Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25747; 22 Aug 95 19:25 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA17973 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 12:08:16 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA17964; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 12:08:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 12:08:14 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508221708.MAA17964@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #351 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Aug 95 12:08:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 351 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "CDMA: Principles of Spread Spectrum Communication" (R. Slade) Billing Goofups (Gary Novosielski) Convert DID Voice System to ISDN BRI Voice System (Rick Strobel) CFP: 4th UK/Australian Int. Symposium on DSP (Tadeusz Wysocki) Telecommunications Short Courses (Bill Bond) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 01:40:52 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "CDMA: Principles of Spread Spectrum Communication" BKCDMASS.RVW 950526 "CDMA: Principles of Spread Spectrum Communication", Andrew Viterbi, 1995, 0- 201-63374-4, U$59.25 %A Andrew Viterbi %C 1 Jacob Way, Reading, MA 01867-9984 %D 1995 %G 0-201-63374-4 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Company %O U$59.25 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 markj@aw.com tiffanym@aw.com %O 800-822-6339 617-944-3700 Fax: (617) 944-7273 %P 272 %T "CDMA: Principles of Spread Spectrum Communication" The use of a "spread spectrum", or multiple frequencies, for communication is known in some frequency-division multiplexed local area networks, and in some proprietary high-speed modems. Its use in wireless communications has historically been limited to the military, where the reliability and security in hostile environments have been worth the additional engineering. With the increasing use of, and interest in, mobile and cellular communications, code- division multiple access (CDMA) technology is quite desirable. As well as security, it offers much greater efficiencies of available bandwidth, location and velocity information, and improved "hand off" performance when crossing cell boundaries. Intended as a text for a graduate course in electrical engineering or communications, the book covers advanced topics in frequency reuse and bandwidth, synchronization, power considerations, interleaving and other topics. (Students are advised to keep texts from earlier courses as Viterbi does not always define terms or acronyms, and there are errors in the index.) While principles are outlined, the bulk of the book is devoted to detailed calculations of the practicalities of CDMA design. Chapter six is specifically devoted to the design of digital cellular systems. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKCDMASS.RVW 950526. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. Vancouver roberts@decus.ca | "Metabolically Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca | challenged" Research into slade@freenet.victoria.bc.ca | User rslade@CyberStore.ca | politically correct Security Canada V7K 2G6 | term for "dead" ------------------------------ From: gary.novosielski@sbaonline.gov Organization: Small Business Administration Date: Mon, 21 Aug 95 14:13:08 -0400 Subject: Billing Goof-ups > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About twenty years ago I had a situation > such as you describe. I had a business line with an unusually high number > of local message units on it for about three months in a row. The phone > office serving that number had just about the same time been converted > to ESS. I had almost a mirror image experience to yours on my residence line about the time our local central office cut over to ESS in the early '80s. I suddenly *stopped* getting long distance charges altogether. Calls to numbers within my home NPA (201) got billed as usual, but anything with a foreign area code simply didn't show up on my bill. (This was before the "breakup," so everything was normally billed by New Jersey Bell regardless of destination. Still, something "different" about long-distance billing was clearly in place already.) I suspected something went wrong in the reprogramming of the new central office, but I didn't call NJB, since I was curious to see how long it would take for them to discover it on their own. I was careful to put aside the "savings" on the phone bill each month, since I was certain the day would come when they discovered the error and demanded payment. As the months dragged on, I found myself paying a little less attention to how long I stayed on the phone, or how many times I dialed an out-of-town BBS, but I didn't go nuts. Still, it was a full year before I got a "that call" at work from my wife. She said a nice lady from the phone company had called and started off the conversation with "Are you sitting down?" (always a bad sign) and had left a number. I called. It wasn't all that bad. My LD bill had run up to a tad over 700 bucks. I tried to sound surprised, but I don't know how well I did. It turns out, says the "nice lady," that when they reprogrammed the CO, my telephone number (let's say NNX-6147, was erroneously programmed to appear on the bill of a local business who had seven trunks beginning with 6140. Somebody added in their head and forgot to start counting with zero, it seems. She couldn't explain why my short-distance calls weren't affected. Anyway, the business hadn't noticed anything odd for a year, but finally questioned the numbers they were seeing, and got the phone company to discover their snafu and issue them a credit. I asked for and received a full listing of the calls, and sure enough they seemed to be familiar for the most part, but I figured it couldn't hurt to try and cut a deal with Telco. I called them and said that even though I couldn't remember every call I'd made for the past year, let's assume for the sake of argument that all the calls were mine. Did they expect me to just write them a check for 700 dollars? No, no, said