination (a StarPlus 96EX hybrid key system coupled with a Vodavi StarPlus AVP voicemail system). I'd like to hear any recommendations for alternate phone systems and associated voice mail systems. We've been recommended by our current vendor to go with the StarPlus SPX PBX system and upgrade our StarPlus AVP system, but we've had no end of problems with our current StarPlus system, so I'm a bit leery of this solution. Currently, we've looked into a ROLM system, but even though this product is very impressive looking, I think that we'd be paying for many features/capabilities that we would never use. I'd appreciate any comments on the ROLM system (we were considering the ROLM 9200 CBX system with the ROLM PhoneMail voice mail). So far, all I've heard is good stuff about this system (well, except for the price :). Our current setup has approximately 16 key phones and 60 single-line phones, and we're planning to expand next year to about 120 single line phones, and maybe add a few key phones as well. The StarPlus system was recommended because it would allow us to use all our existing phones. The ROLM system is compatible with our SLT phones, but we would need to replace our key phones. Obviously, reusability of our current equipment would be nice, but not necessary (assuming the overall price was right). We'd like a system that would allow us to expand beyond this point at some time in the future (perhaps to around 300 or so phones), as well as one that's relatively cheap to operate. One potential problem - we've got a number of extensions that are shared by multiple people, each of whom has their own separate voice mail box. The Vodavi system allows us to have the "message waiting" light lit on the extension if any of the users (about four per extension) of that extension have a message in their mailbox. Our current supplier tells us that that is a feature not commonly found on voice mail systems. Well, if you've waded through all that diatribe, and have any info., please email me back, or give me a call at (303) 444-0498 x155 (or give me your number and I'll be happy to pay the charges). Thanks, Bryan Gonderinger (bjg@nexagen.com) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #810 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25569; 13 Dec 93 15:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23262 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for eweinberger@gn.apc.org); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17097 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:13 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:13 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312111547.AA17097@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #811 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 93 09:47:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 811 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir (Charles Hoequist) International X25 Connections (Frederic Albrecht) Airphone Enhancements, Anyone? (Andrew C. Green) "POTS"/CBL Maintenance Specifications (Anthony D. Vullo) Free Phone Calls on Itineris Service in France (cccf@altern.com) Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK (A. Padgett Peterson) Local Telco Blocking Carriers (A. Padgett Peterson) Do You Know About the Corning Plant in Wilmington, NC? (Phil Crawley) What is MF4? (Stephen L. Moshier) Help - Do You Know Who Sells Prepaid International Calling Cards? (Sue Liu) High Speed Links (ajay@cs.buffalo.edu) Phone Card For a PC (Paul L. Egges) Telephone Company Rate Survey (Hansel E. Lee Jr.) Satellite Monitors Wanted (Darren Ingram) Caller ID Telephone (Russ Kepler) Caller ID in Software? (John Allen) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 16:15:00 +0000 From: Charles Hoequist Subject: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir Last night, a message was waiting on my answering machine when I arrived home, from a Southern Bell representative requesting me to call their customer service number concerning my billing address. Aha, I thought. They are tired of the billing address not being the same as the service address and wish to make them the same. Wrong, wrong. I call the number, wade through the voicemail system, state the issue to the rep, and she asks me for my residential address. After taking it, she says, "Then you don't live at 820 Old Apex Rd?" No, I don't. I've never been to that address, which is in another town, and presumably not even served by the same CO as mine. The rep could not tell me how it happened, nor could she tell me how the discrepancy was discovered. The risky part, however, is embodied in her comment, "well, it's a good thing you didn't call 911!" True enough. Imagine the fire/police/ambulance speeding to some location a dozen miles from me, while whatever disaster is underway plays itself out. Worse: how many more such obvious database glitches are hanging around undetected? I say 'obvious', in light of the likelihood that the incorrect address in not in the correct CO service area, and should therefore be easy to spot. And if I called 911 and gave an address which didn't match the database, what would the 911 operator do? Charles Hoequist, Jr. | Internet: hoequist@bnr.ca BNR, Inc. | voice: 919-991-8642 PO Box 13478 | fax: 919-991-8008 Research Triangle Park NC 27709-3478 USA [Moderator's Note: The printout 911 receives is more of an advisory in the event the caller is unable to speak with them for whatever reason than an absolute guide to location. Had you told them a different address police/fire would have come to the address you stated. Regretfully, had you been incapacitated and been only able to dial the number then unable to speak (unconcious, dead, etc) their initial trip would have been to the wrong address. :(. Errors will occur in data entry when thousands of entries are entered manually. The listings have a high degree of accuracy, but that of course is of little comfort to the person whose entry is incorect. PAT] ------------------------------ From: FA38@calvacom.fr (Frederic ALBRECHT) Subject: International X25 Connections Organization: R.C.I. CalvaCom Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 13:55:29 GMT Hello, I've been asked to write a booklet on ways to connect to a French online service from various countries: Europe, North America, Japan and the Commonwealth. This online service is accessible from the French X25 packet switching network Transpac. It should therefor be accessible through any national X25 network with an international call. Trouble is I don't know how other network operators handle international calls. Which is why I now turn to the Digest. Any help from people from any of the above countries would be very much appreciated regarding ways to place an international call on their local X25 network (is some form of subscription needed?) or the phone number or e-mail address of the local network operator. In return, I'd be glad to answer any questions about France. Please reply by email. Fred fred@calvacom.fr 100136,711 (CIS) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 10:01:29 CST From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Airphone Enhancements, Anyone? I've recently received an invitation to participate in a survey by a market research outfit. No, no, this is a _real_ one, a firm that pays me in cash to show up, frown thoughtfully at the sponsor's product and make inspired suggestions about how they could improve it, as if the future of the free world depended on, say, hair mousse, to cite one recent session. Anyway, next Monday evening, December 13th, I am scheduled to be in a small group discussing possible new services and capabilities that we feel would be useful additions to airplane telephones. The focus of the evening seems to be adding laptop PC or fax machine connectivity, to judge from an unusual advance letter I just received from them. They say, "One of the major stresses on our discussion will be on developing A LIST OF ALL THE POSSIBLE CIRCUMSTANCES AND SITUATIONS IN WHICH YOU AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PANEL CAN VISUALIZE OR IMAGINE THAT YOU MIGHT USE SUCH A SERVICE." (Emphasis theirs) They ask, "[T]hink about this topic, to visualize yourself and perhaps other people as using this feature, and the situations of its use." Since you are all Other People, as far as I can tell, I thought I'd collect suggestions from you to raise in discussion next Monday. Please send whatever ideas you have to me via E-mail (in brief, please; I will be only one of at least six people, so I can't read speeches to them), and assuming I don't get bumped from an overbooked panel, I'll submit a summary of the evening afterwards. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 93 16:51 EST From: Anthony D. Vullo <0003250251@mcimail.com> Subject: "POTS"/CBL Maintenance Specifications I am looking for reference documentation, tariffs, ect. that govern the local exchange companies (LEC) in the US for providing and maintaining "POTS" or Common Business Line (CBL) service. My prime focus is to gain the resource to enable me to quote "chapter and verse" of the appropriate techno-legal references to drive trouble resolutions with local providers on POTS/CBL services, especially with dial-up data problems. I would like to assign one of our lines as a test reference, calibrate it, and use it to test the other lines when trouble is encountered. Then, with test data in hand, call the LEC repair office to report the *EXACT* problem. Specifically: - What are the design specifications for the LECs to provide this service? (C.O. to demarc) o Loss at 1004 hz o 3 tone slope (404 hz, 1004 hz, 2804 hz) o S/N o Noise with a quiet termination o Any other measureable parameters to define this service - What are the maintenance specifications for the LECs to provide service? (C.O. to demarc) o Design loss at 1004 hz +- X dB o Design 3 tone slope (404 hz, 1004 hz, 2804 hz) +- X dB o Design s/n +- XdB o Design noise with a quiet termination +- X dB o Any other measureable parameters to maintain this service Thanks. Tony Vullo ------------------------------ From: cccf@altern.com (cccf) Subject: Free Phone Calls on Itineris Service in France Date: Fri, 10 Dec 93 12:28:52 EST I discovered some time ago the new and very efficient Itineris service. Philips gave me as journalist the marvellous PA 810 portable (made in Finland) with a 11 hours battery. France Telecom offer me the line in some seconds and attribute me the 07038236 phone number without any question. Two days after, I receive an invoice of 1,075.05 FF: 350.00 FF for the initial fees and 556.45 for a "little amount of your future communication costs." The service works in the street, in the tube, in the TGV train, in the taxis, in the restaurant, in the church, in my bed, in my WC, etc. My company found this wunderful phone more practical and pleasant in comparison with the poor pager named Alphapage that can only capture 80 alphanumerical characters. The security of my Itineris is poor: only the PIN code work and I already have a little external kit (320.00 FF) that crash this protection. All my friends put the default value "0000" as the only door to access to the French phone network. The invoice is noted with "C.G.R.T." (33047 Bordeaux Cedex, toll-free phone number: 05 14 20 14) label. This phone help-desk will be of no interest for all my questions. Yves-Marie, my 17-year old brother, use my Itineris in school for no cost :-) He phone me for maximum 15 seconds and ask for a return call: between October 1st and the end of 1993, all these "short calls" are free. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 08:28:38 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK dave@llondel.demon.co.uk (David Hough) writes: > You will find that most UK households manage perfectly well with only > one phone line -- if it is in use then tough, ring back later. A > residential line costs 80-100 pounds a year so a second one would need > a fair bit of justification in most household budgets. This is true of *most* households in the US also, but TELECOM readers are not in the majority. I have had two phone lines ever since I moved from Texas to Florida (and the cost here for two is about the same -- $30/month -- as one line was in Texas). It does not sound like this is much different from the 80-100 pounds per year per line in the UK particularly when McDonald's prices in London seem to have the sane numeric value as in the US, just in pounds not dollars. I should mention that my two lines are both "basic" service with no add-ons other than the Caller-ID on my "hobby" line (now U$6.00/month) since the cost of all the "Touchstar" services would be more than the other line cost. Also it is nice to be able to bring up someone's computer on line two while talking to them on line one. "Blind Bravo Indias" in the military taught me the value of keeping in touch. Then again the fierce competition for long distance in the US helps also (I figure on U$0.15 or less per minute anywhere in the States). Unmetered local and 800 service is another plus. Not to say that this is necessarily typical -- Orlando is one of the least expensive places in the US to live -- just that there are a lot of variables and a second telephone line just does not seem much more expensive than one. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 08:51:46 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Local Telco Blocking Carriers The following announcemet appeared in my November Southern Bell bill: "Effective December 1, 1993, Southern Bell will begin blocking access by long distance companies to local calls. Under Florida law, local telephone calls must be handled by the local exchange telephone company only." My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call when at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the U$1.00-U$1.25 charged to make a collect local call). I called Southern Bell and was told that the ruling only affects residences but have not verified this as yet. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ From: philc@lexington.ee.mcgill.ca (Phil Crawley) Subject: Do You Know About the Corning Plant in Wilmington, NC? Date: 9 Dec 1993 10:03:04 -0500 Organization: McGill University - MACS Laboratory, Montreal, CANADA. I've heard that Corning has its telecommuniations research plant in Wilmington, NC. Unforunately, I have not been able to find out if they do any circuit design at this location. I figured that if Corning does do IC design it would probably be on a GaAs process, but I would like to be sure before sending in a job application. Also I would like to know if they do any analog design at this plant. I anyone has any information I would greatly appreciate hearing what you have. My email address is philc@finnegan.ee.mcgill.ca. Sincerely, Philip Crawley ------------------------------ From: moshier@world.std.com (Stephen L Moshier) Subject: What is MF4? Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 06:57:40 GMT Can someone supply a reference or info on MF4 signalling? It is supposed to be a variant of MF multifrequency tone signals, perhaps a protocol using those tones. ------------------------------ From: sue@gate-testlady.engr.sgi.com (Sue Liu) Subject: Help - Do You Know Who Sells Prepaid International Calling Cards? Date: 11 Dec 1993 11:09:45 GMT Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA Any info is greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: ajay@albali.cs.buffalo.edu Subject: High Speed Links? Reply-To: ajay@cedar.Buffalo.EDU Organization: Center of Excellence for Document Analysis and Recognition Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 22:10:39 GMT We are in the need for a temporary, high-speed ( ~ 50-100KBytes/sec ) link from our offices in Buffalo, to Washington D.C. I'd like to get some information regarding how much such a link would cost, what is involved in setting up the link at both ends, how much would it cost to lease the equipment for the period of time, what are our options, etc. etc. As you can see, Telecomm is definitely not one of my strongpoints, so I'm just fishing for ideas right now! Any help will be appreciated! Ajay ajay@cs.Buffalo.EDU ------------------------------ From: pegges@teal.csn.org (Paul L. Egges) Subject: Phone Card For a PC Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc. Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 23:44:16 GMT My company is looking for software/hardware for a pc-clone that will: 1. Recognize caller id; 2. Understand dtmf tones; 3. Prompt a caller with a voice or tone; 4. Execute a hook flash (for doing a call transfer); 5. Dial out a number (one that the person who has called into the system has entered); 6. Interface with database to verify that the caller is allowed to call out. This board should work in an IBM-PC 386/486. Prefer that the board can handle more than one phone line. Additional question: Where is the faq for this group? Thanks for your help in advance. Paul Egges [Moderator's Note: The TELECOM Digest FAQ is located in the Telecom Archives, accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. You can also get it by using the email information server. If you need a help file on that, let me know. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ar826@yfn.ysu.edu (Hansel E. Lee Jr.) Subject: Telephone Company Rate Survey Date: 11 Dec 1993 06:25:05 GMT Organization: US Air Force - SMC/INKA Reply-To: hansel@freenet.scri.fsu.edu (Hansel E. Lee Jr.) I am conducting a rate survey of long distance companies. Currently I have contacted: MCI Sprint AT&T US Long Distance Metromedia/ITT All Net Cable & Wireless Opticom If you know the name and customer service number to any other long distance companies please e-mail them to me at hansel@freenet.fsu.edu so I can include them in my comparison. I will post the results of my comparison when it is complete. Thank you for any assistance. Hansel E. Lee Jr., GS-07, USAF hansel@freenet.fsu.edu System Threat Analyst leehe@post2.laafb.af.mil Space & Missile Systems Center DSN Prefix (DSN) 833- Directorate of Intelligence Office/STU-III (310) 363-1988 SMC/INKA Unclass Fax (310) 363-0034 180 Skynet Street, Ste 2271 STU-III Fax (310) 363-0792 Los Angeles AFB, CA 90245-4690 Home Phone (310) 643-5067 PGP Public Key available upon request or at keyservers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 07:43 GMT From: Darren Ingram Subject: Satellite Monitors Wanted Reply-To: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk SATELLITE WATCHER, CABLE HOG OR TELLY ADDICT? Are you an enthusiastic viewer of all things televisual? Do you keep an active eye on what is happening on the small screen? Do you care about what is coming up for your viewing pleasure in the future? YOU COULD HELP: Satnews is looking for active enthusiasts and even professionals around the world to provide timely information on developments in cable, satellite, broadcasting and mainstream telecomms, who will act as a tipster or correspondent. Whether you can tell us about a story concerning a Brazilian cable television network in Rio; Icelandic MMDS, Russian satellite dishes or Australian aboriginal television, you can help. Every fortnight M2 Communications Limited releases a full-text version of Satnews free-of-charge to the global on-line community, shadowing developments in the worldwide market place. This resource can cost many hundreds of dollars/British pounds if you had to pay for it. We cannot give you piles of money; but then again we are not asking you to spend a lot either. Just keep an eye on your local cable/satellite TV, daily newspapers, radio and even bits of paper that you come into contact with in your day-to-day employment. At times, however, there may be a requirement for some assistance (if you can provide it) and we may be able to pay you a modest stipend for your efforts and expenses. Such assignments would be proposed and agreed before you would be expected to expend any time or effort. To tell Satnews your news please send us a message as soon as possible after discovery providing as much information as possible -- if you wish to scan/type the story in and e-mail it that is even better. For those rich enough to do so, you may also fax any articles. It is important that you cite the source and date of any clippings you send us. We will not be copying these cuttings, instead using the data as a reference source and a grass roots intelligence resource for our newsgathering. You will be credited for the discovery in any published story (i.e. additional information by John Doe) unless you desire otherwise. Regular contributors will also be given access to the subscription newsletter we also produce on satellite technology, delivered by electronic mail, as a token of our appreciation and gratitude. If you are looking at breaking into journalism or an allied trade, you could even attempt at writing copy directly, submitting it with any associated material. Phone numbers, fax numbers and contact names are always very useful. If you do require any feedback or printed examples of any published work, we may be able to send you copies in the mail. Due to budget constraints we cannot send out regular printed copies of published articles. So what do you have to lose. Please forward any material AS SOON AS POSSIBLE after discovery to: DARREN INGRAM (satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk). Do not be worried if your message does not get acknowledged, but wherever possible you will get a response ... even if it just says "Thanks!" You can receive Satnews free-of-charge for non-commercial usage direct to your Internet/Compuserve mailbox. Signing on is easy. Send a message to our INTERNET mailbox: listserv@orbital.demon.co.uk and in the first line of your message (ignore the subject line), enter: subscribe satnews first_lastname At anytime you can unsubscribe from this automatic mailing list by sending a message to the same address with the words "unsubscribe satnews" on the first line of text. This mailing list is not a interactive discussion forum, and hence traffic is usually limited to around seven to ten messages a month; comprising of two Satnews issues (100k) and the occasional administrative message. If you do have any queries please contact me. If you are considering providing assistance in the future also mail me with your street address/tel/fax and other e-mail details. A few words about your own personal situation/employment would also be appreciated. It is amazing who you get hiding behind a e-mail account these days. Let us work together and keep the Internet spirit going. With best regards and thanks. Darren Ingram EDITOR Satnews M2 Communications Limited Reptile House, 2nd Floor 20 Heathfield Road Coventry CV5 8BT United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 203 717 417 Fax: +44 (0) 203 717 418 Eml: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ From: russ@bbx.basis.com (Russ Kepler) Subject: Caller ID Telephone Organization: BASIS Int'l, Albuquerque NM USA Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 11:14:05 GMT I recently bought an AT&T model 764 telephone to replace a malfunctioning phone at my house. I selected the 764 because it has an integral Caller ID display with handy redial, etc. All in all it had the features that I wanted in a combined Caller ID box and phone. It didn't work. After much gnashing of teeth and moving around of telephones and answering machines it finally turned out that the built in caller id decoder isn't capable of handling (or ignoring) the name portion of the caller id data, and would always fail. Does anyone know of a telephone with the same feature set of the 764 (caller id display, scroll, call back, distinctive ring, etc.) that also handles or ignores the name portion of the datastream? Russ Kepler, Basis International Ltd. russ@bbx.basis.com phone: 505-345-5232 ------------------------------ From: jallen@standard.com (John Allen) Subject: Caller ID in Software? Organization: Standard Insurance Company - Portland Oregon Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:31:35 GMT Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here ready to do some work for me. John Allen - Network Executive E-mail: jallen@standard.com Network Services Telephone: (503) 243-6189 Standard Insurance, Portland Oregon FAX: (503) 321-3313 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #811 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25941; 13 Dec 93 16:23 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29109 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31093 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:10 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:10 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312120348.AA31093@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #812 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 93 21:48:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 812 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Delaware Phone Bill Announces Pa. Split (Carl Moore) Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call (Carl Moore) Vacancies in the Band for Cellulars (Mikhail Boukhny) Cellular Caller ID (Leroy Donnelly) How to Find Number in 313 Area Code? (Victor R. Volkman) Telephone Number Readback Number (Jim Sturtevant) PC Board Wanted (Paul L. Egges) What is "Blueboxing?" (Steve Cogorno) Cellular Systems in Argentina and Peru (Alex Cena) Digital Phone Service in Canada (Alex Cena) More Wireless Questions (Roy Thompson) Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages (Bob Krause) SL-1 to Voice Mail Integration (R. Schwartz) Special Fax Long Distance Service? (Robert J. Keller) A Modem With a Seat Belt 12/02/93 (H. Shrikumar) Re: On Line GSM Recommendations? (Alan Levy) Re: For Your Amusement, if Possible (Thomas Lapp) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 13:48:31 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Delaware Phone Bill Announces Pa. Split I have just picked up my December phone bill from Delaware, and it has notice of the 215/610 split (PRINTED ON THE BACK OF THE ENVELOPE with a list of the prefixes, right there, which will be in 610). Notice also appears in the enclosures. It says that if you dial Area Code 215 to reach any of the exchanges on the list, you should dial Area Code 610 to reach them starting Jan. 8. BUT: "If you dial seven digits to make local calls into Pennsylvania today, you can continue to dial seven digits after January 8, 1994." I do not think any of the Pa. prefixes which are local to Delaware are duplicated in Delaware. There has been some publicity in Delaware in recent years about expanded local areas (with the leading 1 going away for newly-local calls), and (just my own idea) there could be confusion about "7D means local" if Delaware ends up removing the leading 1 for all calls within it. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 14:07:43 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call Arriving with my Delaware phone bill, and I have put some comments in in brackets; *69 for return call and *66 for repeat call, with 11 replacing the * if used from rotary phone: Some phones may not respond properly to the Repeat Call and Return Call special rings. A local or toll charge may apply for calls made with Repeat Call and Return Call. [What is the special ring like, and what does such improper response consist of? I guess the internal signal is different in some way.] Repeat Call and Return Call do not work with calls made to most 700, 800, and 900 numbers. [What are the exceptions, and what happens if you attempt this and it indeed does not work?] You can request your local business office to restrict Repeat Call and Return Call from your telephone line at no extra charge. [What happens if such a restriction exists at the receiving end of your intended call? Or does this mean that if I have such a restriction, I cannot use these features?] ------------------------------ From: Mikhail Boukhny Subject: Vacancies in the Band For Cellulars Organization: University of Virginia Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:23:54 GMT Someone has asked me recently what if he wants to build a competing network for cellular phone. Are there any gaps left in the bandwidth? Whom should he ask to for a license? Federal Communication Commission? Any information is appreciated. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 12:39:38 CST From: Leroy.Donnelly@drbbs.omahug.org (Leroy Donnelly) Subject: Cellular Caller ID Reply-To: leroy.donnelly@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha > From the November 22, 1993 issue of Radio Communications Report Cellular gets Caller ID Cellular carrier Bell Atlantic Mobile announced it will use intelligent switching equipment to test services in Washington, D.C./Baltimore next year designed to give cellular customers more control over the calls they receive. BAM plans to implement GTE Telecommunications Services IntelliBase Enhanced services technology so its customers can take advantage of new Spoken Caller Identification, Selective Call Delivery and Who's Calling Me? services. Spoken Caller Identification enables cellular telephones to announce the name or number of a caller using digital voice technology before the call is answered. Calls can be screened, and the voice application lets customers keep their eyes on the road while driving, BAM noted. Selective Call Delivery lets customers program a list of call numbers into the phone that can be automatically rejected. Who's Calling Me? gives customers a spoken list of unanswered names or numbers, which can be returned by touching one button. BAM employees will be the initial trial participants, starting in January. The test is expected to last about five months. Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 DRBBS -- Planet {Connect} Schmanet Janet (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ From: vvolk@hcia.com (Victor R. Volkman) Subject: How to Find Number in 313 Area Code? Date: 11 Dec 1993 18:38:31 GMT Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan Is there a number in the 313 area code that I can dial that will tell me what number I'm calling from? I saw of list of these here once before. Can anybody mail or repost it? I planning on rewiring several phone outlets (customer wiring) and it would be most helpful. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: jimst@netcom.com (Jim Sturtevant) Subject: Telephone Number Readback Number Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 16:44:59 GMT I've seen several postings of various phone numbers to call to have your telephone number read back. I'm in PacBell area (San Mateo, CA). There have also been postings of 800 numbers to call and have the ANI readback. Any help would be appreciated if you have these numbers. ------------------------------ From: pegges@teal.csn.org (Paul L. Egges) Subject: PC Board Wanted Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc. Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 04:39:50 GMT My company is looking for special board and software that will allow us to do the following: 1. Read the caller id of the caller; 2. If the caller id is in the database allow the user to enter a phone number to dial out (using call transfer from the telephone company); 3. If the caller id is not in the database prompt the user for a password; 4. If the password is in the system allow the user (caller) to enter a phone number to dial out (using call transfer from the telephone company). Basically, then the hardware needs to get the caller id, and understand DTMF codes. We don't want to buy a voice mail system!! Thanks, Paul ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: What is "Blueboxing?" Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:41:05 PST Someone was telling me that the pre-breakup AT&T telephone network operated on a set of 12 tones to control trunks and switches. He said something about blue boxes, blueboxing, or something like that, that would generate tones to signal switches. I assumed that he was talking about a technician's butt-set or test unit, but that doesn't make sense because they are usually bright orange (at least the PacBell ones are). What are these things used for? Also, has the network been changed so that it no longer responds to audio tones? I would think that would be a major cause of telephone fraud if a phreak made a device to generate the control tones. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 [Moderator's Note: 'Blueboxing' referred to placing tones not normally available to telephone subscribers (but otherwise used by telco) on the line with the intent of defrauding telco of toll charges. One such tone was often known simply as '2600' because of its frequency. These tones are/were used internally by telco as a way of telling the switching equipment to begin or end 'supervision'; that is, the timing of calls for billing purposes. Today's network also responds to audio tones, and yes, in the past phreaks have constructed devices to generate these control tones. But the network operates differently today, and theft of service, while not impossible, is much more difficult than in the past. This Digest has never been a phriend of phreaks, and consequently discussions of how to cheat telco are generally kept purposefully vague. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 11:50:45 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Cellular Systems in Argentina and Peru Argentina and Peru recently have purchased cellular infrastructure equipment from AT&T. Does anyone know if its analog or digital technology. If its digital, what technology are they using TDMA, CDMA, GSM, etc? Thanks, Alex M. Cena Lehman Brothers acena@lehman.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 09:05:05 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Digital Phone Service in Canada > DIGITAL PHONE SERVICE. New Brunswick Telephone became Canada's first > phone company able to provide computerized digital service to every > subscriber -- the first step in transforming the company's network > into a high-speed, electronic information highway. (Toronto Globe & > Mail 11/30/93 B7). Does anyone have the details on the infrastructure/technology equipment deployed by NBT for this broadband service? i.e. ADSL, PONs or NGDLC? Does digital service actually reach your home or is this a FITL deployment? Thanks in advance, Alex M. Cena, acena@lehman.com ------------------------------ From: roy_thompson@vos.stratus.com (Roy Thompson) Subject: More Wireless Questions Date: 11 Dec 1993 19:32:46 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA It seems the hot topic of the month is PCS and GSM. I have heard of at least three major groups jumping out in favor of GSM as the new infrastructure for PCS. To my knowledge, NexTel, MCI (and the 100+ members of their consortium), and PTAG (a consortium of all the RBOCS (except Bell South), Sprint, and a few others), have all selected GSM. After the spectrum allocation in May, what are the likely timeframes we will see for new infrastructure being deployed? I'm assuming, because of the nature of the FCC handling of spectrum allocation, many new PCS systems will be deployed with older systems and exisitng wireline networks being used for backhauling. Is there anything, other than frequency issues, that make the PCS infrastructure much different from standard cellular networks? I suppose the micro and pico cell management will create some uniqueness in the network. In that case (with a pico cell for example), will more switches be required? Or will it be more of a service platform issue? I'm not a radio/frequency expert, so I ask the question: What are the unique requirements for implementing at 1.8 GHz? I thought the higher the frequency the more power was required. But the PCS phones (GSM) have lower power requirements than some cellular phones. Is it because of the microcell implementation that allows higher frequency, lower power? Do the basic switching requirements change in the new PCS infrastructure? Do the requirements for HLR change? I understand, maybe incorrectly, that GSM uses TDMA as the AIR standard. Is that TDMA different from that specified for the US? I remember something about a channel number difference. Also, as GSM becomes the defacto standard for PCS in the US, what happens to CDMA? Isn't their an FCC regulation on wireless phones to support a dual-mode? I assume that means a dual AIR standard. Could that mean that GSM TDMA and CDMA will probably be supported out of the same phone, or other similar configurations? Roy Thompson - roy_thompson@vos.stratus.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 11:16:11 EST Subject: Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY From: rjkrause@mothra.syr.edu (Krause) Hello all, I was wondering what large scale e-mail packages people might be running off of their Unix boxes out there. I am interested in receiving information (product and vendor) on e-mail packages that can be used in a corporate environment where one RS/6000 will act as a central point and other RS/6000's will dial into for mail. Mail could consist of regular mail as well as binary files (ie. spreadsheets, designs, etc.). Any information specific or general would be greatly appreciated. If you want, please send e-mail directly to me to avoid making the lists receive the traffic. Thanks, Bob Krause e-mail: rjkrause@rodan.acs.syr.edu phone: 315-451-8000 ext.-4472 ------------------------------ From: r.schwartz18@genie.geis.com Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 23:50:00 BST Subject: SL-1 to Voice Mail Integration I'm looking for information to help me integrate an Northern Telecom SL-1 phone system to a PC based Voice Mail Card. What I need to know is: Is the SL-1 capable of ringing a voice mail port and touch-tone the calling extension number to the vm port prior to conecting the caller? Can the SL-1 give in band supervision via Touch-Tone back to a VM port that is acting as an Automated Attendant? ie: Line busy, line answered, etc. I know that the Panasonic KSU has these capabilities and works wonderfully, but I have yet to be able to track down any info on the SL-1 and these features. If you can help, please respond first to my Internet address or as a reply to the Digest as a second choice. Thanks, Robert Schwartz Internet: r.schwartz18@genie.geis.com ActionTel ------------------------------ Reply-To: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 10:29:57 Subject: Special Fax Long Distance Service? From: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) I heard once about some sort of resale long distance service in which the provider multiplexes a small number of regular voice grade long distance circuits into a larger number of narrower bandwidth circuits and then resells them for dedicated fax use. The theory is that the narrower bandwidth is more than adequate for fax (although horrible for voice) thereby allowing a discount from the usual LD rates. I have four questions regarding this: 1. Does any one know the names and/or contact info for any such long distance providers? 2. Does the fax quality suffer as a result? And what about fax speed in this day of 9600 and 14.4 faxing? 3. Would the same type of lines be adequate for high speed (9600 bps and up) data in addition to fax? (I think I already know the answer to this one, but thought I'd ask anyway!) 4. What sort of discounts are we talking about? Thanks, Bob Keller (KY3R) Tel +1 202.939.7918 rjk@telcomlaw.win.net Fax +1 202.745.0916 rjk@access.digex.net CIS 76100,3333 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:44:44 -0500 From: shri@sureal.cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: A Modem With a Seat Belt Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Systems Bombay India Hi, I just read about the Konnexx line of adapters that lets you use a modem with "any" sort of a telephone/PBX system. The idea is simple: it takes the handset jack, and use the handset wires to give out a POTS style RJ11. [ Any user reports ?? ] The simulated POTS line lacks battery feed, and my guess is it lacks ringing and pulse and digital/PBX style signalling (tho' tone is possible) as well. [ In fact, from the BORSCHT functions ... I guess it only provides the H=Hybrid function :-) ] Back a while ago I was wondering if such a device was possible, and had shot a query to the all-knowing Digest ... if the handset jack was more or less standard, and I was asking if one could use the hack to obtain easy connections in all hotel rooms and friends apartments and also avoid need for certified and surge protected DAAs. [ It got acked but I did not see it appear on the Digest tho' ... wonder if PAT lost it in a deluge ! :-) ] I was surprised to see that the said device lists at a handsome $150 ... maybe I am a bit simplistic, but can you not take the mic and speaker pairs, combine with some imedance matching, maybe an dual opamp, and maybe a hybrid (transformer or transformerless) to obtain an device that can connect a RJ11 to a handset jack? Can you not put one together for much less? Can not the PCMCIA modem guys build it in for cheaper and smaller than their current RJ11 DAAs? shrikumar ( shri@cs.umass.edu, shri@shakti.ncst.ernet.in, G=Shrikumar; S=Hariharasubrahmanian; P=itu; A=arcom; C=CH ) [Moderator's Note: I'm sorry to say I don't remember seeing your other article, so if you want, please send it in again. It sounds like an interesting topic of conversation. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Levy_Alan.Cambridge_LSC@gled.logica.co.uk (Alan Levy) Subject: Re: On Line GSM Recommendations? Organization: Logica Space & Communications Ltd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:08:31 GMT In article , Bui Anh Jonathan Banh wrote: > Can someone tell me where (ftp sites) I might find some GSM > recommendations/standards (on line), particularly, signalling > protocols and interface. Similarly, recommendations/standards on > DCS1800. The GSM and DCS 1800 specifications are commercial publications and are not available in the public domain (OK _should not be_, I can't definitively say that they _are not_). You can buy the specifications from ETSI. They are priced in ECU (European Currency Units -- not _real_ money :-). They are fairly expensive -- a year ago they cost around 2000 UK Pounds (US$3000) for the full set of Phase 1 Specifications. The contact address is: ETSI publications office 06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex France Fax: +33 93 65 47 16 Phone: +33 92 94 42 58 They have no Internet address that I am aware of, but you could try hunting around the net. All opinions expressed are the author's own (whose else would they be?) Alan Levy (+44)223 251000 x4729 Levy_Alan.Cambridge_LSC@gled.logica.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 17:15:21 EST From: Thomas Lapp Subject: Re: For Your Amusement, if Possible Our Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: So true, so true. The scandalous thing about the > Dungheap Net is that its not just the formation of the unmoderated > newsgroup they are now using for telecom; its *any* group they start > there. The battles go on and on and on. I see your point. Perhaps it is time to filter the TELECOM solicitations even more than you do already. A filter to eliminate any articles not sent explicitly to the group comp.dcom.telecom or telecom@eecs might be the next step. It would probably cut down on duplicity of noise on this group. After reading and participating in Usenet for over four years now, I can see three things happening. First, the noise/signal ratio is going up, and the difference between Usenet newsgroups and the noise on "public access" systems like Fidonet conferences is getting less and less. Perhaps this just means that "the masses" are now getting onto Usenet as much as they used to get into Fido. Another thing I see happening is a division between alt.*, soc.* and like groups and comp.* and sci.* groups. Although you have to look long and hard sometimes, there are still some good groups out there that don't have too much traffic each day and have some good experts reading the group and willing to participate (although it is increasing in volume, sci.med is one example I can think of). If or when it becomes necessary to pick and choose newsfeeds, I think that the "entertainment" hierarchy will be dropped by many of the sites and just the "real" newsgroups that have value will stay around on most machines. Finally, I see the formation of e-mail distribution lists or controlled listservers taking over the roles of the "serious" newsgroups. It is already happening, and I find myself spending more time reading mail that comes in via distribution lists than I do reading the same requests over and over again on Usenet. (I think that the cycle time must be one month sometimes!) It seems sometimes that the very technology that we wish to push into the hands of the masses, ends up getting away from the technologists and is trampled to an early death by the media, the users, and the abusers. As the Moderator pointed out, Citizens Band radio was one of the technologies. Amateur radio is quickly going down the same path and Usenet will probably be another one to be trampled. Of course, we can always hope that the technology is a phoenix and will rise again in a mutated, but useful form some time in the future. (Philosophical Irony: This reply itself, while complaining of the tendency toward more noise and less light, ends up contributing to the noise (griping and moaning) rather than light (useful telecom-related items and discussion). Perhaps the TELECOM Digest needs an op-ed page :-) internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu (home) Location : Newark, DE, USA [Moderator's Note: Some people contend this entire Digest is one big op-ed page. :) I think with Usenet now having their own telecom forum to trash out, it should make a substantial difference in the noise level here. The real mistake may have been made years ago in agreeing to interconnect with Usenet, but there was a time I thought that Usenet showed a lot of potential as a medium for change and good, valid information. Some people still feel it does have these qualities, but I am not so sure. Truth be told, I see 'CB Radio' written all over Usenet as the general public starts discovering it. I've always been extraordinarily pleased by *how little* moderation/editing on my part is required on submissions from list members as opposed to what comes in from 'the net'. A lot of them have an utter disdain for grammar and spelling and completely resent someone (like a moderator) correcting if for them. For those of you unfamiliar with/too young to remember the 'CB Craze' of the middle to late 1970's and early 1980's, I want you to know that circa pre-1975, CB was a wonderful communications method. The users were courteous, well-versed in radio etiquette and FCC rules, and helpful, friendly people. They were like ham radio operators but without the license and knowledge required of hams. And ham radio operators will tell you that until around the middle 1980's things were a lot different in that part of the radio spectrum as well. Then as CB increased in popularity and useage, a lot of the CBer's could no longer deal with their own messes and quite a few migrated legally or illegally to amateur radio, joining the true hams in large numbers. Now a few years later ham radio is still a great thing with lots of wonderful people, but we see it starting to get tacky and frayed at its edges. A common complaint is that 'they' (many of the newcomers to ham radio in the past few years) go up to forty meters and sit there to horse around, tune up their rigs, key up and play music, etc. Ditto the written word: the earliest BBS's (Ward and Randy here in Chicago, others) were super-great things; wonderful community treasures where the guys were all helpful and pleasant. Fido started the same way. Soon the 'general public' discovered them, and folks started migrating to Usenet to avoid the messes of the masses on the local boards, etc. Now its Usenet's turn to be discovered and polluted. The anarchists of Usenet did okay when at least everyone there considered themselves an anarchist and essentially went by the same rules. Now they've got people there who have no idea what an anarchist is and have no intention of following someone else's guidelines in any event. :( PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #812 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26198; 13 Dec 93 16:47 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29627 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:14:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09980 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:13:59 -0600 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:13:59 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312131913.AA09980@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #816 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:14:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 816 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson CFP - Home Informatics International Conference (Kresten Bjerg) History of Blue Boxes (Dave Emery) Nokia M10 Programming Manual Wanted (William Quinn) Prodigy-Nynex Online Yellow Pages (Les Reeves) Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols (Marc Riese) Comments Wanted From DECvoice Users (Rick Schofield) Call Return on Pay-per-Use Basis (David Leibold) Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D (Al Varney) Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Weiyun Yu) Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kresten@vax.psl.ku.dk (Kresten Bjerg) Subject: CFP - Home Informatics International Conference Organization: IFIP WG 9.3 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 14:25:57 GMT A cross-disciplinary international conference HOME-ORIENTED INFORMATICS, TELEMATICS & AUTOMATION From 'State of the Art' through 'Prospects' and 'Blueprints' to 'Implementation' organized by IFIP Working Group 9.3 in cooperation with the University of Copenhagen University of Copenhagen, Denmark June 27 - July 1, 1994 BACKGROUND The home offers a great potential for new automation, information and communication technologies and related services. A wide array of innovations are already under way, with many more to come. They will transform the home and everyday life in the emerging information society. They will condition how private households will be enabled to function in changing social, economic and political structures. AIMS AND SCOPE The conference will assess and conceptualize perspectives and options, which attach to developments of domestic informatics, telematics and automation across the levels of - consumer hard- and software, - network infrastructures - storage & distribution media, - teleservices and - socio-cultural & economic structures. How can these new technologies - seen together - be used to empower consumers and private households? How can both users and suppliers get the optimal benefits from the possible new technologies? - and with which global impact? Can these technologies contribute to the emergence of a new home concept, an "Oikos", where the private household can reestablish itself in an experienced way as a living and production centre, embedded in and interacting with a larger community? Addressing such questions requires a multi-disciplinary approach. Therefore the conference aims to bring together experts from many fields and disciplines. Researchers and practitioners, designers and users, policy makers and industrialists, each with new knowledge and new questions from their experience of recent and expected development. The conference will not only serve as a forum to present and exchange experience, results of research and ideas, but also to explore and discuss strategic approaches and alliances for product research and development, and for prototyping and field experiments. MAJOR THEMES * The social construction of new domestic technologies. * Bridging between the various disciplinary approaches. * The changing position and importance of households in the new social and economic structure of the information and communication society. * Strategies for creating professional and public awareness of the converging potentials and implications of constructive innovations for everyday life and for social, cultural, educational, health, energy, and economic policies. * Ways of organizing relations between research and product development which can further the long-term interest of consumers, and save producers from waste of investments in development of products and services which are doomed to failure. * Relevance for developing countries, cultural diversities and the general goals of the UN year of the family 1994. MAIN AREAS Advanced Home Technologies (e.g. Intelligent home - Linking of TV, telephone, computer and VCR - Interactive multimedia and domestic virtual reality - Security-systems - Household appliances - Environmental control and ecology - Bio-electronics and health-monitoring.) Communication and telematics (e.g. Convergence of broadcast and telecom networks - Interactive teleservices and teletransactions - Tele-education - Telework - Evolving informal networks - Home-to-Home interfacing.) Economics and politics of HOIT (e.g. Interests of industry and service providers - Links between R&D and marketing - Prices and tarifs - Legal and regulatory policies on national and international level - The future of home economics.) Cultural and social impact on everyday life (e.g. Personal development and knowledge distribution - Intra- and interfamily relations - Functions for children, elderly, disabled and home-bound people - Community structure - Cultural continuity.) CONTRIBUTIONS We solicit: Research papers; Papers on experiments and case studies; Policy and strategy papers; Opinion and position papers; which will address State of the Art, Prospects, Blueprints or Implementation within these general areas. Besides full papers, short contributions like posters and statements papers may be submitted. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Notification of the intention to submit a full paper (including title and subject area) should preferably be sent as early as possible. Two page abstracts of full papers are due at latest January 15, 1993. Notification of acceptance March 1, 1994. Deadline for submission of final full papers and short contributions May 1, 1994. All accepted contributions will be published in the preceedings available at the conference. Selected papers will be published in the conference proceedings. PROGRAM COMMITTEE Felix van Rijn (Chair), Univ. of Amsterdam, Dept. of Communications (NL) Kresten Bjerg, University of Copenhagen, Psychological Laboratory (DK) Gunilla Bradley, Stockholm University, Inst. of Internatl. Education (S) Valerie Frissen, Univ. of Amsterdam, Dept. of Communications (NL) Karamjit Gill, Seake Centre, University of Brighton (GB) Leslie Haddon, University of Sussex (GB) Gisela Lehmer, Ministry of Telecommunications, Kln (D) Mara Gabrila Macra, IDAT, Montpellier (Fr) Kurt Monse, IWT, Universitaet Wuppertal (D) Bjoern Nake, University of Copenhagen (DK) Toomas Niit, Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law, Tallin (Estonia) Gerrit Noltes, Ministerie van WVC (NL) Yves Punie, Free University of Brussels (B) Andy Sloane, School of Comp. & Inf. Techn. Univ. of Wolwerhampton (GB) Alladi Venkatesh, Grad. Sch. of Management, Univ. of Calif., Irvine (USA) L.E. Zegers, European Home Systems Association, Eindhoven (NL) ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Kresten Bjerg (DK), Bjoern Nake (DK), Dan Melkane (DK), Poul Groenhoej(DK) REPLY FORMAT Please e-mail, fax or photocopy and mail to: HOIT-94, Kresten Bjerg, Psychological Laboratory, University of Copenhagen, 88, Njalsgade, DK 2300 Copenhagen S. Tel.:+45 31541856 Fax: +45 32963138 E-mail: kresten@vax.psl.ku.dk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [ ] I/we consider participating. [ ] I/we intend to submit a full paper. Area: Preliminary title: [ ] I/we intend to submit a short contribution, poster or audio-visual demonstration. Topic: [ ] I/we want to exhibit/demonstrate electronic or mechanic equipment, taking max. m2 floorspace. Subject: Name: Institution: Street address: City / postal code: Country: Voice telephone: Fax: E-mail: ------------------------------ From: jjmhome!pig!die@transfer.stratus.com (Dave Emery) Subject: History of Blue Boxes Date: 12 Dec 93 22:12:33 GMT Reply-To: jjmhome!pig!die@transfer.stratus.com Organization: Opinion Mongers Incorperated... Someone posted an (unattributed) note to the effect that blue boxes had been around "10 or 15 years". This is wrong - try 40 years or so. For what it is worth, blue boxes have been around almost as long as the underlying MF in-band address signaling that they exploit (since 1948). And will probably exist until there is none of this left (we're getting there). The first one I am certainly aware of was built by an IBM engineer working on some sort of government telephone switching project in or around 1957. I have heard rumors of the devices being built by other engineers in the telephone R&D community significantly before that time but have never heard any definate proof one way or the other as to the actual existance of such or to their use for hacking. These early devices of course mostly used vacuum tube oscillators and relays rather than the software and sound board approach that is common now. The famous "Blue Box" which gave the device its common name was the fruit of a hacking project at MIT and Harvard in 1960 or 1961 and was in fact really a blue metal box. I suspect but do not know for certain that that this project which ended in criminal legal negotiations between the students involved and telephone security personel was the first time telephone company operating management became widely aware of the potential of such sophisticated (at least for its time) toll fraud. I was told at the time that the president of the New England Telephone Company was absolutely flabbergasted when he was told of the technology and given a demonstration -- before that time operating telco management has no idea whatsoever that such things were even remotely possible. One suspects that the spooks knew of the technology earlier than this and no doubt kept the secret classified just as they did many other holes in the security of society so they could exploit them for "purposes of national security". The first public discussion of blue boxes that I am aware of was an article in the {Boston Herald} in 1964 or 1965 that resulted from a political fight between the {Boston Herald} and the New England Telephone Company. Apparently the Herald felt that the Telco had screwed them in a legal battle over a story they had published earlier and got revenge by printing the blue box story which they had known about for some years (since 1961 or so) in order to damage the telco since it was known that it would take years to plug the holes that blue boxes exploited. By the time this article was published, the technology of telephone signalling and automatic billing and its weaknesses was fairly well know amoung the nascent MIT centered hacker community and blue