the "nice lady." Since the billing error was their mistake, they were prepared to accept a small amount each month. How much? Oh, say, five or ten bucks tacked on to each bill. So we're talking about six to twelve years before they would recover the full amount, right? Um, yeah, she guessed that was right. Well, if she'd accept fifty cents on the dollar, I offered, I'd write her a check the next day, and we'd call it even, and what did she think about that? Well, she wasn't prepared to do the math in her head, but she was clearly familiar with the concept of Net Present Value, which rather precisely calculates what a bird in the hand is worth, in terms of birds in the bush, at a given interest rate (which back then would have been double digit). Uh, could she call me back in fifteen minutes? Sure. Three minutes later, the phone rang. She had talked to her supervisor, she said. And? And, just to confirm, I *had* said the $350 would be in the mail *tomorrow* right? Yup -- first thing in the morning, I assured her. "Done," she says. "Let me give you a post office box number to mail it to." And I haven't seen a billing error since. GaryN GPN Consulting gnovosielski@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: About 1976 I had a case similar to that. I was living in a building which had a switchboard for the tenants at the front desk and I decided to get my own personal phone installed as well. They put in my phone but never sent me a bill for anything, period, for about one year. Apparently plant never sent the paperwork to the accounting department saying the installation was complete. Since in those days we had a category of service where you got unlimited local calling (which is what I had ordered), provided there were no coin-rated calls on the bill (which I was careful to avoid) there was never any reason for anything to hit the accounting department out of the ordinary. Then one day some #$&^# phreak somewhere made a phraud thirty-party call and billed it to my number. Hmmm ... well of course the charges were forwarded to Illinois Bell from whatever telco was involved (or maybe it was intra- LATA all via Illinois Bell, I don't remember) and the end result was when the charges got into the system they 'fell out' for lack of an account to bill them to. Unbillable charges go into a suspense account and there are clerks whose job it is to be constantly cleaning out the suspense ledger and moving the charges to where they belong. This can be done by charging it back to the telco from which it originated, or by trying to investigate locally, etc. As part of the investigative process, if it is just a couple dollars or less then the clerks usually write it off on the assumption it costs more to do the paperwork charging it back to the other telco and arguing with the other telco about it ("you sent it to us"; "no we didn't, you must have gotten it from another telco"). And sometimes for whatever reason in those days the paperwork would get so mutilated and banged up they did not know where they got the charge from so they had to write it off. This time around, someone decided to dial the number and see if it was actually in service or not. Of course it rang; of course I answered. Bingo, that set off an audit with accounting making an inquiry of plant to see what the actual status of the line was. Plant reconstructed what paperwork they had on it and accounting had to turn on the service after the fact. Like yourself, I had been putting aside money for that day, and one day here comes a bill in the mail for installation charges and monthly service for about *one year* to date. Like yourself, I made a fuss about it, but not a very loud one. I mean, I knew what I was doing all along, so I had no legitimate gripe. I could have inquired about it a year before I did. They did however take off the phraud call which had been billed to me, and the supervisor got a big laugh out of the way things had all come together. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rstrobel@infotime.com (Rick Strobel) Subject: Convert DID Voice System to ISDN BRI Voice System Date: 21 Aug 1995 23:41:52 GMT Organization: InfoTime Could someone please help me find a solution to this problem: I need to replace DID circuits with ISDN BRI. Here's how my current system works: There are several DID trunks connected to an Exacom DID SF-200 interface box, which is connected to a Dialogic voice card on a voice mail system. There are 140 phone numbers assigned to the DID trunks. When a call comes in, the Exacom box signals the voice card and passes the last 4 digits of the phone number to the voice card. The voice mail system then answers, looks up the 4 digit number and then plays the associated greeting. The main problem is that DID circuits are very expensive in my area (the other, less important for now, issues include that DID is inbound only, and I feel that ISDN would be a better technology for the future). ISDN can provide the same functionality for 1/3 the monthly cost. Here's what I want: I want an ISDN device that will accept an ISDN line on one end and provide two analog phone lines on the other. The analog lines should be able to signal my voice card in the same way that the Exacom box does (in band DTMF). (If that is not possible I may be able to take the signalling info from a D channel via (maybe) a serial interface, that would provide the info out of band. But the former is MUCH preferred). Exacom said they were going to make a product like this in the future, the rep called it an ISDN to loop converter with DTMF. They did not provide a time-table, so I suspect it would be at least a year or more -- so I don't want to wait for them. If there's not an off-the-shelf product for this, I'd be interested in any tips on how I could build one myself. BTW, I've contacted all the vendors I could think of, and nobody seems to have anything remotely close. There were a lot of PRI devices, but not BRI. Can anyone recommend any products, vendors, etc that may be able to help me convert from DID to ISDN? Any and all advice is welcomed and REALLY appreciated. Rick Strobel