box projects were common amoung students there. Blue boxes surfaced nationally in the media in 1971 when {Esquire} published an article about them. But by that time the telephone industry had mounted an aggressive campaign to prosecute and monitor blue box use and the whole matter had become one aspect of the ever present toll fraud problem rather than a marvel that stunned senior managment. David I. Emery - N1PRE - Lexington Mass. Former senior technical consultant (and currently unemployed drunken bum) Internet: jjmhome!pig!die@transfer.stratus.com (preferred) or die@world.std.com UUCP: ...uunet!stratus.com!jjmhome!pig!die Phone + fax: 1+(617)-863-9986 ------------------------------ From: quinn@austin.ibm.com Subject: Nokia M10 Programming Manual Wanted Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 05:26:21 GMT Reply-To: quinn@austin.ibm.com Organization: IBM Austin Does anyone know where I can get a programming manual for my NOKIA M10 cellular telephone? I would like to change the "default" lock code ... or am I stuck paying my cellular provider to reprogram it. Thanks. William Quinn ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 10:45:51 PST From: Les Reeves Subject: Prodigy-Nynex Online Yellow Pages Nynex announced plans to team with Prodigy in the first ad-supported on-line interactive Yellow Pages system. The database, consisting of some 300 on-line telephone books, is expected to be available by the end of next year. The service will be delivered over Prodigy's network and will be owned exclusively by Nynex. The listings can include photos, maps, menus and up-to-the minute information, such as interest rates at banks. Nynex plans for the system to eventually be interactive, whereby customers could make reservations on-line. Subscribers will not be charged for the service since it is supported by advertisers, and businesses would only pay for advertising beyond their name and phone number listing. The team plans to push other regional telcos to join them in listing and selling Yellow Page advertising on-line. The value of the agreement was not disclosed. (Wall Street Journal, "Nynex and Prodigy team up on Yellow Pages that will provide on-line listings and ads," 12/10/93, p. B1; New York Times, "So, let your cursor do the walking," 12/10/93, p. C4; USA Today, "Yellow Pages move on-line," 12/10/93, p. 6B ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 14:36:53 +0100 From: riese@litsun.epfl.ch (Marc Riese) Subject: Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols A recent doctoral dissertation entitled: "Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols" is now available by anonymous ftp at site: litsun.epfl.ch Once the ftp connection is established, change to directory: pub/Protocol_Testing_and_Diagnosis. Please feel free to contact me at: riese@acm.org if you have any problems. Marc Riese Swiss Federal Institute of Technology riese@acm.org EPFL-LIT IN-Ecublens CH-1015 tel +41.21.693.4672 Lausanne, Switzerland fax +41.21.693.4701 [Moderator's Note: Would you be so kind as to submit a copy of the paper for the Telecom Archives as well? Thanks very much. PAT] ------------------------------ From: schofield@trlian.enet.dec.com Subject: Comments Wanted From DECvoice Users Date: 13 Dec 1993 14:26:22 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. Reply-To: schofield@trlian.mko.dec.com In all the time I've been following this group, I've seen no mention of Digital's DECvoice product. Has anyone had any experiences with this product set? What were your impressions? Are you using it now? Rick Schofield DECvoice Product Support Digital Equipment Corp. Merrimcak NH ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 16:49 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Call Return on Pay-per-Use Basis [from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 Dec 93] We get thumbs up for two pay-per-use services: Last Call Return and Busy Call Return Last Call Return and Busy Call Return -- two calling features normally available on a subscription basis -- are now available on a pay-per-use basis to individual-line residence and business customers. The features were offered on a three-week, free-trial basis starting November 8, in Belleville and Trenton, Ontario and Sherbrooke and Magog, Quebec. They became available in Ottawa-Hull and Quebec City as a full service on November 29. A charge of 50 cents applies for each use of last call return or busy call return, up to a maximum limit, or cap, of $6.00 per month (plus tax). Both capabilities have been available to Bell customers on a subscription basis. Customers can use Last Call Return and Busy Call Return for local or long distance calls within or between areas where the features are available. The features will be introduced in other Ontario and Quebec communities where calling features are now offered, on a phased basis during the first six months of 1994. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 08:14:11 CST From: varney@ihlpe.att.com Subject: Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D Organization: AT&T In article j-grout@uiuc.edu writes: > fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) writes: >> According to radio ads being heard by a friend in Rochester NY, >> Rochester Tel will change over this week from 1 + 7D for long distance >> in 716 to just 7D. >> This poses a few problems. First, almost any LD call from the >> Rochester exchanges is inter-LATA. 716 is divided into two LATAs. >> The Buffalo LATA encompasses all of 716 except the Roch Tel areas and >> a few other areas inside the Roch Tel zone which are still served by >> indies (including Ogden Telephone and a few Contel exchanges.) I >> suspect LD carriers will be upset about this one ... especially if Roch >> Tel tries to default customers to its own RCI long-distance service. Since the LATA boundaries aren't changing (only the dialing), why would the LD carriers be upset (assuming no IXC defaults are changed). Won't the same calls to the same inter-LATA numbers still use the same IXCs? The IXC sure can't tell that you dialed a '1+' at the beginning. > After divestiture, NJ Bell chose to continue to support the abbrevia- > tion of 7D (instead of the full 1 +609 + 7D) to place a DD inter-LATA > call, now with one's default LD carrier ... of course, to support > equal access, they also had to implement 10xxx + 1 + 609 + 7D (I am > guessing that Bellcore decided from the beginning to never permit > seven or eight-digit abbreviations after 10xxx). Bad guess -- first of all, Bellcore didn't exist when the 10XXX dialing plan was devised, but many folks from AT&T that worked on the plan became Bellcore employees in 1984. Secondly, 10xxx can validly appear in front of any standard numbers of 7, 1+7, 10 or 1+10 digits, assuming you could dial them without the 10xxx prefix. I just tried calling myself using: NXX-XXXX (IBT oops, I mean Ameritech) 1+708+NXX-XXXX (ditto) 10288+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX (AT&T) 10222+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX (you know who) 10333+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX (ditto) 10288+ NXX-XXXX (AT&T) 10222+ NXX-XXXX 10333+ NXX-XXXX These all rang the "second line" on my ISDN set. No form of 1+NXX-XXXX worked -- IBT intercepted. But if IBT permitted it, 10XXX could precede it. All the forms with 1+708 could also be 0+708. IBT doesn't support 0+NXX. The only form of 10XXX access that doesn't work are those where your presubscribed carrier would not be selected, such as 1+800 or 1+900 calls. Note these shorthands: 00 = 10XXX+0# IXC operator 0# = LEC operator Also, 10XXX+# is cut-thru to IXC dial-tone (sorta like 950-0XXX). There is no shorthand for this access, since '#' by itself is an error. Al Varney ------------------------------ From: weiyun@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Weiyun Yu) Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite Organization: Information Services, Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 12:50:00 GMT Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> writes: > In Australia we use the access code 0011 for voice calls, and 0015 for > fax calls. The difference is primarily in the fact that the fax call > will always be placed via cable if cable is available. Correct me if I am wrong. Exactly the opposite happens. The 0015 lines primarily use the satellite route while the 0011 numbers has the cable route when ever possible to provide better voice quality (no echoes). Apparently the fax machines are immune to echoes. I got these from a telecom rep. > There are also some differences in the fact that bit-stealing is > turned off, and some modification to the time-out of the echo > cancellation. Can't comment :) Dr Weiyun Yu "Why Me?" | Internet: weiyun@ucc.su.oz.au Dept of Surgery, Uni of Sydney, Australia | Voice: 61+2-692-3851 Let there be light! And there was light! | Fax: 61+2-692-4887 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:06:21 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir I don't know what would be displayed if I had to call 911 from my present phone on 410-287; my mail (including my phone bills) goes to a PO box in another town. Utility companies need to know where you live, because that is where the physical connections for service (electricity, phone, etc.) go, even if the bills don't. (Perhaps you'd want to find out what exchange serves 820 Old Apex Road. I did find Apex Road and Street listed for zipcode 27707, and Apex Hwy. listed for zip code 27713, both in Durham.) Question: What about foreign exchange service? An old example in Maryland was someone in an area served by 287 prefix who brought in 642 Perryville (the next exchange to the west) as a foreign exchange because it is local to Aberdeen (272,273,278) and Havre de Grace (939). Another case (glaring because a state line is involved, and I recall seeing this at least once in the Wilmington, Del. directory), would be someone in the Wilmington or Holly Oak exchange area bringing in Chester Heights (Pa.) as a foreign exchange; that choice: -Keeps Wilmington, Newport, Holly Oak as local calls -loses local service to other parts of New Castle County, Del. and part of southern Chester County, Pa. -GETS LOCAL SERVICE TO ALL OF PHILADELPHIA METRO AREA Remote-forward, which I set up in Delaware, would not be involved in 911. No calls can originate on my Delaware number; it can only be activated by an incoming call, and can only automatically call the number I am forwarding to. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #816 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26658; 13 Dec 93 17:47 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26549 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04703 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:03 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312120457.AA04703@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #813 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 93 22:57:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 813 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations (David Breneman) Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations (Hoyt A. Stearns, Jr.) Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Alan Levy) Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Erik Ramberg) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Steve Taylor) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Mike Yang) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Robert Berger) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Steve Jones) Re: Sprint Modem Offer :-( (Alan L. Nelson) Re: The Coming of the Information Age (Dennis G. Rears) Re: The Coming of the Information Age (Peter Gregory) Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Carl Moore) Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Steve Cogorno) Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (David A. Kaye) Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Wil Dixon) Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Glen Ecklund) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: daveb%jaws@dsinet.dgtl.com (David Breneman) Subject: Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations Date: 11 Dec 93 20:40:54 GMT Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA niall gallagher (niall@bnr.ca) wrote: > In Telecom Digest #724 (Wed, Nov 24) gardnern@spot.Colorado.EDU wrote: >> I am stumped with how I can demodulate modem communications >> in-progress. My project includes displaying the originating AND >> answering data, though not both at the same time. I envisioned >> recording it, and piping it into my modem. Not so. How would I go >> about convincing a modem to listen to a tape recorded conversation or >> "tapped" in realtime. (Problems there include messing up the current >> conversation). > Unfortunately (or should that be fortunately) it is very difficult to > "tap" modem calls. The basic problem is that high speed modems (V.32 > and above) use the full bandwidth of the telephone channel in both > directions for simultaneous transmission and reception of data. > The modems at either end can extract the Rx data because they *know* > what they have transmitted and using echo-cancellation techniques can > determine what the Rx data is. At any point in between the modem and > the CO, there is a two-wire circuit and anybody listening in would > pick up the combined Tx and Rx data -- ie. garbage. > If you have access to the circuit after it has been through the hybrid > at the CO which separates the combined channels into distinct transmit > and receive, the problem becomes more manageable and I'm sure that > some enterprising government agency somewhere has built the required > decoding equipment. One of the problems is that most modern modems exchange information during the handshake. Older modems, however, did not. The calling modem waited for the answer tone of the called modem, then sent out its tone and the communications began. These modems can be tricked with a tape recorder. I used to test ASR33 Teletypes by recording their output (through the phone line) and playing it back in answer mode. The trick is, in send mode the TTY needs to hear an answer tone before it sends out its town. Easy. Just record a couple seconds of answer tone at the head of the tape. Put the TTY in send mode, play the tape, switch the tape machine to record and start recording. David Breneman Email: daveb@jaws.engineering.dgtl.com System Administrator, Voice: 206 881-7544 Fax: 206 556-8033 Software Engineering Services Digital Systems International, Inc. Redmond, Washington, U. S. o' A. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations From: isus!hoyt@uunet.UU.NET (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.) Organization: International Society of Unified Science Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:32:19 GMT In article niall gallagher writes: > In Telecom Digest #724 (Wed, Nov 24) gardnern@spot.Colorado.EDU wrote: >> I am stumped with how I can demodulate modem communications >> in-progress. My project includes displaying the originating AND >> answering data, though not both at the same time. I envisioned > Unfortunately (or should that be fortunately) it is very difficult to > "tap" modem calls. The basic problem is that high speed modems (V.32 > and above) use the full bandwidth of the telephone channel in both > directions for simultaneous transmission and reception of data. I think it could be done by means of two taps a distance apart. I thought about this when the necessity arose to decode ISDN 2B1Q U channel signals, but the same principle would apply. Ideally you'd have a delay line with multiple taps feeding a forward and reverse correlator (shift registers + adder). One way of looking at this is that the cable is sampled along its distance, and each sample is delayed by the amount of time it takes for the signal to propagate along the cable, and summed. Signals going the other way will not sum up. Hoyt A. Stearns jr.|hoyt@isus.stat.com 4131 E. Cannon Dr. | .com OR Phoenix, AZ. 85028 |enuucp.asu.edu! voice 602 996-1717 |stat.com!wierius!isus!hoyt OR hoyt@isus.tnet.com ------------------------------ From: levya@logica.co.uk (Alan Levy) Subject: Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment Organization: Logica Space & Communications Ltd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:47:58 GMT In article , Alex Cena wrote: > There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the > cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well > as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS. But who will be > providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for > availability. I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes > Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T. I'm specifically > interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the > world. Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest > or to me directly? TDMA networks -- in the form of GSM and to a lesser extent DCS-1800 (aka PCN) are already widespread throughout Europe and are arriving in parts of Asia Pacific. GSM infrastructure equipment is already being manufactured by both Motorola and Ericsson amongst others (I don't know about Hughes or AT&T). As far as the provision of GSM services is concerned, the situation is changing rapidly as new licenses are issued, new services come on-stream and existing ones expand. Takeup varies enormously between countries. For instance, in the UK, where existing analogue cellular services are still very influential (with millions of users), GSM user numbers are in the low thousands. In Germany, where the existing analogue service was limited and very expensive, there are around 1 million GSM users. The above opinions are all my own work. Alan Levy, Logica Space and Communications Ltd E-mail: levya@logica.co.uk Tel: (+44)223 251000 ------------------------------ From: erik_ramberg@SMTP.esl.com (Erik Ramberg) Subject: Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment Date: 12 Dec 1993 02:13:03 GMT Organization: ESL Inc. In article , Alex Cena wrote: > There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the > cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well > as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS. But who will be > providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for > availability. I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes > Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T. I'm specifically > interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the > world. Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest > or to me directly? From what I know about the current players in the North American market regarding digital standards: TDMA - Ericsson E-TDMA - Hughes CDMA - Motorola and AT&T No commitment or I just plain don't know: Northern Telecom, Seimens Erik Nothing that I say can be construed as the opinion of my employer. ------------------------------ From: taylor@perlis.csis.gvsu.edu (Steve Taylor) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Organization: Grand Valley State University Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 14:21:22 GMT In article , Bill Berbenich wrote: > Both are advertised as 900mhz, spread-spectrum models. Does anyone else have experience with spread-spectrum models? I just purchased (and then returned) Vtech's Tropez 900DX. The reception was extrememly poor and it would not hold a charge in stand-by mode for more than 12 hours. I then purchased Southwestern Bell's cordless phone with built in digital answering machine. The reception was horrible and the answering machine didn't work. I am now looking at the new AT&T 9100 900 MHZ cordless phone. I know none of these are spread spectrum, but I would be interested in any opinions on 900 MHZ phones in general. Thanks for the advice! Steve [Moderator's Note: The Radio Shack 900 mhz phone seems to be a very good quality instrument. If anyone has tried it out or purchased one, I would appreciate a review of it here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mikey@sgi.com (Mike Yang) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc. Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 10:18:46 GMT In article bill@wabworld.atl.ga.us (Bill Berbenich) writes: > I have the Cobra CP-910 cordless and it looks like a repackaged > version of the Escort/CM 900mhz cordless. > Bottom line: I have found that sound quality on my Cobra is very > consistent and good, but not of a "corded" quality. The versatility > of getting consistent cordless signal quality within about a one block > radius of my home is worth the minor degradation and loss in audio > quality in that model. I got a Cobra CP-910 a couple days ago but I'm planning on returning it because it's not "corded" quality. There is a noticable background crackling that sounds sort of like that of a long-distance call. Both you and the person you're talking to can hear it. Since my Sony 46/49 mhz phone has virtually the same quality as a corded phone, I find the Cobra quality unacceptable. I guess I'll wait and see if the AT&T spread-spectrum model is any better. On the plus side, I like the Cobra looks and echoing of DTMF tones to the handset earpiece. However, I found the varying tone volumes of the keypad strange (the tone is the same, so why bother making the 1, 4, and 7 tones softer than the 3, 6, and 9 ones). The range-until-failure of the Cobra was about twice that of my Sony, though the Sony degrades well before the limit while the Cobra shows no degradation until the limit. The new Sony 900mhz phone I tried out a month ago had a shorter range than the Cobra, though still longer than my Sony 46/49mhz. I returned that one, too, because it's range was only about 1.5 times and since it was analog, degraded well before the limit too. I don't remember hearing the background noise that the Cobra has. I was disappointed that there was no "standby" mode on the handset to further conserve battery power by not ringing. My Sony handset gets charged every couple weeks in this mode; I can hear the ring from one of the other phones just fine. Besides, the Cobra ring is really shrill and somewhat obnoxious. Mike Yang Silicon Graphics, Inc. mikey@sgi.com 415/390-1786 ------------------------------ From: rwb@alexander.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Berger) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:09:31 GMT In article bill@wabworld.atl.ga.us (Bill Berbenich) writes: > I have the Cobra CP-910 cordless and it looks like a repackaged > version of the Escort/CM 900mhz cordless. Or maybe the Escort is a repackaging of the Cobra; Cobra has been making cordless phones for a while, and it seems more likely that they are the original manufacturers. In any case, the Radio Shack one also appears to be the same unit. My officemate bought an Escort, and I bought the AT&T unit ($249 at Service Merchandise). Both give good sound quality; the AT&T phone had a bit more range in side by side comparisons. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? From: steve.jones@canrem.com (Steve Jones) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 18:56:00 -0500 Organization: CRS Online (Toronto, Ontario) Rich Skrenta writes: > Features I'm interested in: > o Security. If it's all-digital, doing some simple scrambling > should be easy. Going digitial is enough to weed out the > neighbors with scanners, but I don't want someone to be able > to plug in another 900mhz phone and hear my calls. If you've been watching the rec.radio.scanner group, several people have found the audio in the clear somewhere in the UHF region. I believe the Tropez was the model in question. I'd guess the handset radiates more than just the 900Mhz signal. Not sure how far away the signal was accessible but I doubt it would travel too far. Cheers, Steve Jones !Amprnet : VE3SDJ@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CAN.NA General Delivery !Internet: ve3sdj@amiga.ve3sdj.ampr.org Stayner, Ontario ! : steve.jones@canrem.com Canada ! : L0M 1S0 !Phone : (705) 428-5358 ! Fax : (705) 428-5359 ------------------------------ From: nelsoal@irie.network.com (Alan L. Nelson) Subject: Re: Sprint Modem Offer :-( Date: 12 Dec 93 00:24:31 GMT Organization: Network Systems Corporation In article cambler@cymbal.aix. calpoly.edu (Chris Ambler - Fubar) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: By the way, did you *sign* for the packages they >> sent you? Have you opened the packages and installed/used the modems? >> Sorry to make it rough for you guys, but under the Uniform Commercial >> Code -- which will be the prevailing law -- you may have waived any >> further claims. Hmmm, I thought the UCC only applied *between* merchants??? Not between a vendor and a retail customer/consumer. Al [Moderator's Note: No, not necessarily. Just some parts of it. Speaking of which, I haven't received any mail from Fubar and his housemates recently. I wonder how their suit against Sprint is coming along? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 20:46:54 EST From: Dennis G. Rears Subject: Re: The Coming of the Information Age Paul Barnett wrote: > As I said before, welcome to the real world. It's a jungle out here, > and if you don't have what it takes to survive, then I suggest that > you take the civil service exam and get a job with the federal govern- > ment. Paul: With this comment you malign every Federal Civil Servant. You also show an ignorance of the Civil Service. Few positions require the civil service test. Those positions that require the test are generally clerical or low graded. Contary to public belief, federal employees are just as competent if not more so than the private sector. The problem with federal workers is we work under arcane and inefficient laws and regulations. The workers at my site (US Army Armament Research and Development Center) are just as productive and competent as anywhere else. dennis ------------------------------ From: peter.gregory@mccaw.com (Peter Gregory) Subject: Re: The Coming of the Information Age Date: 11 Dec 1993 17:21:10 GMT Organization: Asix, Inc. Reply-To: peter.gregory@mccaw.com In article 1@eecs.nwu.edu, shniad@sfu.ca () writes: > The Telecommunications Revolution > How Union Jobs Are Being Lost In an Expanding Industry > -- by Kim Moody > PHONE COMPANY ACQUISITIONS 1993 > > AT&T-McCaw (cable) $12.6 billion Uh, 'scuze me, but McCaw is not cable, but cellular, the parent company of Cellular One and the North American Cellular Network. Pete Gregory peter.gregory@mccaw.com Senior Consultant. ASIX, Inc., Seattle, WA on-site at Wireless Data Division, McCaw Cellular Communications, Kirkland, WA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 13:14:53 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers What kind of access? 10xxx? If the calls are short, I'd have the Orange Card available for consideration if I were making them. I call an 800 number when originating an Orange Card call. [Moderator's Note: Ah yes, the Orange Card. I think I've heard of that one somewhere before ... :) Its still available; applications are taken through my office as before. Its not a bad deal, with rates of 25 cents per minute (with a thirty second minimum) and *NO* surcharge for its use. It works like any other calling card (except for the absence of a high surcharge I guess); you dial an 800 number, get the tone, then enter your card number, the number you are calling and your PIN. And now I am a dealer for one even better (depending on who you ask and the precise application) called the 'Gold Card'. It incorpor- ates voicemail and a fax mailbox as part of the deal. I'll have a more detailed message about it here in a day or two. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:33:01 PST Said by: A. Padgett Peterson > My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call when > at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the U$1.00-U$1.25 > charged to make a collect local call). I called Southern Bell and was > told that the ruling only affects residences but have not verified > this as yet. How do you circumvent the local company? In PacBell territory, they will not allow you to select a long distance company on a local call. I can, however, use my long-distance calling card (AT&T, haven't tried with another company) for local calls. These calls are billed by AT&T at PacBells rates and the bill reads "Local Calls Charged to Your AT&T Card." If there is a way (besides the 1-800-CALLl-ATT method) to get AT&T for local calls, I would rather do this, as their rates are lower than those of Pacific Bell. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Date: 11 Dec 1993 17:15:43 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Marc Sira (aa382@freenet.carleton.ca) wrote: > couple of months that this phone makes a little beeping-ticking sound > every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Though I have not heard these myself, the local power company in the SF Bay Area, PG&E, sends several tones down the electric line. One is a command to turn street lamps on at dusk and another to turn them off at dawn for those areas which still use synchronous relays instead of photocells. Also, PG&E sends a tone at 10:00pm to set the 60 cycles back on track in case of extreme power loads which may have caused their system to slow down. This allows synchronous clocks to stay on time. Anyhow, power transformers with loose laminations or power supplies with 60-cycle hum problems could likely pick up these kinds of things. If your phone plugs to AC wiring it could possibly be picking up this kind of thing from your own power company. ------------------------------ From: wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Date: 11 Dec 1993 14:44:44 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana aa382@freenet.carleton.ca (Marc Sira) writes: > every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Yeah, I should be > sleeping at this hour instead of waiting around for my phone to tick. > No, it's not particularly loud enough to keep me awake, but I am > curious about it. > The ringer on the phone does seem to be sensitive to the line > condition; taking my modem off-hook or putting it on-hook while it's > on the same line produces a similar, louder noise from the phone. I > imagine a second extension would have the same effect. So presumably > there's a small glitch in the line voltage or something at 4:46 AM > nightly. > Any ideas what the phone company is doing to the line every night that > would cause this behaviour? > [Moderator's Note: Telco is doing line testing of the phones on your > exchange. Your phone is sensitive enough that it notices this when > it occurs. Roll over and go back to sleep. :) PAT] The Telco is doing Automatic Line Insulation Test (ALIT). If the phone has an adjustable spring on the ringer (bias spring) you can increase the tension on the 'clapper' and cure your problem. Wil Dixon wildixon@uiuc.edu 217-244-1321 University of Illinois CCSO Telecom Engineering ------------------------------ From: glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund) Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 19:19:03 GMT Wrap it in a clean diaper (nappy) every night at bedtime. Glen Ecklund glen@cs.wisc.edu (608) 262-1318 Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y Department of Computer Sciences 1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355 University of Wisconsin, Madison Madison, Wis. 53706 U.S.A. [Moderator's Note: Hey, I wake up and go tinkle every night also but that is not the kind of tinkle he was referring to. I think this issue of the Digest had better come to a close now. :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #813 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26922; 13 Dec 93 18:07 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10029 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for dave@geis.geis.com); Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16220 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:01 -0600 Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312120610.AA16220@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #814 TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Dec 93 00:10:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 814 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Tony Harminc) Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Bruce Sullivan) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Brett Frankenberger) Re: What Is Switched 56? (Neil R. Henry) Re: What is Switched 56? (Bill Mayhew) Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (Charles Mattair) Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (E. Castedo Ellerman) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Paul Robinson) Re: Info Wanted on ISDN Centrex (Ed Goldgehn) Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs (John R. Levine) Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs (Will Martin) Re: New Archives Files (Per Helmersen) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 12:38:35 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line a03431@giant.rsoft.bc.ca (Neklan Brozensky) wrote: > I'm a systems administrator in a branch office. We have currently 30 > terminals/printer unit attached to our head office's AS/400 in > Colorado Springs across a leased analogue line. The remote controller > unit is attached to an IBM 5866 9600 baud modem. > We are planning to totally upgrade the connection because our office > is growing rapidly and even more terminals will be required. However > in the mean time I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a > v.32bis type modem would be a fast inexpensive way to increase > throughput untill the issues around a more permanent faster solution > got sorted out. > The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary solution. > Their chief arguments are: > 1. The are uncertain that the line will support a faster line speed. > That there may be problems with the line that only manifest them > selves at the faster rate. and if they occur, too much time will be > spent fooling around tyring to solve that. It's not likely to be a problem. Neither Vancouver nor Colorado Springs is out in the middle of nowhere. The line is likely to be digital all the way. In any case, any reasonable communication protocol (like SNA) will do error checking/retry/recovery. Do keep in mind that you need a modem with a synchronous interface on the RS232 side, that is the modem needs to be able to supply clocking to the terminal equipment, and not require any Hayes-style async ASCII commands to put it into the right mode. You might also look into using an end-to-end digital link. You can get a Dataroute<->DDS (the US equivalent to Dataroute) connection at 19.2 or 56 kBPS at a price that is probably competitive with an analogue line and with a lower error rate. > 2. They don't think that the solution will result in the antiscipated > payoff of increased response for keyers at dataentry terminals. The > guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times for > a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the DSU/CSU). > At that time he only got a 10% increase in resposiveness. Responsiveness is not the same as throughput or bandwidth. SNA has all sorts of buffering and pacing options that need to be set appropriately for the line speed in use. Certainly the time to fill a screen with data should decrease significantly when you go from 9.6 to 56kBPS. If it doesn't, something is very wrong with your configuration. How fast the system responds when you hit enter is another and much more complex issue. You should be sure that the host system is not so constrained that it can't handle the higher transaction rate that might result from higher bandwidth. > What are people's thoughts here about this ... what reply would you > guys make to these claims. > Are they resonable technical objections? Are they being intransigent? You need to look at what you are trying to accomplish, and the cost. Is response time already so bad that "something must be done"? Or are you just anticipating how things will be when you add more terminals? Does "head office" have some longer term solution that they think will work in a way that your faster modem idea won't? Perhaps you should ask *them* some hard technical questions. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 17:27 EST From: Bruce Sullivan Subject: Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line In TELECOM DIGEST V13 810, a03431@giant.rsoft.bc.ca (Neklan Brozensky) writes: > I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a v.32bis type modem > would be a fast inexpensive way to increase throughput untill the > issues around a more permanent faster solution got sorted out. > The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary > solution. And for pretty good reason: It won't work. You may not have meant this, but you cannot simply swap a leased-line modem for a dial-up modem. While they both do the same basic function -- modulate and demodulate -- they are otherwise very different animals. The dial-up modem has no means for 'grasping' the leased circuit. It expects to dial first. Secondly, a v.32bis modem is *asynchronous*, while the SNA/SDLC protocol is *synchronous*. While many dialup modems *can* be strapped for synchronous communications, it's often at a lower speed. Even so, you're now faced with long-distance charges to Colorado Springs. And, you'd be subject to the idiosynchrasies of the Public Switched Telephone Network. > The guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times > for a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the > DSU/CSU). At that time he only got a 10% increase in responsiveness. Depending upon the nature of the traffic, this could indeed be true. Generally speaking, I would probably have expected a somewhat greater improvement in response time, but I'd need to know a lot more about the application and data. In any case, just because you're increasing the line speed roughly 5.8 times, response time does not decrease at the same rate. All of that said, the cheaper solution, which *should* work, is to replace the 9.6K leased line modem with a 19.2K leased line modem. "Most" analog circuits will run up to 19.2. I have done this with many circuits which were originally provisioned at 9.6 with no special conditioning. Because the circuit was not engineered with that conditioning, however, the telco will likely be of no help if you do have problems. Frankly, it's something of a crapshoot. Sometimes I can bump them to 14.4, sometimes 19.2. One final thing to think about: It's the users you're supporting: If your 'solution' is fraught with problems, you're not doing them any favors. Bruce ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:39:38 GMT In article gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not. The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the results. Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that can be set separately), or it might not be working. You might also be having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING. So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ... 2->3 (transmit to receive), 4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send), 20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect). Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be echoed back - if not, the port has a problem. These are the pins for a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 & 1. If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults. It just might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port. For Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches, the command is AT&f&w. puma@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 17:08:32 GMT gast@CS.UCLA.EDU writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. Typically this indicates a problem with interrupt settings. While interrupts can be used for all aspects of serial communications, typically they are used mainly for receiving data. If the card you have has lost the ability to generate interrupts when data is received, or if it is configured for a different interrupt than your comm program expects, you will be able to send fine (assuming your comm program doesn't require interrupts to send), but it will not be able to receive any data, since almost all comm programs require interrupts to receive data. The standard interrupt (IRQ) numbers are 4 for COM1: and 3 for COM2: (and 4 for COM3: and 3 for COM4:). Figure out which COM port you are using (i.e. which comm port is selected in the COMM program) and then make sure than both the card and/or the comm program are set for the correct interrupt. (If the card has no switches, you will have to hope it's the default and just set the comm program to the correct interrupt. If that doesn't work, try all sorts of different interrupts from the COM program). Good luck ... Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ------------------------------ From: nhenry@netcom.com (Neil R. Henry) Subject: Re: What Is Switched 56? Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:54:20 GMT How are switched digital lines "dialed"? Is it a seven or ten digit address like switched analog calls? While I am asking, what is the proceedure (dialing requirement) for ISDN calls? Thanks for the emlightening summaries. ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: What is Switched 56? Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:20:19 GMT In article goldstein@carafe.tay2. dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > Service Unit (CSU) compatible with your serving CO. It "dials" the > call digitally, but it tends to take a while. I was looking at the practice sheet for a switched 56K card a couple of weeks ago. They actually used the A/B signalling leads to outpulse the the dialed number. Seemed rather quaint in this day and age. That would explain why, "it tends to take a while!" Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu amateur radio 146.58: N8WED ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 10:48:03 CST From: mattair@synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc. In article trenton@netcom.com (The CyberMonk) writes: > Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time), > but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access? and PAT responds: > [Moderator's Note: Cable companies don't want competition any more > than the local telco wants competition. Like telco, the cable companies > have friends in high places. So Clueless, given that clue, now do you > have an idea what is going on? PAT] You can also add in the vertical integration of a number of the cable operations. A situation arose in California several years ago regarding a wannabe cable competitor. I can't remember the specific companies so the example is illustrative and does not constitute a condemnation of the companies named. . Time-Warner owns HBO and Warner Cable. . I want to wire west Houston (which is Warner) and contact HBO. . HBO either refuses to sell feed, having signed an exclusive contract with Warner, or agrees but at rates which are significantly higher than those charged to Warner. . In any case, I am effectively blocked from competing. I _think_ the Cable act addressed some of these problems. Charles Mattair (temporarily - work) mattair@synercom.hounix.org In a mature society, "civil servant" is semantically equivalent to "civil master." - Robert Heinlein, _The Notebooks of Lazarus Long_ ------------------------------ From: castedo@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (E. Castedo Ellerman) Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies Date: 11 Dec 1993 20:07:12 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana trenton@netcom.com (The CyberMonk) writes: > Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time), > but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access? > I also don't understand why the courts (I think it's them) don't seem > to be moving faster in allowing competition for the local dial tone. I think in both the local cable and local telco markets, even without regulation you would have a natural monopoly. The initial capital is very costly and there is a fixed number of consumers. Because of this government jumps in a regulates the situation since a natural monopoly is sure to form. That's my guess. Castedo ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 00:20:36 EST Reply-To: 0005066432@MCIMAIL.COM Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Will Estes , writes: > James R Ebright (jebright@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote: > JRE> In article > john.eichler@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (John Eichler) writes: > JRE>JE> oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) wrote: > JRE>JE>CO> I should think that New York Telephone, which fills the > front pages of every telephone directory with glowing > talk of up-to-date digital technology, would be > embarassed at its apparent failure to deploy ISDN > beyond a handful of Manhattan exchanges. > JRE>JE> It's almost a 'catch-22' proposition. The phone companies > are slow to implement ISDN because there is little demand > for it and the demand is waiting for the service to become > available. > JRE> Huh? ISDN was originally a way to get 56KB service ... but > modems on regular analog lines can almost do this today. > ISDN vs market forces. ISDN 0, Market 1. > I think you are missing the big picture here. Within one > year, people are going to be able to buy unlimited 10 Megabit > per second connections to the net via existing cable TV cable, > with a V.FAST or similar channel going upstream. This is > going to cost $99/month or less for unlimited network use. > If the phone companies had even the slightest bit of > technology vision, they would understand what a serious threat > to their future market growth this really is, and they would > be offer ISDN at or below cost until they can get the fiber > optic cables in. And one more thing. How long until someone figures a way to do real-time compression of voice onto a modem data stream and do "telephony over internet"? If I want to talk to someone in Dallas or Los Angeles, so I would put a microphone on my computer, have it digitize my voice and send it as a TCP/IP packet stream to someone else's computer where his application is listening on a port, and his computer receives it as a TCP/IP connection who then decodes it and sends it to a sound card and receives my message. I think that the least expensive dial voice service is running at least 6c per minute if you buy huge quantities of time, e.g. thousands of hours of time per month. The cost to send information over the Internet is effectively zero. It's only a matter of time until someone figures out that all it takes for an Internet connection to pay for itself is to be able to use it to reduce long distance traffic by 1 1/2 hour a day even at these low rates. If the other places you call are on the Internet and their computers have the means to do voice reception and transmission, how long before people discover that if they are paying 15c a minute per trunk for conference calls, that they can set up a multicast group and everyone involved can hear and speak and the net cost per minute is zero? If it ever becomes easy to do real time digitizing and compression of speech with decompression and playback, it's going to cause people to reconsider the high cost of long distance service. Paul Robinson - TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: sysexpa@netcom.com (Sys. Express Corp) Subject: Re: Info Wanted on ISDN Centrex Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 02:58:54 GMT System Operator (ftgcorp!system@uunet.UU.NET) wrote: > I'm looking for information and experiences with ISDN Centrex > operations, especially from Chesapeake and Potomac (C&P) Telephone > Company (now Bell Atlantic). I work with a company that is an authorized Bell Atlantic Reseller. I'll be happy to have them get in touch with you to assist in determining your needs. I've found them to be good at what they do. Ed Goldgehn Internet: sysexpa@netcom.com Technical Sales Engineer Voice: (404) 919-9442 Systems Express Corporation Fax: (404) 919-9527 Distributors for Data/Voice/Video Communication Equipment Manufacturers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 14:15 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Anyone have information where I can get thinks like the old Telecom > Talk Tickets? Most of the convenience stores around here sell Sprint's prepaid FON cards. They're not cheap, 33 to 50 cents a minute, but they're convenient. At a truck stop I also saw another brand of card, Liberty something, a little cheaper, and with the possibility of refilling the card over the phone and charged to a MC/V credit card. If you have a few weeks to plan, AT&T still issues calling cards not tied to a particular phone. You need to make a full credit application, like the one for a bank credit card, so it takes a while. (For that matter, there's also the AT&T Universal card which is both a bank card and a calling card.) If you already have a bank card or Amex, MCI and Sprint probably still have the deals that let you use your credit card as a calling card without extra credit or billing complexity. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 8:17:40 CST From: Will Martin Subject: Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs > [Moderator's Note: I think Western Union sells them via currency ex- > changes and other outlets. I didn't mention this before because I felt it was a competitor to our esteemed Moderator's income, but, since he himself now referred to a different source, and no longer is a dealer in these, here is the info: Another source for these was recently (Nov. 1 93) advertised by the populist newspaper, {The Spotlight}. They are selling these type of prepaid telephone cards in $30, $50, and $100 denominations. They say they're good in the US and Canada, but not Alaska. Calls are charged against the card balance at 25 cents per minute at all times. The ad does not state the 800 number you call to use the card. They imply the card can be "recharged" by calling and giving a credit-card number to restore or increase the credit balance against which calls are charged, but they do not state this number or go into any detail on that process in the ad I have. Also, the only way to buy these, according to this same ad, is to write them and order cards with a check (payable to "The Spotlight"), or a Visa or MC number, with expiration date and signature. The address is: The Spotlight 300 Independence Ave., SE Washington, DC 20003 (I find it rather strange that they don't give an 800 number to call to buy cards via credit card, but that's the way it appears. Maybe later ads have added this feature -- this ad is the only thing I have with me about this product.) Regards, Will ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 01:39:09 GMT From: Per.Helmersen@tf.tele.no (Per Helmersen) Subject: Re: New Archives Files Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research In article , TELECOM Moderator wrote: > Several new files have been added to the Telecom Archives today. Are the archives accessible by means of WWW? Per Helmersen E-mail: Per.Helmersen@tf.tele.no Norwegian Telecom Research Phone: +47 63 80 91 58 P.O Box 83 / N-2007 KJELLER FAX: +47 63 81 00 76 NORWAY [Moderator's Note: I believe someone told me they were, but I have no first hand knowledge of it, or really, how WWW works. Maybe someone with knowledge of WWW will write to explain it more, and let me know if Telecom Archives is obtainable that way. Generally when asked, I refer people to the anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu facility or I send them a help file for use with the Email Information Service. If anyone wants to use the Telecom Archives but does not have the help file to properly phrase their commands, etc, let me know and a copy will be sent out to you right away. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #814 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27364; 13 Dec 93 19:23 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28225 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for jgfrancis@genvax.glamorgan.ac.uk); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17882 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:04 -0600 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312130813.AA17882@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #815 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Dec 93 02:13:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 815 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson ISDN in Huntsville, AL (Hunstville Times via Dwayne Blumenberg) Newspapers Want ?11 Numbers; So Do Hearing-Impaired People (Nigel Allen) PC Pursuit vs America Online (Earl R. Hall) Book Review: "Managing UUCP and Usenet" by O'Reilly/Todino (Rob Slade) Bell Canada Invests in Jones Intercable (David Leibold) Phone Line Teaming (krc@igc.apc.org) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dablumen@infonode.ingr.com (Dwayne Blumenberg) Subject: ISDN in Huntsville, AL Reply-To: dablumen@ingr.com Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL. Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 20:10:47 GMT The following article appeared in the Dec. 12, 1993 edition of _The Huntsville Times_ newspaper Business Section (Huntsville, AL). I thought it might be of interest to Digest readers. NETWORK CAN CONNECT AREA TO ECONOMIC FUTURE WORLD By Connie H. Dykstra For The Times Amidst the current climate of economic uncertainty among Huntsville's traditional space and defense operations, an unseen but extremely powerful force has been building a new foundation for future economic growth. Huntsville stands at the forefont of the challenge to greet the dawning information age not only with open arms but with ready technologies to satisfy emerging customer demands. Through vision and partnership with area businesses and the U.S. Army at Redstone Arsenal, South Central Bell has built in Huntsville and Madison one of the world's most advanced telecommunications networks. Just the bare statistics of what's been happening here on the high-tech telecommunications front are staggering. This is the nation's first large metropolitan area to have 100 percent digital network switching and transmission facilities, according to telephone company executives. Huntsville is the first, and only, major city served by Bell in the U.S. to have a metro area-wide Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) service -- the most advanced telecommunications network technology available anywhere, according to Gary Pledger, South Central Bell's district manager. The operation has more than 1,100 ISDN lines now in service. Huntsville was SCB's first AccuPulse customer, the Central Office Local Area Network (C.O. LAN) customer, the first city in Alabama to have both major universities connected to C.O. LAN, first to use wideband switches, and the location where many first-time services were made available to Army and NASA customers. SCB has in services more than 4,000 miles of fiber optic cable throughout Madison County. The list of telecommunications triumphs goes on, but the bottom line is the South Central Bell has invested more the $60 million here during the past five years to offer the most advanced intelligent network capabilities of any U.S. city. What this means for Huntsville's future includes diverse advantages that range from businesses expansion to remotely transmitted medical services to improved pizza delivery, Pledger says. "Basically what we have come to realize is that the public network is really to commerce and industry today what rivers and railroads were in the last century,", says Pledger, "Commerce is carried over our network and we have a profound role to play in facilitating that." The movie, "Field of Dreams," features actor Kevin Costner who carves a baseball field out of a corn field guided by the notion of "build it and they will come." Similarly, with the high-tech in formation services already in place here, the right players will follow. "We're sending more than voice and data signals, we're sending a signal to the world that we're ready to meet any telecommunications needs of existing businesses or anybody looking for a great place to locate," Pledger says. With the U.S. Army as the first customer for ISDN here, the leading-edge technology was able to be rapidly developed and tested. BellSouth operates an ISDN laboratory at Redstone Arsenal, serving as a testbed to keep the company -- and Huntsville -- at the forefront of ISDN research. "The Army was looking for ways to find efficiencies in their business and one way was through a single line concept. If you have a telephone line for a fax machine, another line for voice communications, a line for a modem and a line for whatever else, you wind up with three and four separate telephone lines to serve someone who performs those functions," explains Pledger. "The Army realized it was costing a lot of money to maintain all those lines, and they said there's got to be a better way. And the better way, naturally, was ISDN which allowed the Army to fold all those services into one telephone line." Based on digital technology, ISDN represents a major breakthrough in telecommunications by providing a "digital pipeline" for moving voice, data, telemetry, video and facsimile separately or simultaneously all over one telephone line. Data can be transmitted up to 60 times faster than a normal modem. More than 1,000 pages of information can be faxed in 30 minutes. "With digital you get speed, reliability and tremendous efficiencies," say Pledger. In addition, SCB has installed more than 4,000 miles of fiber optic cable in Madison County. Fiber provides tremendous band width, or capacity, to quickly and accurately deliver enormous volumes of data. Pledger proudly points out that fiber is not only deployed to specific customer's offices, but is 100 percent in place for routing between all SCB central offices. While fiber optics continues to capture attention, Pledger hastens to add that copper is being used to display some phenomenal capabilities, as well. "People never dreamed 100 years ago that copper was able to carry what it is. Now we're even experimenting with delivering 35-millimeter- quality over copper. So, we're continuing to push the copper technol- ogy at the same time we're deploying fiber." SCB's investment appears to be paying off. Pledger says people from other cities and states are now coming here just to talk with him about what's been done and learn from Huntsville's experience and how these elements work together in economic development. "When Nichols Research outgrew their buildings on South Parkway and needed to add a facility in research park, they came to us and said we want to link that new site with out current site so employees have a virtual co-location," recalls Pledger. "We were able to facilitate that and in so doing, helped them expand in such a way as to contribute to the continuing success of their