InfoTime Fax Communications voice: 502-426-4279 fax: 502-426-3721 email: rstrobel@infotime.com ------------------------------ From: Tadeusz Wysocki Subject: CFP: 4th UK/Australian Int. Symp. on DSP for Communication Systems Date: 22 Aug 1995 13:01:26 GMT Organization: Edith Cowan University 4th UK/AUSTRALIAN INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON DSP FOR COMUNICATION SYSTEMS CO-SPONSORED BY: IEEE, CRC for BTN, IEE EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY, JOONDALUP CAMPUS, PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA SEPTEMBER 23-27, 1996 Communication System worldwide have provided a rapidly growing a useful services and are continuing to evolve using Digital Signal Processing. UK/Australian International Symposium was planned by a group of academics and professionals from both Australia and the UK to examine the plans for the future and the progress that has already been made in the field of DSP and their applications to communication systems. The organising committee of the symposium decided to hold the 4th UK/Australian Symposium on DSP for Communication Systems in Perth from 23 - 27 September 1996. A major objective of the symposium will be to pursue the progression from communication and information theory through to the implementation, evaluation and performance of practical communication systems using DSP technology. Papers are invited over the full range of Communication System, Communication Theory and Signal Processing. Examples of such areas are: Error Control Coding Modulation, Demodulation & Multiple Access Data Compression & Speech Coding Channel Characterisation Simulation & Modelling Synchronisation DSP Algorithms & Applications Information Theory Cryptography & Protocols Implementation Consideration Design & Analysis Paper will be reviewed on the basis of extended abstracts of about 1000 words. S e n d A b s t r a c t s t o: DR S H Razavi School of Electrical & Computer Engineering Curtin University of Technology GPO BOX U1987 PERTH WA 6001 AUSTRALIA Fax: 619.351.2584 Email: Razavi_SH@cc.Curtin.edu.au S e n d A b s t r a c t s from E u r o p e, A f r i c a and the M i d d l e E a s t to: Prof. B Honary School of Engineering, Computing & Mathematical Sciences Lancaster University LANCASTER LAI 4YR UK Fax: 441.524.594207 Email: B.Honary@Lancaster.ac.uk D e a d l i n e: Extended Abstract: 31 January 1996 Notification of Acceptance: 15 April 1996 Camera Ready Copies: 15 June 1996 I n q u i r i e s: All correspondence concerning the symposium organisation should be addressed to: Dr. T Wysocki CRC, Australian Telecommunications Research Institute Curtin University of Technology GPO Box U1987, PERTH WA 6001 AUSTRALIA Fax: 619.351.3244 Email: Tad@ATRI.Curtin.edu.au or T.Wysocki@cowan.edu.au O r g a n i s i n g C o m m i t t e e Prof. A Cantoni (CRC for BTN) Australian Telecommunications Research Institute Dr. H Razavi (CRC for BTN) Curtin University of Technology Dr. T Wysocki (CRC for BTN) Edith Cowan University Prof. B Honary (Lancaster University) United Kingdom Dr. H Eren (Electrical & Computer Engineering) Curtin University of Technology ------------------------------ From: bond@utdallas.edu Subject: Telecommunications Short Courses Date: 21 Aug 1995 15:29:21 -0500 Organization: The University of Texas at Dallas Telecommunications Short Courses September - October, 1995 The University of Texas at Dallas Center for Continuing Education P.O. Box 830688, CN 1.1 Richardson, Texas 75083-0688 (214) 883-2204 ADAPTIVE SIGNAL PROCESSING IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS Adaptive signal processing algorithms are central to network echo cancellation, speech enhancement and acoustic echo cancellation (for hands-free teleconferencing and wireless communications), channel equalization, interference rejection in CDMA cellular, smart antennas, and active noise control. The course will give an overview of the Least Means Squares (LMS) and Recursive Least Squares (RLS) adaptive filter algorithms. It will focus on how these algorithms are used in the above telecommunications applications. September 11-12, 1995; 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.; UTD Conference Center; Instructor, Eric Dowling, Ph.D.; fee - $595, CEU's 1.4; for additional information, call Barbara Johnson at (214) 883-2204. MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING In the past decade, the mobile communications industry has enjoyed an exponential growth in its customer base. This has forced many industries to respond to the demands of this exciting field. This course introduces engineers and other professionals to the basic elements of mobile communications engineering. Principle, practice, and system overview of mobile systems will be discussed. The main objective of this two-day course is not to provide an in-depth coverage of all the elements of this field, but to focus on the key elements, such as cell geometry, cochannel interference, modulation schemes, and channel effects. The key elements of TDMA and CDMA emerging digital cellular systems will be introduced. Subsequently, a comparison of these emerging systems in the face of channel impairments will be discussed in terms of the performance measures introduced in this course. September 15-16, 1995; 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.; UTD Conference Center; Instructor, Kamran, Kiasaleh, Ph.D.; fee - $595; CEU's 1.4; for additional information, call Barbara Johnson at (214) 883-2204. OBJECT-ORIENTED ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Object-Oriented Programming has become the methodology of choice in the 1990's. This course aims to equip students with knowledge of the principles of sound analysis and design techniques for programs that will be implemented in C++ or Smalltalk. Students will learn by experience as designs are formulated through the use of several case studies. The chosen methodology will mainly be based on Rumbaugh's OMT, although brief overviews of FUSION and Booch's methodology will also be given. September 21-22, 1995; 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.; UTD Conference Center; Instructor, Ivor Page, Ph.D.; fee - $595; CEU's 1.4; for additional informa- tion, call Barbara Johnson at (214) 883-2204. VIDEO DIAL TONE Video-based services, such as Video Dial Tone (VDT), are witness- ing rapid growth. This growth is likely to accelerate as some of the regulatory barriers faced by cable companies, local exchange carriers and interexchange carriers are removed by the Congress. In order to meet the higher bandwidth requirements of the video signals, telephone and cable companies are introducing new transport and switching technologies in the network. The stan- dards organizations such as ITU-TS and committee T1 and the ATM Forum are also defining new standards for handling video servic- es. This course is designed to bring students up-to-date with the market dynamics of the video industry and to provide techni- cal details, from data storage to different delivery architec- tures for the VDT services. September 25-26, 1995; 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.; UTD Conference Center; Instructor, Sudhir Gupta; fee - $595; CEU's 1.4; for additional information, call Barbara Johnson at (214) 883-2204. DESIGN OF FIBER COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS The design of high data rate/bandwidth short haul and long haul fiber communications systems is becoming important because of the high demand for large data rate/bandwidth transmission. Efforts are on the way to seamlessly connect the cellular networks to fiber networks whereby more services can be offered. This course introduces engineers, scientists and managers working in the telecommunications industries to the basic elements of fiber communication. Principle, design, practice and system overview of analog and digital fiber communication will be discussed. After completing the two-day course, the participants will have enough knowledge to understand, design as well as to evaluate digital and analog fiber systems. Design of 10Gbits/s digital systems, fiber communication for video transmission, wavelength division multiplexed systems, systems with concatenated fiber amplifiers, dispersion compensators and external modulators are some of the topics that will be discussed. The data rate impair- ments due to nonlinearity and methods to combat them will also be discussed. October 17-18, 1995; 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.; UTD Conference Center; Instructor, Lakshman Tamil, Ph.D., fee - $595; CEU's 1.4; for additional information, call Barbara Johnson at (214) 883-2204. Bill Bond bond@utdallas.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #351 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26741; 22 Aug 95 20:38 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA22847 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:21:20 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA22833; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:21:13 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:21:13 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508221921.OAA22833@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #352 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Aug 95 14:21:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 352 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Newsletter on 800,900 Numbers: inTELigence (Judith Oppenheimer) Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Fritz Whittington) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Bob Goudreau) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Wes Leatherock) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (James E. Bellaire) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Patrick L. Humphrey) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Carl Moore) Re: Shanghai to Raise Telephone Numbers to Eight Digits (Sam Spens Clason) Re: Shanghai to Raise Telephone Numbers to Eight Digits (Michael Jennings) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Judith Oppenheimer Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:56:15 -0400 Subject: New Newsletter on 800, 900 Numbers: inTELigence Newsletter Separates Fact From Fiction For Users Of 800, 900 Telephone Services New York, NY -- The alleged exhaustion of available 800 telephone numbers and proposed new rules on how the system is to be administrated has spawned a newsletter to keep users of 800 and 900 exchanges up-to-date. inTELigence, published by Interactive CallBrand, tracks actions being considered by the rule-making bodies involved as well as proposals from the telephone service providers. "We separate fact from rumor," said Judith Oppenheimer, president of Interactive CallBrand. "The newsletter tracks the regulators and the service providers and compares their claims with what's actually going on in the marketplace. That way we can advise users about what proposals they may want to make to the rule-making bodies." Several months ago regulators became concerned about the dwindling supply of 800 numbers and they predicted the current supply could be exhausted by February, 1996. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and other bodies are reviewing how to allocate the current supply of numbers and is overseeing the addition of a new 888 toll-free exchange which is supposed to be ready for use in March, 1996. "The next few months will be critical and proposed rules will be changing from week to week. Our clients needed some way to keep up and that's why we started inTELigence," Oppenheimer said. Interactive CallBrand and its clients are concerned that doubling the toll-free database will cause quality of service to be compromised. A decline in service could mean slower phone service for customers who have come to depend upon the 800 and 900 systems. inTELigence will also be monitoring plans by service providers to educate the public about the new 888 service and changes in the telephone system that may be needed to accommodate it. These issues are critically important not only to the technical people who will have to implement the new system, but also to marketers who need 800 and 900 services for customer sales