enterprise." Nichols Research Corp.'s Vice President of Computer Systems, Mike Solley, says his company is perhaps unique in wanting to get as close as possible to their customers. The telecommunications equipment required to achieve that is available in Huntsville. It's really a combination of all the manufacturers in town," Solley says, pointing to the fact the Nichols is a beta test side for Adtran which manufactures electronic transmission equipment for telecommunications. UDS Motorola of Huntsville designs and manufactures data communications equipment such as high-speed digital modems facilitating remote applications for advanced telecommunications services. FITS GROWTH STRATEGY Brian Hilson, senior vice president for economic development at the Huntsville-Madison County Chamber of Commerce, knows well the advantages of having advanced telecommunications services in place throughout this area. "It fits well with our economic growth strategy. We've targeted several industry sectors to bring to this area based on the labor attributes and industry support services we offer, and telecommunications is one of those," Hilson says. According to an economic development specialist with GTESouth, 80 percent of corporations say telecommunications is important, or very important, in facility planning. Ten years ago, that number was only 30 percent. Hilson says Huntsville is well-positioned in the current nation-wide trend for companies to decentralize from larger cities to smaller cities, taking advantage of lower operating costs but still looking for advanced technologies. "There is not a significant office operation or business that is dependent on quality telecommunications which our community can't compete for," Hilson asserts. While the feral government plans to consolidate Defense Department finance and accounting operations at a central location has been more or less shelved for the time being, Pledger discovered that Huntsville stacked up well in the recent competition to win the proposed facility. Again, the telecommunication network was one of the area's strengths. Pledger says sometimes there are direct hits where people who have heard of this area's network come here because they have a telecommun- ications-sensitive operation and believe Huntsville to be a prime site for them. "Unfortunately, I can't tell you about one of these yet," he hints, "but in the near future was expect to make a major announcement than an organization that is telecommunications-intensive is coming to Huntsville. They will locate here and provide a worldwide service." This area's telecommunications capabilities are making possible numerous other significant advances for future development opportunities. HELPING EDUCATION Pledger believes their network will play a role in resolving the equity in education problem currently plaguing Alabama. "If we can link schools, as we are, for distant learning -- for remote access to CD ROM and other applications -- then students in a remote location can have access to lectures and learning opportunities that students in urban areas already have," he explains. Mike Solley at Nichols Research is working closely with the Alabama Supercomputer Authority, South Central Bell and local telecommunications equipment providers to hook up Johnson High School, and other local schools, to the supercomputer facilities in Cummings Research Park. Dozens of high schools statewide have now been similarly connected via high-speed, dedicated data circuits for classroom instruction and other applications. MEDICAL APPLICATIONS At Crestwood Hospital, neurosurgeon and chief of staff Dr. Ira Denton has been breaking new ground with ISDN. He uses the high-speed, high-volume data transfer capabilities to send, receive and annotate x-rays and video images while talking with other medical professionals on the same line. He has also partici- pated in physical examinations and has observed microneurosurgical procedures taking place at a remote location. "ISDN has tremendous potential for cost-savings by providing access to specialists for practitioners and hospitals remotely located," Dr. Denton says. Dr. Denton has been using ISDN with the latest video compression technology for videoteleconferencing applications using two-way audio and video. He is conducting a study to determine which bandwidths are most effective for this type of effort. When completed, the study will serve as a guide to further the development of similar systems for use by medical professionals worldwide. Videoteleconferencing via ISDN technology was employed last year when back surgery prevented superintendent Dr. Ron Saunders from attending a Huntsville Board of Education meeting. Using three ISDN lines, video equipment and a personal computer, both video and voice were transmitted between Dr. Saunders' home and the board's administrative officers, enabling everyone to meet as if they were all in the same room. The efficiencies of advanced telecommunications services can even be felt these days when calling many local pizza carry-out establishments. Once a caller's name and phone number are given, the employee automatically knows their location, thanks to specialized caller ID services. Pledger says he's talking with the Board of Realtors to explore real estate applications allowing on-screen walk-throughs of homes or buildings that can be constantly updated as data changes. "Certainly real estate is an integral part of economic development. If we can facilitate information flow about sites, than can help fuel economic growth," add Pledger. Like any state-of-the-art technology, telecommunications advances have a life cycle often eclipsed by emerging capabilities. Pledger says this is good news for them because it means companies like South Central Bell have to be constantly looking as far down the road as possible. "We have five-year plans, ten-year plans, and even fifteen-year plans for how we're going to continue tow build and enhance the network. We're constantly doing analysis of what our customers will need." Dwayne A. Blumenberg | Internet: dablumen@dwayneb.b30.ingr.com IBM Systems Programmer | UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!b30!dwayneb!dablumen Intergraph Corp., M.S. GD3002 | Voice: (205) 730-3795 Huntsville, AL 35894-0001 | FAX: (205) 730-3300 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 08:24 WET From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Subject: Newspapers Want ?11 Numbers; So Do Hearing-Impaired People Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-3783 Voice: 416-363-8676 Here is a press release from the National Newspaper Association. I downloaded the press release from the PR On-Line BBS in Maryland at 410-363-0834. I do not work for the Association, and I do not think that newspapers should be allocated three-digit numbers for their information services. Instead, I feel that three-digit numbers should be reserved for relay services for the hearing-impaired. National Newspaper Association Announces Program to Help Newspapers Apply for Three-Digit Calling Numbers Contact: Mark Sheehan of the National Newspaper Association, 703-907-7900 WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 -- National Newspaper Association Chairman Sam Griffin today announced a four-point program to help newspapers successfully apply for three-digit calling number -- called N-one-one or N11 numbers -- in their local areas. "There's no time to waste," he said, the smartest publishers are already moving aggressively to protect this vital tool of delivering news and information." He said the NNA Board of Directors had recently reviewed the developments of N11 numbers in several states. It concluded that prompt action by community newspapers may be needed to guarantee that the maximum number of Nll numbers are assigned for local information tools. Nll numbers are being used in some markets in the U.S. as an expedited dialing number for electronic information systems. Consumers dial 311, for example, to access newspaper audiotex systems. The telephone company collects a fee for the service as a part of regular phone billing and passes on a share of the revenue to the newspaper. "In the past we tended to think of N11 numbers and audiotex as concerns for metropolitan newspapers, but we've come to recognize that they are a key part of community newspaper strategic marketing," he said. "Perhaps the most important point was the board's decision to support local rather than statewide allocation of such numbers," he said. "You can ask the phone company for statewide designation, so that, for example, 311 is the number all across your state for information services, but each local exchange should assign the number on a local basis so that local publishers have access to them. A statewide allocation system would simply give one provider a statewide monopoly." The four-point NNA program involves: 1. An initiative to help publishers make immediate application to their local telephone companies for such numbers, including a model letter. Most of these requests are being refused at the present time, except in states served by the BellSouth Regional Bell Operating Company. 2. Assistance to publishers in preparing for the application to the state public utilities commission (if the telephone company refuses the request), including a model application to be tailored to the publisher's individual situation. 3. A referral system for more detailed legal expertise. 4. Continuing policy support to publishers in the N11 effort, backed up by a resolution passed by the NNA Board of Directors urging local assignment of the maximum possible number of N11 numbers by telephone companies to community newspapers and other local information providers. "Make no mistake," said Griffin, who publishes the Post-Searchlight in Bainbridge, Ga., "NNA believes this should be an all-out effort by publishers. At the same time, we realize this is a new area for community newspapers and we want to provide our members the support they need to take these steps." "Some of us have already begun," said R. Jack Fishman, publisher of the Morristown (Tenn.) Citizen Tribune and chairman of the NNA Government Relations Committee. "I have already filed an N11 number for both the Morristown Citizen Tribune and our weekly Tullahoma News, and I've purchased an audiotex system. My readers will receive electronic information the same way they receive printed information: from the Citizen Tribune and the News. "NNA is providing support to our members for two reasons. One, we know that unless local information providers begin to move quickly, the perception that the electronic highway is only for the big guys will continue to mushroom. Two, many state governments are now poised to figure out bow to handle the N11 requests they are already receiving. If we are going to maintain the nature of localism in this country, states must build localism into their telecommunications policy. This is a piece of the puzzle." Griffin said the NNA board cautioned newspapers that while prompt action is essential, newspapers must think strategically about their electronic future. "Newspapers are offering everything from school lunch menus to horoscopes and soap opera updates in their audiotex systems," Griffin said. "We believe there are new revenue sources through the N11 mechanism. Obviously, before you apply for N11, you have to know what you plan to sell. Several vendors are now vying in the marketplace for your business and that is a welcome new development. "And, not so obviously, you may have to persuade your public utility commission that you are the best candidate for the number. Newspapers are experienced information providers. They should be in a very strong position to make that case. But it won't be made for them. Each publisher has to develop a plan and take these first important steps into the electronic future." Fishman emphasized two things: "First, this isn't for everybody. You've got to determine that you're going to get into the audiotex business. Newspapers are offering everything from business news and sports to horoscopes and summaries of soap operas over the phone and hoping to make money at it, but don't expect to get rich overnight. "Second, when you make that application to the PUC, you'd better be prepared to explain, in detail, why your newspaper is the best available source to have that N11 number, and how you plan to benefit the public by the use you make of it." Note: Copies of the following N11 code application materials are available through the National Newspaper Association office: -- N11 code application instruction sheet -- NNA Model N11 Request Letter -- NNA Model N11 Petition. Please call 703-907-7900 for more information. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 06:53:51 -0800 From: Earl R. Hall Subject: PC Pursuit vs America Online Recent changes at America Online may be behind SprintNet's reported 'reexamination' of PC Pursuit. America Online is one of the "Big Three" of Online Information Providers (is that the right term?), the other two being Compuserve and Prodigy. America Online recently announced that it had exceeded 450,000 subscribers. Unlike Compuserve and Prodigy, America Online does not run its own private data network. It instead relies on SprintNet and BT Tymnet to provide dial-in connections for subscribers. Connections were originally limited to 2400bps, but they have now announced the availability of 9600bps dial-in connections (so far, via SprintNet only) at no additional charge. Coincidently, SprintNet is expanding its dialin network: a few months ago it added 9600 service to 53 new locations. I wonder if the America Online traffic negates the justification behind the forming of the PC Pursuit program. With this non-Primetime traffic their network no longer sits idle at night, waiting for the start of the next business day. In fact, SprintNet may now consider PC Pursuit traffic a hindrance in meeting any contractual Level-of- Service agreement they may have with America Online. Earl Hall | +1 708 437 9300 (work) | via Peacenet: erhall@igc.apc.org Skokie IL | +1 708 933 9352 (home) | CIS: 72746,3244 | AoL: Erhall ------------------------------ Date: 12 Dec 93 18:41 -0600 From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Managing UUCP and Usenet" by O'Reilly/Todino BKMANUCP.RVW 931104 O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. 103 Morris Street, Suite A Sebastopol, CA 95472 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 info@ora.com "Managing uucp and Usenet", O'Reilly/Todino, 1992 Once again an excellent job by the nutshell folks. Intended for system administrators who need to set up and maintain UUCP connections or access Usenet, the book realizes that in the UNIX world many sysadmins are just plain folks. The necessary technical details are here, but presented in a logical and non-threatening manner. Not limiting themselves to the UNIX software, the authors provide hardware guidance as well, particularly to those with Intel boxes. Chapters two and three deal not only with the basic operations and configuration of UUCP, but also with cabling, ports and modems. The material gives enough detail but does not go on to flaunt knowledge of unnecessary trivia. Further chapters give information on testing and troubleshooting, security and management. The material provides a functional overview, but assumes a reasonably computer-literate reader with a small system. Those completely unfamiliar with data communica- tions may want to get some assistance from experienced friends; those with large systems and very active connections may wish for more suggestions on security, for example, such as may be provided by "Practical UNIX Security" (BKPRUNSC.RVW). Chapters seven to ten deal specifically with Usenet and news, assuming that you have UUCP running properly. Again, it is a practical and realistic guide, starting with the selection of a Usenet feed site. Seven appendices are included covering the working files, modems and modem setup strings, more details on cabling and RS-232, useful programs and scripts, UUCP implementation for MS-DOS, Macintosh (and even VMS), frequently asked questions about Internet mail and Usenet news, and the inner workings of the UUCP G protocol. If you are planning to install or use UUCP and Usenet, this book is undoubtedly well worth the cost: probably many times over. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993 BKMANUCP.RVW 931104 Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 16:47 WET From: djcl@io.org (David J. Leibold) Subject: Bell Canada Invests in Jones Intercable [from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 December 93; content is Bell Canada's] Big Step Into U.S. Cable TV BCE Telecom International (BCETI), a subsidiary of our parent corporation BCE Inc., has signed a letter of intent with Jones Intercable, Inc. of Englewood, Colorado. Following the completion of a proposed acquisition by Jones Intercable, Inc. of the assets of Jones Spacelink, Ltd., BCETI will invest US $275 million for the purchase of approximately ten million shares of class A common stock representing a 30 per cent equity interest. BCETI will also acquire for approximately US $55 million the option to purchase eventual control of Jones Intercable. In addition, it has committed to participate in future equity financings up to US $125 million which will increase the original investment to US $400 million as Jones Intercable continues to grow through acquisitions. "This investment provides BCETI with a solid entry into the world's most dynamic telecommunications market and is a major step in BCE's global strategy," said Derek Burney, BCETI's chairman, president and chief executive officer. "The complementary strengths of BCE and Jones Intercable will enable us and our shareholders to take advantage of the rapidly converging cable, communications and entertainment markets in the United States." Jones Intercable ranks among the top ten cable television operators in the United States, serving 1.3 million basic subscribers in 55 cable systems. Its major markets include Illinois, Florida, California and the Washington D.C. area. In addition to its businesses in the United States, the company has interests in cable and telecommunications operations in the United Kingdom and potential cable operations in Spain. BCETI will also invest in other assets of Jones International, including Jones Lightwave, a competitive access telecommunications service provider and Jones Education Networks, which operates the only distance education network on basic cable television that offers academic degree programs. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 04:19:09 GMT From: Kentucky Resources Council Subject: Phone Line Teaming Hi, I want to use a standard telco line to connect to my local schools -- they will soon have local internet connections (a big deal in the boonies!). What I really want is a means to team a second phone numner onto the standard number. The second number needs a different ring cadence so I can discriminate between the two numbers -- now comes the fun part: I want to enable the second number from 4:30 pm to 7:30; that way we can publish the second number and not endure data calls during the school day. Anyone who can help me enable such a system would be a minor hero in my book -- thanks for reading this. wsherr01@ukcc.uky.edu wh [Moderator's Note: Okay, here is what you do. Get one of the devices similar to those sold at Radio Shack which uses the ringing cadence to decide whether to send an incoming call to a regular telephone or to a modem. Your incoming phone line plugs into this, and from the two outgoing connections on the back you plug your regular telephone in one and the modem in the other. The phone itself will only ring when the appropriate ringing cadence triggers the device to send the call in that direction. You'll miss part of the first ring because the device will absorb it in the process of deciding what to do with the newly arrived call. But once it has decided, and flipped its little gate inside one direction or the other, then your associated phone will ring. You answer it as always. If the cadence indicates the call is on the 'modem line' then the device will flip its gate in the other direction and send the ringing current to the modem instead. But of course you will have the modem turned off so the calls to that side of the device will just ring open -- never get an answer. When school is out for the day (is that the selection of your time of 4:30 ?) then someone has the duty of turning the modem on before they leave. Perhaps you will instead prefer to use a timer for the electric supply which feeds the modem and at 4:30 the electric current feeding the modem will kick in allowing the modem to answer calls. At 7:30 the timer will shut the current off and the modem will no longer answer the line. You might want to actually set the timer for 8:00 PM but *publish* 7:30 as the cutoff time; that way the modem won't power down right in the middle of someone's call which started at 7:25 and (would have) ended at 7:31. If the caller is on the line as much as 30 minutes after the published cutoff time then it is really their problem. But since reasonable people's watches may disagree by a couple minutes, you'll want to allow some latitude at 7:30 for the person on line who is trying to wind down his session in good faith, etc. One problem with this solution is that although you won't be plagued by hearing the distinctive ringing line ringing all day long, you may have times when someone is unbeknownst to you ringing that line (you won't hear it of course) and you decide to make an outgoing call. As soon as you pick up your phone, naturally you will trigger an offhook condition for their modem. They'll be sitting there dead and you'll be on your end waiting for a dialtone which never comes. That only really matters if you expect the voice traffic to be heavy increasing the likelyhood that you'll want to make a lot of outgoing calls and be doing so just after a modem call arrived from the other direction. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #815 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29995; 14 Dec 93 3:51 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17068 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:29 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08152 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:05 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312140643.AA08152@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #817 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 93 00:43:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 817 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson NYNEX/BAMS Codes, More (Douglas Scott Reuben) Bravo, Bravo +, etc. Pager Options and Programming? (Mike Gordon) Radio Shack 900 Mhz Cordless Phone (Greg Abbott) Big Switch Interfaces? (Christopher Nielsen) Acoustic Coupler For PCMCIA Modem Wanted (Phydeaux) Problems With 911 (Ed Mitchell) Some Surveyers Want Exemption From Autodialer Tariffs (David Leibold) Mind Games: A New Love Story (Dror Lubin via Mark Brader) Layoffs at NYNEX? (Reuters via Sid Shniad) Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs (David Appell) Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs (Eric Florack) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13-DEC-1993 14:50:37.92 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: NYNEX/BAMS Codes, More I recently gave in and got service with NYNEX/NY. I've been holding out because each time that I've had opportunity to call their customer service in the past, they have responded so incompetantly that I figured that their system/service could not be much better. However, since the summer, NYNNEX/NY finally added Follow Me Roaming (four years after every other major city got it), and more significantly, Mobilreach, NYNEX Mobile's automatic call delivery network which runs from Maine to Virginia. This includes SIDs: 00022 (NYC Metro), 00484 (Star Cell/southern Maine), 00028 (Boston Metro/RI), 00088 (CT), 00404 (Orange County, NY), 00486 (Poughkeepsie Area), 00078 (Albany), 00??? (forgot the SID for Pittsfield, MA), 00008 (Southern Jersey, Eastern PA, Delaware), 00018 (Baltimore and DC). I think there may be more past Albany, in other NYNEX properties, I'm not sure. (Note that SID 01516, near Kingston, NY, halfway between Poughkeepsie and Albany is NOT on the system, nor do they have FMR. It's some hick system which is only operated by NYNEX, and is an annoying hole in their NY <-> Albany coverage.) I think that NYNEX recently purchased the southern VT and NH properties from US Cellular, so maybe those will be added to the Mobilreach network as well. With such an extensive system, and with no daily surcharge for incoming calls, I decided it was time to try to them. (The "A" side still does not have a similar auto call delivery network which is as extensive, lacking any connectivity between New England or NY and DC/Baltimore, and nothing past Boston, so you lose Maine as well. There is a link between DC/Baltimore and Philly/DE on the A side, but it doesn't go as far northward or westward as does the B side. Vanguard and SWBell on the "A" side are supposed to get on the NACN "soon", but that still means that immediately north of NY (north of I-84) there is no means for auto-call delivery on the "A" side for the forseeable future.) Anyhow, the system works quite well -- I am autonomously registered as I enter a new system, and calls are routed there automatically. The "please hold on" message is annoying -- I'd prefer that the phone just rang. The system needs to place the call over an IXC, so the NYC system has to grab a line and dial out to the visited system, which takes time, and hence the "hold on" message. (Note that but for the DOJ's requirements, this would probably be unecessary :( ). In most of the systems, my call-forwarding features work. I can activate *71/2 and *73 to clear in all of BAMS, all of NYNEX (NY, MA, and RI), and Star Cell of Maine. They will not work in CT, simply because SNET refuses to allow them for some reason. I'll be calling them about that on Monday, and would encourage others who roam to CT to call SNET at 800-922-5469 and bypass the front-end customer service(?) automatons and directly ask to speak to the VP of Network Operations or something to find out why they don't allow call forwarding features to be activated/deactivated in CT, when all the other systems with the same AT&T switches allow it -- it's NOT a technical reason. (BTW, SNET auto-call delivery also goes to Maine, and your forwarding features from SNET will work all over New England, but not NY. SNET customers who roam in NYNEX/NY State properties may also want to inquire as to why SNET has chosen not to allow them to use their forwarding features from NY, whereas in Mass and Maine it is apparently OK.) One neat feature about forwarding on an AT&T Autoplex is that it is similar to forwarding on a landline -- if you receive a call while you have immediate forwarding (*72) set on, your cellular phone will ring once to let you know that a call was forwarded. This will work in NYNEX/NY (home system), and throughout BAMS as well. It won't work in NYNEX/Boston or Star Cell/Maine. Also, since calls are not being delivered to you in a visited market when you have forwarding on, it rings once IMMEDIATELY, which goes to show you how fast call delivery CAN be if it were not for these IXCs (MCI et. al.) screaming to the DOJ about "all that lost revenue from inter-lata, non-waiver cellular traffic". Call-Waiting also has a very nice implementation on the Autpoplex - if you are on a call, and a second comes in, you get the standard two call-waiting beeps, and then about 20 seconds later, a third one. The calling party hears a speacial ring (a ring with a beep attached to the end) to let him or her know that the cellular customer is on a call. If the calling party hangs up before the cellular customer answers, the cellular customer gets a stutter dial tone to indicate that the caller has terminated the call. Call-waiting for NYNEX/NYC customers works in all of BAMS, I think all of the NY properties, but not in SNET or the rest of New England. (Its seems as if NY and BAMS are in one "regime" and New England is in another -- is this in any way correct?) Voice-mail works nicely too -- if you are in your home system and have received a message while you were away from the phone, when you place or receive a call, you will hear an initial stutter dial tone to idicate that a message has been deposited in voicemail. This won't work when you roam in SNET or the rest of New England; it may work in BAMS and other NYNEX sites, but I haven't tried yet. Since the DOJ prohibits messages from going back to voicemail from a visited market unless it goes through an IXC (which most switches can't seem to handle, I dunno why), if you are roaming and get a call, and don't answer it, it will NOT go to voicemail. (The "A" side is similar). I'm not sure how advanced IS-41 Rev (whatever revision will handle this) is, but it's not here yet, and the US cellular industry is wasting a good deal of time and effort to deal with a problem which wouldn't even exist were it not for, in my mind, unecessarily onerous DOJ requirements for cellular voice (+ messaging?) inter-lata trafficking. (Hey, anyone have the address for Al Gore's Efficiency in Government or Competitiveness Committee or whatever it is called? ;) ) In any event, if you need to force your calls back to voicemail (or designated No Answer Transfer location) while you are roaming, hit *780. This turns call delivery of and forces calls to stay in your home system. Hitting *78 will turn call delivery on an have calls come to the visited market. (Similar to the *35/*350 codes on the "A" side NACN, or the *28/*29 codes for some Motorolas or ex-Motorola systems like GTE/SF.) I noticed that these codes were not working from any BAMS properties, although BAMS does indeed uses these for roamers from other PA B systems. (They use *18/*19 -- the FMR codes -- for auto call delivery for their customers -- foolishly I think. Its too confusing to know if you are using FMR or auto call delivery, although GTE FMR may be pushing for this. Don't be fooled, FMR is NO substitute to auto call delivery!). I called NYNEX/NY, and their inept customer service first had no idea what *78 was, and then told me it didn't work outside of NYC (????!!?!), and then one totally self-assured rep told me "It won't work south of NYC due to DOJ regulations" (really?! Which ones?!), and finally I called the corporate headquarters (914-365-7200) and got them to check it out for me. Seems it IS supposed to work, but BAMS never put *78/*780 in their translation table for NYNEX roamers! It is supposed to be set up in Philly (00008) this weekend, and DC/Baltimore (00018) early next week. What I want to know if why after six + months of auto call delivery and four + months of having the *78 feature that NO ONE at NYNEX even noticed this?! Don't they actually send people -- even just ONCE -- to the markets where these services are offered to try things out to see if they work? What sort of quality assurance do they have, anyhow? In general, a very nice network (once the *78/*780 codes are set up in BAMS),if you can stand the awful NYNEX customer service reps. Unfortun- ately, it is more the rule than the exception that although technically impressive, most inter-system call delivery regimes are not very well supported, by both lower-level technicians and customer service, which tends to discourage their use. Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: mwgordon@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Mike Gordon) Subject: Bravo, Bravo +, etc. Pager Options and Programming Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 01:19:11 GMT Four years ago, I was on a Bravo, now I see that the paging companies are pushing a variety of numeric pagers, including the Bravo + (or 2?), Bravo Express, the Freespirit (rounded looking moto pager) and those CHEAP NEC models. I'd like to stay with a Motorola, (I hear nothing but problems about the NEC) but which one? I like the time-stamp feature of the Bravo + and Express, and vibration mode is a must, as I'm often in noisy environments. What other features do these newer units have, and how useful are they? What options can the user set, and what ones can be set by the dealer? Since I'm sure most dealers don't want to go through the trouble of programming options, I'm sure they won't tell me about all of them. Also, has anyone figured out how to program a Bravo through the 3 contacts near the battery? (Without having to pay the paging company big $ to do it?) A buddy of mine wants to change the his beep sound (no, not his CAP code), and can't justify the $25 his paging company wants just to plug it in and hit a few keys on their computer. He has a PC, and can make a cable / interface if it isn't too overly complicated. Gee, could it just be a three wire serial connection? On a more serious note, last time I was on a pager, my call-in number used to be occupied by a "dealer". (And I don't mean a used car dealer.) As I worked third shift and often slept during the day, (and will be again, oh joy of joys) I didn't enjoy the calls at noon from his old customers. Does anyone have any little hints on how to avoid this? Please don't suggest having my boss call me at home during my sleeping hours, because that would mean I'd have to plug my phone in and get woke up by tele-marketers. (At least they don't call pagers!) By the way, the rep from the paging company could only suggest turning off the pager while I slept. Kind of defeats the purpose of having a pager when you're on call around the clock, and missing a call means losing a shift. Thanks in advance for any help, Mike Gordon N9LOI mwgordon@nyx.cs.du.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 20:22:58 CST From: Greg Abbott Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: Radio Shack 900 Mhz Cordless > [Moderator's Note: The Radio Shack 900 mhz phone seems to be a very > good quality instrument. If anyone has tried it out or purchased one, > I would appreciate a review of it here. PAT] Pat: I had the chance to play with one at a nearby Radio Shack about two weeks ago. After being asked if I would like to try out their new cordless I picked the unit up and placed a call. I then, much to the manager's dismay, walked out of the store with the handset and walked down the sidewalk. This Radio Shack is located in a strip mall constructed of steel and concrete. I had no problems with the unit all the way down to the grocery store (about 400' away through all the concrete and steel). I was amazed. I was also able to place calls all the way out into the parking lot (well over 2,000 feet). In short, I found the unit very well built and certainly capable of living up to all of the statements made about it in the catalog. I gave a good report to the manager who was very pleased. BTW, the manager is a friend of mine, so don't think I make it a practice to pick up property and walk out of the store with it! The comments expressed here are my opinion. They in no way reflect an opinion or endorsement by/of my employer. GREG ABBOTT INTERNET: GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107 VOICE: 217/333-4348 METCAD FAX: 217/384-7003 1905 E. MAIN ST. PAGER: 800/222-6651 URBANA, IL 61801 PIN # 9541 ------------------------------ From: zchris@eskimo.com (Christopher Nielsen) Subject: Big Switch Interfaces? Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 21:05:53 GMT We are looking for a way to interface a PC based voicemail type system to many types of switches out there. It seems difficult because each switch has different programming, different T1 specs, etc, etc I'm sure you've all heard it before ... It would be great if there some black box that could be used to interface to 'switch X', and on the other end have a standardized T1 interface that would allow transfers, accepting calls, and perhaps some other basic functionallity. Does anyone out there know of the likelyhood of such a black box? Failing that, does anyone know of (or is) a consultant that is very good at interfacing to many of the switches out there? Thanks for any help! Christopher Nielsen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 15:35:03 -0500 From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Acoustic Coupler For PCMCIA Modem Wanted I'm trying to find an acoustic coupler adapter for a PCMCIA modem (Intel PCMCIA Faxmodem). Any solution short of taking apart a telephone jack each place I go help would be appreciated. reb ------------------------------ From: Ed Mitchell Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:40:24 PST Subject: Problems With 911 In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 811, Charles Hoequist pointed out the dangers of errors in the telephone company address database when that database is used for 911 dispatch operations. 911 dispatchers have told me that they recommend persons who are concerned about this to telephone 911 during off hours and ask that the dispatcher verify the address shown on the screen. What constitutes "off hours" varies by location so you shouldt first look in the phone book and call the emergency agency's regular business number and ask. I was told that a more common problem than having a completely incorrect address is to have corner lots (at the corner of two streets) reported as facing the street other than that used for the postal address, eg. 4204 Arastradero when 4204 Suzanne was intended. By the way, the dispatchers I spoke with said they usually attempt to verbally confirm your address while on the phone. Ed Mitchell "These opinion are my own and do not reflect the views of Microsoft Corp." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 23:52:43 -0500 From: David Leibold Subject: Some Surveyers Want Exemption From Autodialer Tariffs [from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 Dec 93; content is Bell Canada's] Market/survey researchers to be exempt from ADADs tariff Bell has listened to the market/survey research industry and has informed the CRTC that certain market/survey researchers should be exempted from our original ADADs (Automatic Dialing and Announcing Devices) tariff filing. Of primary concern to markey/survey researchers was the proposed restrictions related to the hours of calling and random or sequential dialing. Representatives of Bell and the market/survey research industry agreed that placing strict limits on the hours during which they may call people could potentially affect the quality and accuracy of their research (e.g., certain types of people would not be available for interviews during the proposed hours of calling). The industry recognizes that calling people at unreasonable times could hinder researchers' abilities to gain the co-operation of the people they wish to interview. Although most interviews would be conducted within the hours proposed, in some cases calls could be placed outside of the proposed hours. Under Bell's original proposed tariffs, this could have resulted in the termination of the researcher's telephone service, should a customer complain to Bell (as per the complaint procedure proposed in the company's August 6, 1993 filing). The ability to randomly select telephone numbers is integral to the market/survey research industry. Industry representatives and Bell reps agreed that prohibiting the use of random dialing would hinder their ability to obtain research results that are representative of the general population. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 01:29:00 -0500 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Mind Games: A New Love Story Moderator's Note: Forwarded to the Digest by Mark Brader from the rec.puzzles group on Usenet where he found it. Look it over and think about it; I'll print the answer here in a day or two. PAT] From: lubin@fy.chalmers.se (Dror Lubin) Subject: A New Love Story Reply-To: lubin@fy.chalmers.se Organization: Chalmers University of Technology Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 08:33:39 GMT A New Love Story Once upon a time, in a far away land, there was a beautiful girl, who lived in a big big castle, just like in all the other stories that begin like this. Alas, the girl had a wicked mother who kept her locked. Where? In a red cell. The cell had a combination lock with three knobs. On one was written "red" on the other was written "cell", and on the third, the biggest, was written "nlrrecs". Our poor girl couldn't find out how on earth could she open this lock. As she couldn't get out, she decided to make her living in. She was a great cook, so she opened a road restaurant in her cell, or more properly: A cell-diner. She put outside a big sign saying: "NIIDSACAL CELL DINER" (niidsacal means "friendly" in her language). Of course, with such a name, not many people stopped there, and even if they did, they couldn't get in because of the lock, so business was rather slow. One day, a young prince heard about this girl. Nowadays, most princes are in the racing business, and so was he. Instead of a white horse, he had a big racing car. People often asked him if he had a white horse, and he would always say: "NO!, I have a racing car". Then they would ask him what does his car look like, and he would say: "Nice ... All RED!!". The registration plate was "ICDIINPNNS". He chose this plate because these were the initials of his name and title: "Isidor Charles Darwinski the 2nd, Noble Prince of Norway, Nashville and Seattle". Well, as ICDII heard the sad story of the girl in the red cell, he jumped into his car, and raced towards the evil castle. He was so furious, he did not see the huge oil truck coming towards him on the wrong side of the road. Boy, was that an ill-end-race!! ICDII became even more ill when he got the bill: $5,172,790.20, you see, it was he who drove on the wrong side, and without insurance too! After that, ICDII wouldn't hear anymore of no princesses, so our little girl is still locked away in her red cell, waiting for *YOU* to call her. Do you know her phone number?? ---------------------------- [Moderator's Note: Figure out the right phone number and send it to me **with an explanation for how you figured it out**. I'll print the answer in a day or two after a few replies have arrived. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: Layoffs at NYNEX? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 10:43:28 PST MASSIVE JOB CUTS COMING AT NYNEX? Boston -- NYNEX Corp. has declined comment on a report that it will cut 22,000 jobs over the next three years as part of a plan announced earlier to cut costs 30%. The {Boston Herald} said an internal NYNEX memo showed the telephone company plans to slash 28% of its 80,000-strong workforce by 1996 through layoffs, attrition and retirement. These would include some 7,100 jobs at it New England Telephone subsidiary, the report said. The memo called for 2,551 job cuts in 1994, it added. The company, which also owns New York Telephone, has already cut one sixth of its workforce in recent years to compete with rivals that are merging telephone, cable television and computers. "I can't confirm the numbers of workforce layoffs," said NYNEX spokesman Pete Goodale. He noted that the Herald report was "based on a single document and out of context." In September, NYNEX announced it would eliminate 1,200 jobs by June and several thousand more in the next few years. Goodale said NYNEX's plans to trim operations had already been made plain. "But there are a variety of ways of achieving this. How it plays in terms of workforce reductions is not yet determined." NYNEX shares closed up 1/8 on the New York Stock Exchange after the news was released. -- Reuter Sid Shniad ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 12:03 EST From: David Appell <0005946880@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs In Telecom Digest V13 #803 Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com wrote: > Regardsless of any other factor, companies whose primary goal is to > make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably move to > operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin. Perhaps this is one of the things they're upset about: the unspoken assumption that *investor's* rights take precedence over *worker's* rights. Investment capital is only one of the requirements for a successful business -- labor capital is important, too. Yet, in the money-crazed, business-first environment of the 90s, those who have money to invest in a company are invariably treated better than those who merely give their blood, sweat and tears to it. There are real people underneath all those layoff numbers, whose belts are undoubtably tightened much farther than your average stock holder, institutional or individual. Both groups are necessary for a successful business, and a little perspective, even in this day and age, can't hurt. David Appell 594-6880@mcimail.com [Moderator's Note: That's why I like running Sid's commentaries and reports from time to time; they lend a little balance, a view of the other side of the coin. But Eric Florack has another rebuttal, so his article next will close this issue and this thread. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 09:55:09 PST From: Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com Subject: Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs Eric originally responded: >> What the article fails to point out is that the unions themselves are >> responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to >> represent, out of the market. Sid replied: > Eric doesn't adduce any evidence to substantiate this claim. In fact, > real, inflation-adjusted wages -- in the unionized telephone industry > and other sectors -- have been declining for more than ten years. But > let's not let facts get in the way of a good diatribe. Let's just use > this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless > accusations. Declining in relationship to what, Sid, themselves? Non-union wages? Either one is a strong suggestion of just how out of line union wages have been ... and does /nothing/ to dispute my statment. In fact, it backs it. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good pro-union diatribe. Let's just use this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless pro-union spout. Asks Sid, > What evidence is there that regulation kills jobs? Carter. Johnson. Most recently, Clinton, and the reaction of industry to her agendae. The biggest example is the biggest regulator in the world; the former Soviet Empire. Just to name a few examples. Note that each of these was a friend of big labor. Then place in contrast, the deregulation attitude /after/ each of these administrations, and the well-documented spurt in job growth, after dereg, in each and every case. (See? I`ve even given you something to watch for, in the future. Remember, you heard it here first, gang! :->) Can you deny, for example, the number of newly created jobs that came along when the federal government allowed competition, by removing the regulation that established the monopoly of AT&T? > But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it > that companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas > expansion, takeovers, etc.? I don`t suppose it`s occurred to you that such investment goes to the places it`s most likely to earn a good ROI. Obviously, they don`t consider the best investment to be in the CWA controlled telecom market that we have here in the US. > But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it that > companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas expansion, > takeovers, etc.? You are attempting to have it both ways. You complain that they`re making too much money on vid services, and then you wonder where it comes from, as if they were making it all from their `cash cow`. Which is it? > However, when the normal workings of said Free Market generate > staggering loss of jobs -- for example, a recent {Wall Street Journal} > article reported that the Fortune 500 employed 16.2 million people in > 1990, versus 11.8 million in 1993 -- then this is treated as just a > natural unfolding of the workings of the world. What`s your solution, then? Back to the Xbar system, or before, so that all the operators will have their jobs back? Should we go even farther ... back to cord boards? What you`re dealing with is not free market forces alone, but the free market reacting to technology. You`d best understand, with the rest of us, that making money for the owners (nee:investors) is the number one goal of any company. Jobs are nothing more than a secondary function of business, albeit a happy one, and telcos are certainly no exception. And by the way, your F-500 comment is quite typical of someone attempting to prove a point with only half the statistics. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics, it is said. What your comment /does not/ indicate is how many jobs were created /outside/ of the F-500 ... which, in fact is where most jobs in this country are created, and a higher percentage of non-union jobs, at that. Being at work, I don`t have the figures to hand, but look it up. You will find that the number of jobs created by companies other than the 500 far outstripped the numbers of jobs lost by the 500 in the same period. A smaller number of people working under the F-500 umbrella, therefore, is an indication that free markets are working for the benefit of all, not that the system is failing. In short, tell the whole story. On the other hand, let's not let facts get in the way of a good pro-union diatribe. Let's just use this comment as the launch pad for further baseless pro-union spout. My regards to Pat, who says: > [Moderator's Note: Part of -- maybe the majority of -- the 'rabid > responses seen here come from the Dungheap Net (Usenet). I`m not on Usenet, so far as I know, FYI. > As you know Sid, I sent you a separate note a few minutes ago noting > that most of the readers here like to see two, or three or four sides > to every story. I certainly don`t object to such material being placed in here. Not only is that your call, Pat, but I happen to agree with you, in it. I simply reserve the right to respond to things when they come through ... one you apparently support, having echoed it out in the Digest. As to Sid`s comment about his post being taken as off subject; no, I don`t think it is.This is an issue that affects, on a first level, the future of the telecommunications industry ... the other implications for other industry and government policy towards labor not withstanding. In fact, I would suggest it`s those parallels to the rest of industry that make this an important topic. All this having been said, allow me to place a little perspective on all of this; my company (see my address) has just recently announced a ten thousand or so employee cutback, on a world-wide basis. /E Everyone`s entitled to my opinion, but Xerox doesn`t pay me for it.... [Moderator's Note: And I bet you hope you are not one of the 'ten thousand or so' they choose to eliminate. Hey Sid, better get some union membership sign-up cards over to Xerox right away! :) And Eric, I never claimed YOU were part of Usenet, although I guess my message came out sounding that way. Anyway, Usenet is now doing their own thing with telecom news in an unmoderated forum, as I'm sure will become obvious before long, even to the untrained eye! :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #817 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03722; 14 Dec 93 15:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27831 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17249 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:12 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312141742.AA17249@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #818 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 93 11:42:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 818 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Gold Card: New Calling Card For Business Travelers (TELECOM Moderator) Businesses Should Beware of Phone Fraud During Holiday Season (Nigel Allen) International Internet Association (Alfredo E. Cotroneo) New: RADIO-L - Digital Audio Broadcasting - DAB (Ronald Lee Stone) X.32 Dial-up Access (Stewart Fist) Miscellaneous Questions Before Leaving For China (John T. Ellis) Area Codes *and* Prefixes (Doug Krause) Caller ID Project in Electronics Now (Feb. 94) (David Leibold) Caller ID Terms Can be Confusing (Stewart Fist) Cox Cable to Compete With US West (Advertising Age via vantek@aol.com) Scaling (Was Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS?) (Paul Robinson) Shared 800 Telephone Numbers (Dave Bonney) Wanted: RJ Testing Tools (David Elliott) Frequency Tuning Speed (Jae-Soo Kim) Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? (Linc Madison) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: New Calling Card For Business Travelers Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 01:53:00 CST You who have been around here awhile have heard me mention the Orange Calling Card from Orange Communications; a telephone calling card with no surcharge at any time for its use, and rates of 25 cents per minute with a thirty second minimum billing period. It costs $12 to sign up and it works like any other calling card (dial an 800 number; get the tone; enter your card number, the number you are calling, and your PIN) except for the lack of any surcharge at all. Now I am offering one called the GOLD CARD. For starters, the rates are a little different, however there are some additional features available on it you should find useful. Rates: 28 cents per minute during the day; 25 cents per minute evenings and nights; As with the Orange Card, *no surcharge at any time*. So you are probably asking why you should spend 28 cents per minute during the day on calls when Orange is only 25 cents per minute. Here is why: No fee to sign up. If you qualify, you get it free of charge. Qualifying means having reasonably good credit and being a regular business traveler; You choose your own ten digit authorization code and four digit PIN; Voicemail is included -- 25 cents per message left in your box; Fax mailbx is included -- 30 cents per faxed page left in your box; Fraud protection in the form of a daily usage limit which you set and you can adjust as required; Originate calls anywhere in the USA with domestic *and international* terminations. (Orange is still just domestic USA terminations); Use # for redial or re-origination of calls; Speed dial capability for your frequently called numbers; Broadcast voicemail and broadcast fax mail capabilities; International origination of calls beginning around the middle of 1994. Orange Card has never been useful to readers of the Digest outside the USA, but beginning sometime next year the GOLD CARD will allow people in other countries to participate; Voice prompts make the system easy to use. Here are some examples: To make a regular GOLD CARD call: Dial 1-800-xxx-xxxx and listen for the greeting; Enter your self-defined authorization code and PIN; Listen for further instructions which will tell you to dial your call (with 011 if international) or press * for options. To pick up voicemail, select option #2. To pick up fax messages, select option #3 and enter the number where your faxes are to be delivered. The system will then call that number and deliver the fax(es). To change your system daily limit, press * from within the options menu, and enter your six digit limit code, then act according to the prompts given. To send voicemail messages and faxes using the GOLD CARD: Give your associates the 800 number, your ten digit authorization code and the special PIN 6245 (MAIL). They'll get switched into your voicemail box to leave messages at 25 cents each which you retrieve from wherever you are at your convenience. People also send faxes to you in much the same way. They call the 800 number, and certain prompts tell them to start the fax transmission once they have gotten to your mailbox. So, if you think this is worth three cents more per minute on daytime calls (but the same rate as Orange evening and nights along with the no surcharge arrangement), then drop me a note at ptownson@townson.com and ask for the paperwork to be mailed out to you to get an account started. The GOLD CARD is a service of Corporate Telemanagement Group and is intended for frequent business travelers. Please include your company name when you contact me for the application, and the address where it is to be mailed. ------------------------------- The same folks offer 1+ long distance service to businesses at the rate of 18.4 cents per minute flat rate, and 800 service at the rate of 18.4 cents per minute flat rate plus a $5 per month surcharge in the case of 800 numbers. As my existing 800 number customers know, Hogan was bought out by Corporate Telemanagement Group and your existing 800 numbers are being serviced by CTG under the terms of the contract you had with Hogan. Regards the 1+ dialing noted above, obviously I can only recommend this to business users with a heavy volume of daytime calls. 18.4 cents per minute is never a bargain at night, and if your long distance calling is mostly at night from home, don't apply for this. For many small businesses however, the 18.4 daytime rate might be a good deal. Again, for details or to sign up: ptownson@townson.com. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 09:23 WET From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Subject: Businesses Should Beware of Phone Fraud During Holiday Season Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-3783 Voice: 416-363-8676 Here is a press release from AT&T. AT&T Warns Businesses Against Holiday Hackers and Toll Thieves David Bikle 201-644-7052 (office) 201-871-0104 (home) FOR RELEASE WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1993 BASKING RIDGE, N.J.-- AT&T urges businesses to guard against increased risk of toll-fraud attempts by hackers, or toll-call thieves, during the upcoming holiday season. Last year nationwide toll-fraud attempts increased by about 50 per cent during the Christmas week. Hackers "break into" PBX's or voice-mail systems, obtain passwords or access to outside lines, and then sell or use the information to make illegal international phone calls. Toll fraud cost American businesses more than $2 billion in l993. "Hackers count on being able to steal calls undetected while businesses are closed during a long holiday weekend," says Larry Watt, director of AT&T's Toll Fraud Prevention center. "'Tis the season to be wary." AT&T suggests several steps businesses can take to protect against phone fraud: o Program PBX's to block outgoing calls to foreign countries during the hours the business is closed. Also consider blocking remote access into PBX and voice-mail systems both after hours and throughout the holiday weekends. o Deactivate or restrict call transfer out of voice mail and auto-attendant systems. o Institute a regular schedule for changing access codes and passwords, and always delete unused codes. o Enroll in a fraud-prevention program that will call the customer whenever suspicious calling patterns are detected--even in the evening and on weekends--so the long-distance carrier can quickly block further illegal outgoing calls. AT&T monitors virtually all of its business customers' calls 24 hours a day, and its NetPROTECT(SM) Services include notification of fraud attempts even at night and on weekends. For example, with NetPROTECT Plus Service a business can designate three people and their reach numbers after work hours, so that AT&T can notify the representative and work with him or her to stop the fraud quickly. AT&T is the industry leader in helping companies to prevent toll fraud. Businesses that want more information on preventative measures can request AT&T's free booklet, "Tips on Safeguarding Your Company's Telecom Network," by calling 1-800-NET-SAFE. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 93 02:02:48 EST From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <100020.1013@CompuServe.COM> Subject: International Internet Association This is warning for possible fraud involving "free" Internet access offered to European users by IIA (International Internet Association). Potential users of Internet and e-mail services in Europe have been contacted by an alleged non profit organization denominated "International Internet Associaton (IIA)" based in Washington, DC, USA, promoting free access to Internet sponsored with funds provided by the US Administration. A few days later expressing interest in IIA's "free" service, companies in Europe were told by IIA that "International Discount Telecommunication Corp. (IDT)" would contact them for details on how to connect to the "free" Internet service. IDT, based in Hackensack, NJ, is a Telecommunication (phone) services provider, which basically provide a US dial-tone service to customers outside the USA, giving them access to the US phone networks at tariffs slighlty higher that the ones normally offered by AT&T, but cheaper than the ones offered by most European national PTTs. The invitation to sign a contract with IDT to get access to IIA "free Internet" must be carefully evaluated by potential users of Internet in Europe, because even at the discounted phone rates offered by IDT, Internet access will be quite expensive. There are -- depending on the particular usage of Internet by the individual companies in Europe -- much cheaper alternatives to be considered. To the profane, all this is a clear indication that everyone must be very careful when a service is offered for free. Especially when free services are offered by a non-profit organization in the US which seem to have very close ties with a commercial company. Furthermore: IDT does not indicate clearly the phone tariffs in their contract form, they ask for a credit card number to activate the service, and they only indicate that the "users will be billed directly by the American carriers (???WHO ARE THEY???) at their lowest rate", which one is not shown. No access to Internet is being offered apparently by IIA without signing a contract with IDT. Unfortunately this warning will not reach Europeans in need of an Internet access, since they would not probably be connected yet to read this message. Alfredo E. Cotroneo, PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano Italy email: 100020.1013@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 10:31:00 -0500 From: Ronald Lee Stone Subject: New: RADIO-L - Digital Audio Broadcasting - DAB RADIO-L on LISTSERV@UMINN1.BITNET or LISTSERV@VM1.SPCS.UMN.EDU Discussion of Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) The RADIO-L discussion list is a forum for addressing the issues involved in the transition to a Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) standard in the United States and other countries. Discussion regarding the relative technological merits of various DAB proposals, as well as the social and economic implications of a transition to DAB is welcome and encouraged on this list. Digital audio broadcasting offers improved sound quality, technical superiority, and economic efficiency over current AM and FM analog broadcasting. The United States is scheduling tests of various DAB proposals beginning summer 1994. Anyone can join. To join the list send a message to LISTSERV@UMINN1 on BITNET or LISTSERV@vm1.spcs.umn.edu on the Internet with the BODY containing the command: SUBSCRIBE RADIO-L Yourfirstname Yourlastname Eg. sub radio-l Marchese G. Marconi Owner: Ronald L. Stone ston0030@gold.tc.umn.edu graduate student : Scientific & Technical Communication Department of Rhetoric : University of Minnesota, St. Paul (612) 644-9706 ------------------------------ From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: X.32 Dial-up Access Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:00:00 GMT What has happened to X.32 as a dial-up form of access to X.25 packet networks? A couple of years ago it was being hailed as the great break- through that would allow POTS line and modem users to get two-way- calling access to ISDN at reasonable rates. From memory, the two-way-calling system wasn't integrated into the first release of the protocol, so it was then little more than a synchronous form of the X.28 access for people without tie lines. Was two-way-calling ever introduced? I'm interested in this because it occurs to me that the ideal combination for small business and people working from home, will be something like X.32 over ADSL or HDSL. This seems to be the ideal way to use a POTS line to get reasonable data rates into public-access X.25, frame-relay and ATM networking services. ------------------------------ From: ellis@rtsg.mot.com (John T Ellis) Subject: Miscellaneous Questions Before Leaving For China Date: 14 Dec 1993 02:31:08 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Reply-To: ellis@rtsg.mot.com I will be moving to Beijing, China in late January to begin a two year assignment training Chinese engineers on Motorola's cellular equipment (infrastructure). As I've been preparing to pack up and move out, I compiled the following list of questions. I would appreciate a word or two from anyone who can shed some light. Thanks much beforehand. I certainly appreciate it. (1) I am looking to buy a fully compatible PAL/NTSC video recorder. When I say "fully compatible", I mean the following - : able to record NTSC : able to record PAL : able to play PAL : able to play NTSC Can anyone offer suggestions on models, brands? What experiences have people had with these kind of systems - ie. poor tape recording quality, poor playing of a tape from a particular signalling system? Also, I was given the following name and address for a company in New York that specializes in the above systems. Has anyone dealt with them before? Appliances Overseas 276 Fifth Ave. Suite 407 New York, NY 10001-4509 212-545-8001 - tel 212-545-8005 - fax (2) What experience(s) do people have with Fax/Modem/Phone switches? I have a catalog from DAMARK that has a TT System listed for $79.99. Does this sound reasonable? Is this a good buy? If not, where should I go? What should I try to avoid? (3) What problems can I expect when trying to interface American made phone equipment into a Chinese phone jack? I know that I will have to worry about power, but I'm refering to connectors, line voltages etc. The equipment I will be bringing in includes: computer modem, fax machine, ATT cordless phone. (4) ** This isn't really related to telecom, but I thought someone might know. ** I would like to bring my tape deck, record player and microwave with me. I have been told that I may need to make adjustments to the belts on the players and some other modifications to the microwave. Can anyone confirm this? If so, what changes are required? If I don't make the changes, what problems will I incur? Again, thanks much for all the assistance. John T. Ellis 708-632-7857 Motorola Cellular ellis@rtsg.mot.com ------------------------------ From: dkrause@hydra.acs.uci.edu (Doug Krause) Subject: Area Codes *and* Prefixes Organization: Lido 24 Hr. Pizza and Video Date: 14 Dec 93 12:51:49 GMT Is there a US-wide list of area codes and prefixes available? If not, I would be willing to collect this information from people around the country and post it monthly. **** Douglas Krause dkrause@uci.edu One yuppie can ruin **** **** University of California, Irvine your whole day. **** [Moderator's Note: Most of what you are seeking is in the Telecom Archives already. Check out the 'areacodes' and 'country.codes' sub- directories within the archives. Carl Moore is responsible for much of the data in that area, along with others who help him. The archives is accessible several ways: the two most common are anonymous ftp and the email information service I operate. Use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu to connect, then 'cd telecom-archives' and go from there. If you need a copy of the email information service help file (it is completely an automated thing) then write me and ask for it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 06:44 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Caller ID Project in Electronics Now (Feb. 94) The {Electronics Now} publication (formerly Radio-Electronics) has a Caller ID project scheduled for its February 1994 edition, which should be on newsstands in January. The do-it-yourself folks interested in number display things might take notice. David Leibold ------------------------------ Date: 08 Dec 93 17:37:49 EST From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Caller ID Terms Can be Confusing I'm trying to follow this CLI/ANI discussion in TELECOM Digest and in other technical publications. I guess you guys know what you're talking about, but the welter of casually-used terms and acronyms have left me rather confused. I've culled out the following acronyms and terminology. Would someone care to explain the distinctions. > Caller ID > CID - Calling Identity Delivery > ID calls - (presumably the same - or does this refer to a post-hoc call to the exchange to discover the ID of the last caller?) > CLI - Call Line Identification > CLID - (presumably the same) > CND - Caller Number Display (probably the same) > CNI - Call Number Identification > CNID - (is this only between exchanges?) > CPNI - Customer Private Network Information (is this generic?) > ANI - (Is this primarily for inter-carrier billing purposes?) > ADSI - Analog Display Service Interface (aren't all of these analog?) > STR - Source Telephone Recognition (seems to be on ISDN only?) > Ad-Hoc call trace (automatic delivery of CLI after, by dialling special number, presumably?) Also, while you are about it, could someone clear up the following: 1. What is CLI called when it is carried over ISDN's D-channel? Is this STR? 2. What is it called when it is carried in SS7 (CCS#7) packets? 3. How does Delux ID know the name of the caller? Does it need to reference some form of X.500 directory? 4. What's the distinction between "CLASS and LASS-based"? 5. What is meant (or implied) by "multi message format". What is single message format CLI? [Moderator's Note: Well, that's a big order; I suspect people are going to be writing with several responses. This is a good time to remind readers that one of the features of the Telecom Archives Email Information Service is the GLOSSARY command: When you encounter a term you are unfamiliar with, send email to the archives in the usual prescribed format (see the help file) and as your command, you enter GLOSSARY . All the various glossary files will be searched automatically and the appropriate text from each glossary sent back to you in email. Try it and have some fun with it. I guess a few thousand entries are available. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vantek@aol.com Reply-To: vantek@aol.com Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 05:33:23 EST Subject: Cox Cable to Compete with US West The following appeared in the Dec. 6, 1993 edition of {Advertising Age}: COX CABLE TO COMPETE WITH US WEST IN INTERACTIVE TEST Cox Cable Communications will test a variety of interactive services on it's system in Omaha, Neb., starting next June. Cox will use interactive technology provided by a consortium of ICTV, a Santa Clara, Calif., interactive services company; IBM Corp., which is providing digital servers; and New Century Communications, a data management company. Among the services Cox will test are movies and music videos on demand, a shopping mall, electronic classified ads and a local dining guide, said David Serlin, exec VP of ICTV. The interactive service will compete directly with a similar one planned for Omaha by US West. The Cox test is the first market test by ICTV, a four-year old company. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1993 12:12:08 EST Reply-To: 0005066432@mcimail.com Subject: Scaling (Was Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS?) From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Brendan Jones , writes: > I don't deny CDMA looks to be a promising technology. However, you > can't necessarily scale the experience of a 50 user 5 base station > system. Some particular propagation or interference effects, > negligible under low density use, may become far more important > under higher density use. I will concur with this. There have been major technological improvements and corrections in design errors of equipment used on the Internet. Some of the flaws in the design and implementation were only discovered after they were put into "live use" on a running network of hundreds of thousands of sites (then). The equipment worked fine under low usage conditions and laboratory tests. When put into service in the real world where a "baptism under fire" showed they needed to be changed to meet the conditions that actual service would cause. This is not to fault the designers of those systems; there was no way to tell until they went into service exactly what conditions would occur on a real network under actual conditions. This was one case where you can't guess at what will happen, the only way you can find out is to put it up and see why it fails, since no laboratory or simulation could provide the kind of punishment that real-life actual use would provide. Paul Robinson - TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 13:46:55 GMT From: dab@wiretap.spies.com (Dave Bonney) Subject: Shared 800 Telephone Numbers Carl Moore in writing about changes to local dialing plans quoted from a Bell letter to customers: > "We thank you for helping us to prepare for Pennsylvania's new area > code. If you have any questions, please call our We Can Help Center > at 1-800-555-5000, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m." and Carl commented: > [I tried that number from Maryland and got U.S. West Communications > -- a recording only -- in Denver, Colorado. Darn, I am not in Del. or > Pa. now.] If you try that number in New England Telephone territory, you get the 'New England Telephone Customer Response Center'. Leading one to believe that despite the TELCO and RESPORG claims of 'One Number -- One User', it's another case of 'Mother Knows Best' and 'Do As I Say, Not As I Do'. Does anyone have any knowledge of a single 800 number being used for different customers in different geographical areas?? (Other than Mother and the Children of course ...) Inquiring Minds Want To Know ... David A. Bonney <---> Telephone +1 (508) 692-4194 A Telecommunications Professional Now Available in Westford MA No Employer, No Disclaimer. Just My Own Thoughts. Inquiries to MCIMail 422-4552 or Internet ------------------------------ From: dce@netcom.com (David Elliott) Subject: Wanted: RJ Testing Tools Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:55:02 GMT I work for a small software company, and we do our own network and telephone wiring inside the office. Our computers are networked together using 10BaseT Ethernet and our telephone lines are all single lines. Everything is handled in one room with a punch-down panel, though some larger offices have separate Ethernet hubs in them. Our biggest problems tend to be with broken or incorrectly-made cables. Testing these to isolate problems is a big hassle. The only real tools we have are a beeper box and a multimeter. While these are a start, and we could improve things by creating some special cables and connectors, time is money. What I am interested in is a set of tools for testing and analyzing cables and jacks. Typical testing scenarios: * Cable tester - I plug in both sides of a cable (either RJ11 or RJ45) and the tester tells me what is connected to what, or at least whether the wires are connected straight through (though for modem serial cables it would be nice to have it work like a standard break-out box, too). * Line tester - I plug in a loop-back connector on one side of a run, plug in a line tester on the other, and it tells me whether each wire is good or not (it would be great if it could help isolate which one, but one bad wire usually means the whole cable needs replacing). * In-line signal analyzer - I plug this into an existing setup, and it tells me which lines have signal on them. There may be other tools that are useful, and if so, I'd like to hear about them. The main goal is to make it so that diagnosing problems doesn't require taking someone away from their regular work. David Elliott - dce@netcom.com - (408) 735-8362 ------------------------------ From: jkim@acsu.buffalo.edu (Jae-Soo Kim) Subject: Frequency Tuning Speed Organization: UB Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 01:23:42 GMT Hello, I'd like to know the frequency tuning speed of frequency synthesizer which is in market now. Any information or any direction to materials will be greatly appreciated. Jae ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 09:58:12 GMT I have a question about the selection of 334 as the new area code for Atlanta. In numerous discussions about the generalization of area codes after "Time T," it has been stated that the first NNX area codes would all be NN0 (such as 520 for Arizona). Yet the very first NNX is not NN0. Just wondering about this picayune detail ... Linc Madison * Oakland, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #818 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08486; 15 Dec 93 5:59 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20955 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14127 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312150823.AA14127@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #819 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Dec 93 02:23:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 819 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Possible Rate Lowering by NYNEX (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere... (Greg Abbott) Re: AT&T's New Facility (Christopher C. Blough) Re: Crummy Service in NY (Carl Oppedahl) Re: Looping and Data Looping (Michael Oshea) Re: PCS Questions (Kyle Griffin) Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice (Glenn Inn) Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice (Ray Normandeau) Re: Terse 800 Failure ... Oh My! (Randall Gellens) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 19:45:12 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Possible Rate Lowering by NYNEX {Newsday} (Dec 4, 1993) had an article concerning rate cuts for New York Telephone subscribers to the tune of nearly 297 million dollars (US). "If the Public Service Commission adopts the recommendation of two of its judges, at a meeting set for Dec. 15, the cost for many New York Telephone calls and for Touch Tone service could fall starting Jan. 1, 1994. "A residential customer now pays $1.35 a month for each Touch Tone line according to New York Telephone." "The ruling illustrates the tension between NYNEX goals and regulatory concerns. On Thursday, NYNEX announced a new marketing strategy and a planned restructuring for its operations. NYNEX also reiterated its determination to be able to offer a full range of interactive and video services, including cable TV, if it can list federal regularory restrictions." I always knew we were being ripped off and this is one of the few times that the PSC has come to the ratepayer's aid. NYNEX is also setting itself up for a regulatory battle concerning video in its service area due to a purchase of a portion of a company (Teleport I think) which has portions of it owned by some cable companies. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 20:23:17 CST From: Greg Abbott Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere... > I don't know what would be displayed if I had to call 911 from my > present phone on 410-287; my mail (including my phone bills) goes to a > PO box in another town. Utility companies need to know where you > live, because that is where the physical connections for service > (electricity, phone, etc.) go, even if the bills don't. (Perhaps > you'd want to find out what exchange serves 820 Old Apex Road. I did > find Apex Road and Street listed for zipcode 27707, and Apex Hwy. > listed for zip code 27713, both in Durham.) All of the telco's I deal with have billing addresses and service addresses. The 9-1-1 Database is not (atleast in Illinois) built from only billing addresses. We make a careful review of the database before the system can be turned on. Any listings found without a locatable address (i.e. P.O. Boxes, Rural Route, etc.) are contacted and asked for their locatable address. > Question: What about foreign exchange service? An old example in > Maryland was someone in an area served by 287 prefix who brought in > 642 Perryville (the next exchange to the west) as a foreign exchange > because it is local to Aberdeen (272,273,278) and Havre de Grace > (939). Another case (glaring because a state line is involved, and I > recall seeing this at least once in the Wilmington, Del. directory), > would be someone in the Wilmington or Holly Oak exchange area bringing > in Chester Heights (Pa.) as a foreign exchange; that choice: > -Keeps Wilmington, Newport, Holly Oak as local calls > -loses local service to other parts of New Castle County, Del. > and part of southern Chester County, Pa. > -GETS LOCAL SERVICE TO ALL OF PHILADELPHIA METRO AREA FX circuits are a particular headache, but not impossible to deal with. Once they are discovered we can make specific notations on that telephone number indicating where the actual telephone service is located at. Special routing can be set up (if equipment allows) to send the call to the correct PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point). > Remote-forward, which I set up in Delaware, would not be involved in > 911. No calls can originate on my Delaware number; it can only be > activated by an incoming call, and can only automatically call the > number I am forwarding to. If a telephone number can make outgoing calls (even if it is a fax, modem or remote forwarding device) then you can be that the record has been examined for accurate service location information. If you were to disconnect your remote forwarding device and plug in a standard telephone (or hook up a butt set to the D-Marc) you could dial a number just like a normal telephone line. Granted, you don't use your line this way and there probably will never be any other outgoing calls except those forwarded, but you *could*, if you wanted to, hook up a phone and dial 9-1-1 from that line. One more quick example of something we ran across. One of the local power companies has some remote telemetry units at their sub-stations. These units are hard wired into standard telephone lines. When we ran across their telephone records with addresses like "SBS36L-W3" we inquired where they were. We were told that there was no need to address these sub-stations since "no one could *ever* make a call from these lines". I asked to visit one of the sites with the power company rep. I looked at it and indeed the wires come out of the telemetry unit and go right into the D-Marc. I pulled out my butt set, tapped into the line and produced dial tone for the rep and dialed the time and temperature number. We immediatly went back to his office and assigned addresses to each of their sub-stations. I heard of a similar incident somewhere out west where a 9-1-1 center was searching for a telephone number that had a service record showing an address in the middle of a major bridge over a dam. After several conversations with the folks who manage the dam, an old-timer remembered a long time ago when they had had a telephone down in the base of a maintenance shaft, well under the water level. Someone (I don't know if it was a public safety official or an employee of the water folks) went down in this shaft and someone else up on the surface dialed the telephone number. Sure enough, there at the bottom of the shaft, back behind some old control cabinets was a rusted old wall phone that was ringing away. The person answered the phone and conversed with the surface. That phone had to have an address since it would be possible for someone to call 9-1-1 from it. I should clarify, it had an address, but it needed a better location added to the record. Hope this answers a few questions, though I'm sure it will stir up a few more comments/questions. Happy Holidays! GREG ABBOTT INTERNET: GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU 9-1-1 COORDINATOR COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107 VOICE: 217/333-4348 METCAD FAX: 217/384-7003 1905 E. MAIN ST. PAGER: 800/222-6651 URBANA, IL 61801 PIN # 9541 ------------------------------ From: gnh-starport!cblough@clark.net Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility Date: 15 Dec 1993 02:21:33 -0500 Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc. > Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to > Washington, DC. After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T > cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor. On > Friday morning, both vessels were docked. However, on the Sunday > return trip, only one boat was still in port. Perhaps to Long Island > is where the second ship went? I personally make the trip from D.C. to philadelphia up 95 about three times a month. That is the first time in over a year that I have even heard of either ship being out to sea. Speaking of which, those ships are technically amazing. They can lay something like 20 miles of cable in a day (over a straight distance on a level sea floor). That isn't fiber optic, so I don't know how fast that goes. Christopher C. Blough InterNet: cblough@gnh-starport.clarknet UUCP: clarknet!gnh-starport!cblough Starport BBS 703-560-9308 ARPA: clarknet!gnh-starport!cblough@nosc.mil ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Crummy Service in NY Date: 14 Dec 1993 15:17:17 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In gaj@pcs.win.net (Gordon Jacobson) writes: >> Oh, and I cannot get ISDN, either. > All Business Service NYTel COs south of 57th Street provide ISDN > PRI/BRI. > Call Bob Block at (212) 395 5272. >> My service comes from the "Second Avenue" central office in Manhattan. > So does mine -- 2nd Avenue and 56th Street in fact. And I can > get ISDN whenever I want it. No, the "Second Avenue" central office is at Second Avenue and 13th Street. I expect they call it that because they don't like to repeat the number "13" if they can avoid it. There is ISDN in the Second Avenue CO, but I would only be able to receive incoming calls on it if I told lots of people to call a different number than they normally do. The exchange serving me there, which is 212-777, has no ISDN. Indeed only two out of thirty-six exchanges in that CO support ISDN, I am told. But another of my exchanges, the Yorktown Heights central office, has *no* ISDN. None. Even if I change my number there. And another central office I call frequently, 212-787 (West 73rd Street) has *no* ISDN. None. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW (patent lawyer) Oppedahl & Larson Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 ------------------------------ From: michael oshea Subject: Re: Looping and Data Looping Organization: University of Virginia Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 00:38:25 GMT I am familiar with the term looping or data looping in the sense that it relates to testing a line from here to there to see if it is functioning properly. Some looping can also be done at various stages with the electronics at the distant end to determine if it is functioning properly. I do not know how this relates to fraud. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 11:31:06 CST From: kgriffin@ltec.com (Kyle Griffin) Subject: Re: PCS questions In response to Roy Thompson's queries regarding PCS: > what are the likely timeframes we will see for new infrastructure being > deployed? Given the FCC's rulemaking, and the congressional Budget Act, spectrum auctions are supposed to occur in early May, 1994. The FCC's rulemaking also outlines a build-out requirement that basically requires licensees to be _offering_ service to 33% of the population of their license area (either MTA or BTA) within five years of the granting of the license, 67% within seven years, and 90% within ten years. Several equipment vendors are saying they'll be rolling out equipment in the late '94 -- early '95 time frame. > Is there anything, other than frequency issues, that make the PCS > infrastructure much different from standard cellular networks? An interesting thing happened to PCS on the way to the FCC. When it was first introduced as a concept in the industry (see Bellcore Framework Advisory 90-1013), it was envisioned as a low-power, pedestrian-oriented service. A typical "cell" might serve a two to four block area, would accommodate 50-200 users, and would be designed for low-speed (<30 mph) traffic. Such a service might someday replace wireline voice and low-speed data service. But suddenly all sorts of light bulbs went on and all sorts of warning flags shot up. All sorts of players from all sorts of industries wanted to get in on this deal. The cellular industry, perhaps thinking they could "nip this thing in the bud", started saying, "We already do that. We ARE providing PCS. There's nothing new here. Cellular IS PCS." Meanwhile, the FCC is chomping at the bit to establish more competition in the cellular marketplace. Then they hear "cellular IS PCS", and they think "Here's the answer. Here's our competition for cellular." So, with the Commission's underlying agenda, and the barrage of input from all the would-be players, PCS evolved into a higher-power, wider-area concept that looks very much like cellular. So, in answer to your question, the main differences are that 1) PCS will operate at a much higher frequency (with different propagation and fading characteristics) and will require a different sort of RF transmission hardware, 2) PCS will start out as digital radio technology (which has it's own unique set of design considerations), and 3) PCS will be designed from the start to take advantage of existing and evolving Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) functionality, something the cellular carriers are having to try to "retrofit". > I suppose the micro and pico cell management will create some > uniqueness in the network. In that case (with a pico cell for example), > will more switches be required? In some major cities it is possible that more than one PCS switch will be used, but in most cases one switch will be sufficient. In most of the schematics I've seen, the "cell site" transmitters are referred to as base stations, and are connected to some sort of Base Station Controller. The BSC concentrates several base stations, and from what I can tell has enough intelligence to route calls that are local to itself without burdening the MSS. (Of course, it still must send the call information to the switch for administrative and billing purposes). > What are the unique requirements for implementing at 1.8 GHz? I'm not an RF engineer, but from what I understand the transmission characteristics, especially fading, are much more of an issue. This means that things like terrain, structures, and vegetation (as it changes seasonally) have much more impact on network design. > I understand, maybe incorrectly, that GSM uses TDMA ... You understand correctly. Actually, many of the proponents of using the GSM standard in the US are proposing a slightly modified version to take into account 1) the slightly different US spectrum allocation (utilizing more of the 1900 Mhz band) and 2) different transmission power and propagation patterns, given that most areas of the US are more sparsely populated than the areas of Europe where GSM has been deployed. > Also, as GSM becomes a defacto standard in the US, what happens to CDMA? Although there are strong proponents of making GSM (or a modified version) a US standard, there's no guarantee that will happen. The FCC has stated that they would rather let the market determine standards rather than dictate any. There are also proponents of CDMA. I've seen some of the TDMA-CDMA dialogue in this digest. I'm not on either "side" of the issue. From what I've read (from people not related to any company making either type of equipment), as well as an acquaintance at Bellcore, there is a general feeling that, as far as capacity is concerned, when all is said and done, they're going to come out about equal in terms of increased capacity over cellular AMPS (approximatly 7 to 1). > Isn't there an FCC regulation on wireless phones to support a dual-mode? There is no such regulation, at least to my knowledge. As I stated before, the FCC intends to let the market determine standards. In terms of cellular, I can pretty much guarantee that whether you buy a TDMA digital phone or a CDMA digital phone, it will be a "dual-mode" phone in that it will have the capability to fall back to an AMPS mode of operation (since it will be a while before digital makes any serious inroads, and AMPS is everywhere). In terms of PCS, I don't know that I would hold my breath waiting for a TDMA-CDMA dual-mode phone. Maybe somebody will make one someday, but I'm guessing it will be difficult enough to make the PCS handsets lightweight, compact, and affordable using one technology, let alone two. At any rate, I hope this has addressed some of your questions. Kyle Griffin The Lincoln Telephone Company kgriffin@ltec.com ------------------------------ From: Glenn Inn Subject: Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice Organization: Latitude Communications, Inc. Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 18:00:53 GMT In article , writes: > Because my son is handicapped, he needs a lot of ferrying around from > place to place. I'm considering getting a car phone for my wife (who > does over 50% of the ferrying) just for peace of mind. > Anyway, I figure there has to be some underlying principals to follow; > aspects of things that I may not have thought of; so I'd welcome > advice or being pointed to a FAQ. This is the second person who's asked a "help choosing cellular phone" question. I'm going to write my choice/decision process because I sympathize with just how painful it is to pick a phone. (I spent over a year choosing). It sounded like you prefer a vehicular phone. When I searched, I was in the market for a portable -- I ended up with the Oki 900. Why? I found that All the "hi-end" portables were the same (clarity, and tx signal). It all boiled down to "software" features -- and the Oki (at that time) beat everyone else hands down. 200 number Alpha-memory, 189 speed dial's, paging, online help, to name a few. Now for vehicular, Oki has its "800" series of car phones. Many of the 900's features are in the 800-line. The Oki 830 is the top of the line. Another kicker: the Cellular-1 salesman who helped me? He had an Oki car phone and swore by it. gLENN Inn Latitude Communications inn@latitude.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 14 Dec 93 12:58:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) > Because my son is handicapped, he needs a lot of ferrying around from > place to place. I'm considering getting a car phone for my wife (who > does over 50% of the ferrying) just for peace of mind. In Ontario canada there is a special rate for blind users. See if you can get a special handicap rate for your area. ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 15 Dec 1993 01:41 GMT Subject: Re: Terse 800 Failure ... Oh My! sp9183@swuts.sbc.com (Scott M. Pfeffer) writes: > In any event, I got the following: > "Click" > High-paid male announcer's voice saying > "A system error has occurred. Goodbye." > "Click" > Weird. I wonder who the carrier was ...? I wonder where the problem > was ...? > I wonder what this world has come to ...? Reminds me of the old days > when terse young men used to serve as operators (way before any of us > were cognitive human beings ...) Every now and then, when I place a call from behing the PBX at my office there is a long delay wherein nothing happens, then I get: *click* (Background sounds of a very noisy equipement room) Slighly annoyed male voice: We're sorry; your call did not go through. *click* It sounds so different from the usual telco breathless-woman intercepts, that when I encounter it I always get a mental image of a switchroom with a very harried technician, trying to fix some problem, but constantly interrupted by misrouted calls, which he picks up, barks at, and hangs up. Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com A Series System Software Unisys Corporation [Please forward bounce messages Mission Viejo, CA to: rgellens@mcimail.com] Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #819 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16698; 16 Dec 93 4:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23059 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:51 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21260 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:27 -0600 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312160706.AA21260@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #820 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Dec 93 01:07:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 820 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Ecolinking" by Rittner (Rob Slade) Executone CPI - Far Too Expensive? (Harry Skelton) Need Information on T1's and Equipment (Lee Havemann) Dedicated Line Provivsioning Systems (Yohan) 5ESS Questions (Tom Ace) NEC Information Needed (Antonio Saponaro) Cellular Phone on a PC Board (Filippo Tripiciano) Low-Bandwidth Speech (Ulrich Neumann) Magazine Contacts Wanted (Brian Combs) Help Wanted Restoring WECO '64 Six Button Set (Thomas P. Brisco) Call For Papers and Panel Session Proposals (Bing Gao) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Dec 93 15:22 -0600 From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Ecolinking" by Rittner BKECOLNK.RVW 931117 PeachPit 2414 6th St. Berkeley, CA 94710 510-548-4393 fax: 510-548-5991 800-283-9444 "Ecolinking", Rittner, 1992, U$18.95/C$23.95 donr@aol.com 70057.1325@compuserve.com drittner@uacsc1.albany.edu Working in computer virus research, I can have a lot of sympathy with those involved in the environmental movement. Both fields can be relatively unpopular. Both suffer from the fact that a "critical mass" of concerned individuals cannot often be gathered in one place. Both fields are multi-disciplinary, and require input from experts in a variety of fields. The only reason the virus research community has survived at all, is because of computer communications networks. It is quite reasonable to assume that computer networks would be of help to the environmental activist, wherever located. Rittner's book, indeed, gives numerous examples and case studies of computer links giving victory to the environmental side -- sometimes just in the nick of time. It is both introduction and resource for those who are interested in using the new computer communications tools in their ecological work and study. Part one (or, more accurately, chapter two) is an introduction to "The Basics" of getting online, dealing briefly with modems, communications software, and communications functions. Very briefly. As noted in chapter one, those involved with computers will find nothing new here. Newcomers, however, are advised to take the advice of chapter one and find a local friend for help. You are unlikely to get online successfully, with only this as your guide. As far as it goes, however, it is a reasonably good primer, with only a few idiosyn- cracies such as "8-0-1" for what most online people would call "8N1". I was happy to see a mention of virus checking, although, since most ecological researchers would be primarily interested in information, some discussion of data versus program files might be in order. Still, I suppose it's best to err on the side of caution. I was also pleased to note the brief discussion of online etiquette. Given the strong emotions involved in the environmental movement this could be quite important. It is difficult to see why parts two, three and four are separate parts. Certainly there are differences in price, interface and availability, but functionally, the similarities are greater than the differences between bulletin boards, networks and commercial services in regard to communications and access to information. Quarterman's "The Matrix" (cf. BKMATRIX.RVW) is obviously admired: its structure has also been copied. This is appropriate to a technical reference work, but, for the computer communications neophyte, a structuring of features, with discussions of the differences, by system, might have been more helpful. As it is, the VAX and Mac specific references may occasionally confuse the reader using other systems. To be fair, though, Rittner has obviously worked hard to try and keep technical matters as generic as possible. The US-centric listings of systems and access may be more of a problem for international readers. Part five, "Libraries That Never Close," demonstrates to a certain extent the enormous quantity of information now available either online or on disk. The appendices are rather odd. The first lists communications software, and states that many are cheap or free. Kermit, however, which is available (basically) free for any system, is listed only for the Mac. Appendix B is a list of Internet mailing lists with an environmental bent. Very useful -- but the Fidonet, BITNET and Usenet lists are printed within their respective chapters. Appendix C lists gateway services that provide access to the nets, this time *definitely* US-centric, while D is a sample BBS session. The most useful part of the book will likely be the listings of various environmental Fidonet "echoes," BITNET "listservs," Usenet "newsgroups," and Internet distribution lists. While these tend to be somewhat ephemeral, the wealth of research done here will quite possibly save you years, in getting linked into the proper channels. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993 BKECOLNK.RVW 931117 Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of TELECOM Digest and associated mailing lists only. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ From: zorba@netcom.com (Harry Skelton) Subject: Executone CPI - Far Too Expensive? Organization: USS Enterprise Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1993 22:30:03 GMT A bit ago our Executone rep. gave us a quote of $17,000 for software/hardware to allow our computer to access and control the Executone system directly via a Computer Port Interface (CPI). This, in my opinion, is far too expensive. This considering that it cost us $20,000 for the system. I was told directly that the cost involved is more involved in granting us permission to access and control the system than it is for software or hardware to allow this. Not being of a deep telcom background, the company found this cost ludirous. Especially since we OWN the system and it only cost us $20k in the first place. My questions are: 1. Is there a way I can gain control over the CPI without Executone's 'help'. 2. Is there an inexpensive, T1 capable, 30 phone system available that would allow us to control it? Something cheaper than the $17k? 3. Has anyone delt with Executone on this issue? If so, what happened in your environment? 4. Are there other Executone offices that might give me a better price or is this a case of proprietary schemes raised to the limits? i.e. I'm SOL? Many thanks!! Harry Skelton - 1848 Beaver Dam Lane - Marietta, Georgia - 30062 404-590-7100 or 800-366-8181 Work -- 404-578-8085 Home skelton@jdp.dragon.com ------------------------------ From: Lee Havemann Subject: Need Information on T1's and Equipment Date: 15 Dec 93 12:54:33 EST Organization: HSH Associates We are faced with the possibility of having to install a T1 on our premises, and as I am not familiar with this technology, I thought I would turn to the net for help. We would be averaging approx 50,000 minutes/month over a T1, of which 12 lines would go do a dedicated fax broadcast system. The system (using gammaLink hardware) is supposedly T1 ready. The other 12 lines would go into a Premier 24/60 phone system which is not equipped for T1. Our phone carrier says we need two channel banks, one at their POP, and one at our location to make this work. My questions: Where can I get some more info on T1's and related equipment? What do these channel banks do? Are they just a kind of digital to analog converters? Why do I need _2_ channel banks? Can I buy these channel banks from another source (preferably cheaper than paying $500/month lease from our LDC?) Does anybody else out there have any T1's installed who can answer these (and other :-) questions for me? Any info would be gratefully appreciated! Lee Havemann, Comp Ops Dir. HSH Associates (201) 838-3330 Internet: lee@hsh.com Compuserve: 70410,3507 AOL: HSH Assoc "Any opinions expressed are not necessarily those of anyone else, including myself." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 14:30:00 PST From: Yohan Subject: Dedicated Line Provivsioning Systems I am doing a study on dedicated line provisioning systems (Fractional T1, T1, T3 ). I am looking for information regarding relevant services offered by IXCs, RBOC or CAPS, the cycle times involved for provisioning and some information regarding the underlying provisioning processes and systems. If anyone can answer some of these questions or point me towards some sources I would appreciate it. Thank you in advance. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 16:30:57 -0800 From: tea@netcom.com (Tom Ace) Subject: 5ESS Questions A recent article (in a magazine not noted for thoroughgoing and authoritative reporting) discussed the White House phone system, and included the following statement: Now, stuffing a 5ESS in the White House basement would have been impressive and it would have given the Clinton Administration the telecommunications power of a city roughly the size of New York, give or take a couple of boroughs. Sensing overkill, the Clinton administration went with the cheaper Definity G3R PBXs. Could someone knowledgeable about the 5ESS please tell me: 1) I assume that a 5ESS can be had in different configurations, suitable for different numbers of subscribers. What's the minimum number of lines appropriate for a 5ESS installation, and what's the maximum number of lines a 5ESS could be configured for? 2) Does it even make sense to suggest a 5ESS for a PBX application like the White House? Tom Ace tea@netcom.com ------------------------------ Subject: NEC Information Needed Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 1:50:37 CET From: Antonio Saponaro I'm looking for technical informations about Nec cellular telephones, like service manuals and programming tips. Can anyone help me? Antonio Saponaro ------------------------------ From: phil@sibilla.it56.bull.it (Filippo Tripiciano ) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 11:49:34 MET Subject: Cellular Phone on a PC Board I'm looking for a PC board (possibly AT compatible) that provides a direct connectivity to a cellular phone line. In fact, what I'm really trying to do is to build a system that connect to a remote site (using cellular phone network) without having a modem connected to a cellular phone device. Any help would be appreciated. :-) Please answer by e-mail. My correct e-mail address is: f.tripiciano@it56.bull.it Filippo Tripiciano BULL HN Italia Voice: +39-2-6779 2553 Via del Parlamento 33 FAX: +39-2-6779 2439 ------------------------------ From: neumann@cs.unc.edu (Ulrich Neumann) Subject: Low-Bandwidth Speech Date: 15 Dec 1993 20:31:38 GMT Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Does anyone have knowledge of very low bandwidth speech communications systems? I'm looking for <10K bits/sec technology for toll-quality speech. Please email pointer to algorithms and/or hardware to: neumann@cs.unc.edu Thanks, UN ------------------------------ From: combs@quadralay.com (Brian Combs) Subject: Magazine Contacts Wanted Date: 15 Dec 1993 22:19:21 GMT Organization: Quadralay Corporation If anyone has any information about the following magazine (i.e. contact info, whether they are still publishing, etc.) I would be very grateful if you would e-mail the information to me. The list is as follows: Sun World PC Week Communication Week Communications of the ACM Computer World Data Communication Datamation Information Week EDN Electronic Design Electronic Products Electronics EDN News ECN Electronic News EE Product News I would prefer e-mail over a response posting as I do not normally read TELECOM Digest. However, I am perfectly willing to forward information I receive to interested parties. Thanks, Brian Combs Tel: 512-346-9199 Fax: 512-794-9997 Quadralay Corporation FTP Address: ftp.quadralay.com combs @ quadralay.com WWW Server: www.quadralay.com ------------------------------ From: brisco@hercules.rutgers.edu (Thomas P. Brisco) Subject: Help Wanted Restoring WECO '64 Six Button Set Date: 15 Dec 93 21:30:48 GMT Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. During a "rotary unit decom" sweep last summer (yes, we're just getting rid of all of the old rotary units) I managed to get my paws on a six button rotary set -- the bottom is marked "565HK 2-64" - presumably 1964 unit, and some of the guts bear this out. (BTW: Can anyone fill me in on the 565HK bit?). What is odd (or odd to me) about this unit is that the push button/lights are round -- not square. Anyway, I just (today) came across a "harmonica" to RJ11 converter for this beastie (one Radio Shack claimed to not have them, another had it on the wall -- go figure) so I can hook my conventional home lines into it. I get tone and can dial fine, but the bell and appropriate light doesn't work. I took off the shell, and the internals had been modified (pretty badly -- it's hard to tell if it's Bell work or not :-) for a RJ11. (I can't get anything if I plug my line into that - but I'm not concerned there). There appears to have been about four wires moved off of the wiring block in there -- does anyone know where I can get schematics for this puppy? I'd dearly love to hear that old jangle again, blinkey lights are, of course, a thrill. I've got an old 30-or-so button set also, which I can cannibalize if necessary (though I'd like to get that working -- if only for kicks). While I'm here; the unit is a bit dirty, and has some of the required "911/Emergency" sticker on it (which gives you a clue how recently it was used :-). Any hints on cleaning this thing? I'm reluctant to throw chemicals on it. Additionally, I'd like to get new paper inserts for the dial and buttons -- any clue on those? (BTW: I just took apart the handset, it looks like wax paper in the speaker, and the inside of the speaker cap is marked 2-64 also -- so I don't believe it's been refurb'd). From the top: 1) Schematics for WECO '64 era 6 button set? 2) Suggestions on cleaning the plastic/metal? 3) Where to get new paper inserts? (Maybe I'll just ask my local repair person) Thanks for any pointers/tips ... The dial and face-plate are metal, but the handset and casing are _heavy_ plastic -- was this at the beginning of the "plastic era"? Can anyone recommend any books that might detail the construction of the phones over the years? While this one is pretty nice, I think a '50's period piece would be even nicer. It adds a nice bit of charm to my den. [Moderator's Note: All the six button (five line plus hold) phones until sometime in the 1960's had round buttons rather than square ones. I think your phone is made of very hard rubber rather than heavy plastic. Does it have a curly cord between the handset and the phone or a straight cord? Straight cords were used until about the same time, and cloth cords (as opposed to rubber covering) were also common until during the 1950's. The phone you have also requires a control box (a rather big, ugly unit) which hangs on the wall nearby *if* you want the hold button to work and the lights to flash when the phone rings or a line is put on hold. Obviously you can wire five lines into it if you don't mind doing without hold and the lights. The other thing you can do is modify it a little so you use the six buttons to handle *three* lines with a hold button for each line. i.e. line one, line one hold; line two, line two hold; and line three, line three hold. You don't need the control box for that, just re-arrange the wires in the phone itself so each of three lines goes to two buttons, but with every other button terminated right there and *not* getting back to the receiver. Then, you also have to do a little surgery and castrate the phone -- cut those balls out from up in front under the buttons. See the little ball-bearings under the buttons which slide back and forth, forcing one button to rise when another is pressed down, and see how the hold button on the left end is spring loaded so it comes back up anyway when pressed? Maybe button six has the same spring loading in it in the event the former owner was using one of the lines for ICOM and the last button for the ICOM signal. Fix those so that *two* or more buttons can be made to stay down at the same time, i.e. line 'x' hold-path and line 'y' talking-path. Basically what you will then have is the GTE (Automatic Electric) ver- sion of a multiline phone from the 1940-50 era since theirs had three lines and three hold buttons. For extra points, pick up a DC transformer at Radio Shack and fix things so those buttons at least light up when you are off hook on one of them (or on hold on one of your three lines if you go that way) even if you can't get them to flash in rythmn with the ringing cadence lacking the control box. If you prefer, get a few neon test lamps; they'll sit there on the line without causing any disturbance since they don't illuminate until they get 90 volts or so. Squeeze one behind each of the six buttons or at least behind the buttons with lines. That will cause your buttons to flash when the associated line rings (but not stay lit while you are talking). Have fun and report back to us, y'hear? Those old phones can make such great hobbyist kits on their own merits. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gaob@azalea.cis.ufl.edu (Bing Gao) Subject: Call For Papers and Panel Session Proposals Date: 15 Dec 1993 22:00:22 GMT Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept. CALL FOR PAPERS and Panel Session Proposals COMPSAC 94 The Eighteenth Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference Conference: November 9 - 11, 1994 International Convention Center, Taipei Professional Development Seminars: November 7 - 8, 1994 Science and Technology Building, Taipei The conference is a major international forum for researchers, practioners, managers and policy makers interested in computer software and applications as well as software industry. Original papers and panel session proposals on various research and practical aspects as well as future trends are invited. It is anticipated that leaders and experts from industry, academia and governments will participate in the program. The following topics are examples of sessions planned for the conference. Special sessions facilitating the presentation of timely results from the industry will be arranged for those papers with presentation material only. * Software Development and Maintenance Paradigms and Environments * Software Quality Assurance, Process Improvement and Maturity Models * Software Reliability, Security and Safety * Risk Assessment and Management of Large-Scale Software Projects * Re-engineering, Reverse Engineering, Reuse and Customization * Software Metrics and Modeling * Software Development for Distributed and Parallel Processing systems * Co-design of Hardware and Software for Application Specific Systems * Interoperability in Systems and Tools * Large-Scale Software System Integration * Formal Methods * AI Tools and Techniques * Data and Knowledge Bases * Computer-Aided Support for Document Preparation * Advances in CASE * Interactive Computing and Groupware * Multimedia Systems and Virtual Reality * Software Engineering Education * Applications: Government Services, Telecommunications, Banking Systems, Health Care, Entertainment, Consumer Electronics. * Industry Trends: Downsizing, Outsourcing, Off-Shore Software Support. * Legal and Social Issues of Computer Software Information for Authors for formal papers (included in the proceedings): * Mail six copies of an original (not submitted or published elsewhere) paper (double space) of 3000-5000 words. * Include the title of the paper, the name and alliiation of each author, a 150-word abstract and no more than 8 keywords. * Include the name, position, address, telephone numbers, and if possible, fax numbers and e-mail address of the author responsible for correspondence of the paper Information for Authors for providing presentation material only: ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ * The presentation material of all accepted papers in this category will appear in a bound conference record. * Mail six copies of an original paper with the title and a 300-word abstract to the Program Chair. * Include the name, position, address, telephone number, and if possible, fax number and e-mail address of the author responsible for the correspondence of the presentation. Information for Panel Organizers: * Send six copies of panel proposals to the Program Chair. * Include the title, a 150-word scope statement, proposed session chair and panelists and their affiliations and locations, the organizer's affiliation, address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address. IMPORTANT DEADLINES: * March 1, 1994 all papers and panel proposals due * April 1, 1994 panel organizers notified of acceptance * April 20, 1994 organizers of accepted panel proposals provide final information on session chairs and panelists * May 16, 1994 au;thors notified of acceptance * July 12, 1994 camera-ready copies of accepted papers and panelists' position papers to be included in the conference proceedings due * September 20, 1994 camer-ready copies of presentation material of accepted paperd to be included in the conference record due Program Chair C. V. Ramamoorthy University of California at Berkeley Department of Ele