and who want access to the new 888 exchange. Subscription information is available by calling ICB at 212-684-7210. For More Information Contact: Judith Oppenheimer, 212-684-7210 Judith Oppenheimer, President Interactive CallBrand(TM): Strategic Leadership, Competitive Intelligence Producer@pipeline.com. Ph: +1 800 The Expert. Fax: +1 212 684-2714. Interactive CallBrand is a leading source of information and support on 800 and related issues, representing user positions before the FCC, State Department, Int'l. Telecommunications Union, and domestic industry forums. ------------------------------ From: fritz@mirage.hc.ti.com (Fritz Whittington) Subject: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint Date: Tue, 22 Aug 95 10:23:19 CDT Reply-To: fritz@mirage.hc.ti.com There is an extremely interesting document available at: http://www.open.gov.uk/oftel/oftelwww/oftcons.htm which explains how the UK intends to handle the area-code and number shortage problems, in a very flexible and user-friendly way. Makes me wonder why we couldn't do it the same way (I know, North America is a lot bigger and has more people, but the scheme is scaleable). It also (horrors!) asks for *feedback* and *comments* on the various proposals. But we know it would never work here -- the opening statement is: "*TELEPHONE NUMBERS BELONG* to people and businesses and they need to be treated as a national resource. OFTEL took over responsibility for the UK Numbering Scheme from BT in 1994. This means that OFTEL now makes plans for the future use of numbers and allocates numbers to telephone companies to allow them to provide service to their customers. To help us make the right decisions, we are committed to consulting all those with an interest - residential customers, business users and the telecommunications industry." (Emphasis mine.) And other heresies like: "When you call a person with the same area code, you usually dial only their local number -- this is known as local dialing. But you can dial the full national number if you prefer. Your call will be connected and the charge is the same either way." Fritz Whittington Texas Instruments, P.O. Box 655474, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75265 Shipping address: 13510 North Central Expressway, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75243 fritz@ti.com Office: +1 214 995 0397 FAX: +1 214 995 6194 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You're right! It would never, never do here in the USA, where we have the only really correct way of doing these things. I should have censored your message entirely rather than risk allowing these heresies to become known to telecom admins here. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 11:32:57 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Carl Moore writes: >> Inter-NPA 7D dialing is the exception, not the rule, even in >> rural areas. > It refers only to LOCAL calls to other area codes. Of course. And I repeat: 11D (or 10D) dialing for such calls seems far more prevalent than 7D. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:51:00 GMT bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There really is no reason to ever go to > eleven digits as in 1+anything. The reason is that when we get to the > point that all calls must be dialed as AC + seven digits, we will no > longer need the initial '1' as a flag. Right now it serves as a flag > to indicate that an area code is following rather than a prefix. When > we get to where we always begin with an area code, then switches can > be modified to always expect ten digits and always expect the first > three to be an area code. PAT] I believe there is another reason for this, Pat. The leading "1" identifies the call as a call for which a charge is made. In Southwestern Bell territory, at least, originally the leading "1" was not required. A great many calls to the business office were generated by people making 7D calls to numbers which were interzone or toll. They had no indication that the calls were chargeable. It eventually became apparent that a large number of customers were not comfortable with the fact they could not tell from the way they had to dial the call whether the call was toll or not. (Note that virtually all service in Southwestern Bell territory was, and is, flat rate.) So the driving force in adopting "1+" in Southwestern Bell territory, at least, was the demand from customers and the number of calls that had to be written off. Those in this newsgroup tend to feel that everyone is, or should be, as knowledgable as they are about communications matters. The great majority of customers are not, and furthermore they don't want to be and don't see why they should be forced to be. And in the long run they will vote if that's what is required to make telephone service convenient for them. It is, perhaps, one of the penalties that has to be paid for the telephone's becoming such an integrated part of the fabric of life in the U.S.A. that the great body of the public thinks it is theirs and should be operated for their benefit. Even in a corporate environment, it is very hard to educate the users about how to use the telephone service. Most of them don't know; they may learn how to use a few features that are advantageous to them. I have been a part of such education efforts. JEB> Q. Why should users be forced to use area codes when dialing across JEB> NPA boundries? JEB> A. They are not. Suprised? In many rural areas users can dial across JEB> NPA and state lines with 7 digits. The only time 10 or 11 digits JEB> are used is in major metropolitan areas. There are some cases where this is true, but they tend to be special situations. One of the most notable cases is the Kansas City metropolitan area (certainly not a rural area) where cross-NPA and cross-state line (they are the same thing there) are indeed 7D for local calls. But this is limited to calls within the Kansas City metropolitan exchange. If you call outside the flat rate area, you have to use 1 + NPA + 7D. Note that when cross-NPA 7D dialing is used, the NXX has to be "protected" in the other NPA. So the number of available NXXs is reduced by the number of NNXs that can be dialed 7D across the boundary. So I imagine the days of that arrangement in metropolitan Kansas City are numbered. In the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, that time has already arrived. Local calls in the same area code are dialed as 7D. Local calls across the NPA boundary are dialed as AC+7D (10 digits). Chargeable calls to any point, whether within the same area code or not, are dialed as 1+AC+7D (11 digits). JEB> In residential areas an overlay could be perfomed by allowing 7 digit JEB> dialing to all exchanges within the community, and 11 digit dialing to JEB> zone dialing or LD locations. That way neighbors could call each JEB> other using 7 digit dialing. Since in cities of any size the percentage of intra-wire center calls is quite low, this wouldn't be of any great benefit. And wire center boundaries don't usually follow "residential area" or "community" boundaries anyway. JEB> Business areas would not be able to do this because of their high use JEB> of NXXs, but the problems are their creation and a split would be JEB> worse. (See previous messages about stationary and advertising costs JEB> associated with a split.) Since almost all "areas" (wire center areas? metropolitan exchanges? what kind of area?) are a mix of residential and business, and served from the same COs, it's hard to see how, or why, this distinction could be made or implemented. As to stationary and advertising costs, these occur whenever a wire center boundary is changed, when a business relocates or gets a centrex or other types of inward dialing arrangements. And if the business expects to ever get a call from outside its own narrow area, it's going to need to show its area code anyway. Most businesses are fairly small, with a few lines at most (many have only one). But unless it's the local barber shop, most of them expect someone will call them long distance at some time and will want to show their area code anyway. (Even the local barber shop may expect to get calls from vendors outside the local area, and not just unsolicited sales calls, either; businesses need vendors to supply their needs.) Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@f2001.n147.z1.fidonet.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wait a minute. We went through this several years ago here about the meaning and purpose of 'one'. The One True Religion says that 'one' indicates the three digits following consitute an area code. I had thought that all those heretics who kept insisting that 'one' meant 'the call you are now dialing has a toll charge involved' had long since been excommunicated from this Digest and that those who then persisted in their heresy had been beheaded. ... Now here you are back to pester me again! ... Even if we assume there is some validity in the 'one = toll' argument -- and it probably was valid a number of years ago when area codes did not change with every street corner and back yard neighbor's fence -- there is not a lot of consistency there now. One does not equal toll for large segments of customers in 312/708 who are near each other. There are many many cases now where inter-areacode dialing is purely local. I'll grant you in more rural and lesser populated areas of the USA -- let us take Wyoming, or Montana as examples -- you still have to go the entire state before you change area codes and toll generated from seven digit dialing is pretty common. But do they dial 1 plus seven digits in that case, in order to catch the attention of the originator of the call? I would think they would do that if alerting the caller to the existence of toll was the reason for the leading one. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 12:52:18 -0500 From: bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines I, bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) wrote: >> Q. Why should users be forced to use area codes when dialing across NPA >> boundries [sic]? >> A. They are not. Suprised? In many rural areas users can dial across >> NPA and state lines with 7 digits. The only time 10 or 11 digits are used >> is in major metropolitan areas. goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) replied: > This latter statement is certainly false. Inter-NPA 7D dialing is the > exception, not the rule, even in rural areas. In *most* area where you may dial local across an NPA boundry you dial 7D. 'The rule' in *most* rural areas is 'if it is local, it is 7D' regardless of NPA. The exception is in *metropolitan* areas where you dial 10D or 11D to cross NPAs. Check the boundry lines between NPAs in 'rural' areas, such as the=20 Michigan/Indiana border, where South Bend, IN, can call Niles, MI, and Elkhart, IN, can call Union and Edwardsburg, MI. Along every NPA border there are several rural communities who can dial across the line 7D. Look at Indiana --- 317-564 Delphi to 219-652 Burrows / 219-686 Camden / 219-859 Deer Creek / 219-943 Idaville / 219-965 Yeoman (and back); 317-981 LaFontaine to 219-563/568/569 Wabash (and back); 317-964 Union City to 513-968 Union City, OH (as expected); 317-732 West College Corner to 513-523/529/798 College Corner, OH and 513-796 Morning Sun, OH; ALL of these offer 7D local across NPA borders. The only 1+ NPA requirement I have seen in all of Indiana is from East Chicago, Hammond, and Whiting, Indiana who can call Calumet City, Illinois, locally by dialing 1+708. Where there is a cross NPA local call in rural areas you are *most likely* to find 7D dialing. The exception is 10D or 11D. Inter-NPA 7D dialing is the rule, especially in rural areas. In other news cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) added: > While I don't disagree that overlays are a good idea, it will take > some consumer education. I don't like the idea of an overlay for > landline phones though, because I don't want to have to remember what > area code my friend has (seven digits to remeber is enough for me :-). It > would be easier to put all wireless services into an overlay, then > tell customers XXX is for wireless. All NEW services in the overlay, regardless of use. Most would be cellular/ paging/PBX uses since that is where most of the growth is. 1+NPA would always be allowed and suggested as the 'norm' with 7D being allowed for local calls (all exchanges at your CO plus a few close neighbors). Nobody should ever have to change their phone number unless they move. That would include wireless services. Every time a cell operator has to move their NXX from one NPA to another they must get every customer to bring in their phone to change the MIN. The same NXX cannot be used in the old NPA for cell service untill all the changes are made. Paging companies are easier to move since DID to their switches need not contain the NPA. As far as cellular in Chicago goes, there are a few NXX conflicts that prevent moving all cellular in 708 and 312 directly to a new NPA without changing a few NXX's. But the majority of NXX's in use for cellular are not duplicated in the other Chicago NPAs. It would be nice not to ever change your NPA. But that is part of progress. Have you noticed how many CO names changed when DDD was introduced? The recent discussions of Seattle, New Orleans and Chicago exchange histories show a few of these. Based on 1940's estimates the exaustion of NPAs in 1994 was right on target. The original plan was 'no resplit within 10 years'. It is a shame to see resplits within 5 years but that is part of the change in technology. Overlays would fix this IF all users would accept numbers in the new area and NO user would be removed from the old area. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Twin Kings Communications - Sturgis, MI [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is quite interesting that you mention the Hammond, Whiting and East Chicago area of northern Indiana in your article. I remember when those all dialed 7-D to reach anywhere in 312. Hammond's exchanges WEstmore-1, 2, and 3 along with TIlden 4 and 5, plus East Chicago's EXport-7 and 8 had to be dialed 219 + 7D from the Chicago side however. Note, it was not 1 + 219 + 7D since we did not dial a leading '1' here until about 1980 or so. Even when Chicago had to dial 219+7D to reach northern Indiana (but not the same way in reverse) for a few years thereafter Calumet City could still dial 7-D to get Hammond/Whiting. Of course this meant that the prefixes 397,398,659, 844,845,931,932,933 could not be assigned in the 312 area. A similar case existed in Antioch, Illinois and North Antioch, Wisconsin where 312-395 could dial 414-396 as seven digits and vice-versa. This did not however prevent the use of 396 elsewhere in northern Illinois; the rule was that subscribers in Antioch had to dial 1+ to reach anywhere in northern Illinois *other than their immediate local area*. I think at one point they asked for community input on the decision and everyone decided they would prefer to be able to call the Wisconsin side of their community with seven digits (instead of ten or eleven) even it if meant having to dial eight digits (1+7D) for everywhere else in the same area code. That was a long, long time before the 312/708 split of course. PAT] ------------------------------ From: plh@hic.net (Patrick L. Humphrey) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:58:51 -0600 In article , goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes: > bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) writes: >> Q. Why should NPAs be required to split rather than be overlaid? >> A. They should not. NPA overlays have been in use for several years in >> New York and California. > New York City's 917 NPA has certainly existed for several years, but > as far as I know, it is the *only* overlay in the entire NANP (though > overlays almost happened in other places like Chicago, Miami and > Atlanta). What California NPA were you referring to? There is another one in place and operating right now -- 281 here in Houston, and 972 will be overlaid on 214 (i.e., Dallas) six months from now. >> This means 10 or 11 digit dialing for local calls, with the old >> users being able to keep their numbers. Sometimes 7 digit dialing is >> allowed IF the area code is the same. > What service areas are there that *don't* allow intra-NPA local calls > to be dialed using 7D? I'm not aware of any yet, although mandatory > 10D dialing has been mooted as a future option for some metro areas > that might receive overlay NPAs. Indeed, 10D is in its permissive period right now here in 713 (but *not* in the 281 overlay -- any calls made from or to that NPA _must_ be dialed 10D now), and next March 1 10D will become mandatory on all local calls within 713. >> Q. Why should users be forced to use area codes when dialing across NPA >> boundries [sic]? >> A. They are not. Suprised? In many rural areas users can dial across NPA >> and state lines with 7 digits. The only time 10 or 11 digits are used >> is in major metropolitan areas. > This latter statement is certainly false. Inter-NPA 7D dialing is the > exception, not the rule, even in rural areas. It's still in place in the Kansas City area as of a month ago, from personal observation, and in a few border communities in South Dakota (also as of a month ago, from the same personal observation), but in my travels across sixteen states last month, those are the only places I found it. Patrick L. "staying with 713 -- old habits are hard to break" Humphrey ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 95 08:25:09 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) includes this question and (his) answer: >> A. They are not. Surprised? In many rural areas users can dial across NPA >> and state lines with 7 digits. The only time 10 or 11 digits are used >> is in major metropolitan areas. > This latter statement is certainly false. Inter-NPA 7D dialing is the > exception, not the rule, even in rural areas. It refers only to LOCAL calls to other area codes. cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) writes: > 542 may be an overlay, but that is two years from now. Did you mean 562? It was just announced as a geographical split, which means a second area code change in less than ten years for some people who switched from 213 to 310. And 760 has been announced for split of 619. ------------------------------ From: d92-sam@filsun09.nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: Shanghai to Raise Telephone Numbers to Eight Digits Date: 21 Aug 1995 16:53:58 GMT In Peter_Mansfield@australia.notes.pw.com writes: >> It will be the fourth city in the world with eight-digit phone >> numbers, after Paris, Tokyo and Hong Kong. > I'm sure that there are other places that I have missed where > eight-digit numbers are already in use. The outer Stockholm suburbs have had eight digit numbers for several years. Those are the old 07xx-xxx xx numbers that were merged with 08 between 1991 (?) and 1993. Those numbers then became 08-5xxx xxxx (we write them 5xx xxx xx). The government regulatory, Post- & Telestyrelsen (PTS), has decided that all new Swedish number series are to be 0 plus nine digits but there is no plan to move all numbers to at least 0 plus eight. I guess dominant operator (& former monopoly) Telia isn't going to change those unless PTS makes them. I wonder if not the competitors would want numbers that are of (almost) equivalent length to that of Telia's ... Sam www.nada.kth.se/~d92-sam, sam@nada.kth.se, +46 7 01234567 ------------------------------ From: M.J.Jennings@amtp.cam.ac.uk (Michael Jennings) Subject: Re: Shanghai to Raise Telephone Numbers to Eight Digits Date: 22 Aug 1995 00:37:54 GMT Organization: University of Cambridge DAMTP In article , Glenn Shirley =WA TELEC ENG= wrote: > bkron@netcom.com (BUBEYE!) writes: >> It will be the fourth city in the world with eight-digit phone >> numbers, after Paris, Tokyo and Hong Kong. > Depends what you mean by metropolis, I suppose. Melbourne, Australia > (only about three million people I think -- not quite the same scale) > changed to eight digits in May 1995. Parts of Sydney have already but > won't be entirely changed until about half way through next year. > Brisbane was planned for August this year, Adelaide was August next > year, Perth was September 1997 although these were the timetable they > have probably changed. They could hardly be called metropolis' > although Sydney and Melbourne would probably be. A difference is that the Australian area codes don't just cover the cities mentioned. Each of the new Australian area codes will cover at least one whole state. I belive Denmark and Norway also have eight digit codes for wide areas consisting of more than one city. France excluding Paris is also like this. I _think_ that Paris, Tokyo and Hong Kong are the only cities that have an area code for the city that is not shared with anywhere else and which has entirely eight digits numbers. I think that this is what the original statement meant, although it is not exactly what it said. The question as to what other cities should have an arrangement like this but don't will largely be left as an exercise to the reader. (I would argue London, certainly. It might have made sense for places like New York and Los Angeles, too, but the US decided long ago to go for a uniform three + seven digits which rules it out). Michael Jennings Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics The University of Cambridge. mjj12@damtp.cambridge.ac.uk ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #352 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26424; 22 Aug 95 20:22 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA23654 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:44:34 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA23645; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:44:31 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:44:31 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508221944.OAA23645@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #353 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Aug 95 14:44:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 353 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson TRW Versus Inmarsat - Patent Wars in Outer Space (PATNEWS via M. Solomon) 4th Int'l. Conference on Spoken Language Processing '96 (Jim Polikoff) New Area Code Test Numbers (Phillip M. Dampier) Book Review: "Educator's Internet Companion" by Giagnocavo (Rob Slade) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 13:37:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TRW Versus Inmarsat - Patent Wars in Outer Space Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Forwarded FYI to the Digest: Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 23:04:32 -0400 From: srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) To: patents@world.std.com Subject: PATNEWS: TRW versus Inmarsat - patent wars in outer space One of the reasons that the professional IP community has been so apathetic to the problem of software prior art is that for the big boys, software patent lawsuits are more of a nuisance than anything else (and even then, when you lose you often can win, if you look at Microsoft's final arrangements with Stac and Wang). As big as a million dollars maybe to the rest of us, in some circles it isn't that much. A billion dollars, well that's big bucks to pretty much everyone, including two outer space companies, TRW and Inmarsat, amounts currently at stake over a patent with a very curious history for which the fat lady has yet to sing. It's hard to be apathetic to billion dollar actions. Last May, I had sent an IPNS news item on a patent TRW was seeking dealing with satellite configurations in medium Earth orbit, based on an article I had seen in the London Financial Times. TRW had been suggesting in the space community that it's patent was broad enough to prohibit anyone else from using medium Earth orbit's for satellite systems. While not many of us are trying to do so, one other company was doing so, Inmarsat. Both TRW and Inmarsat are spending billions to establish satellite telephone constellations, big stakes. Coincidently, the day after I sent out that news item, the patent issued, kind of. The "kind of" was that for awhile that day the patent was prepared to be issued, and made it to the PTO's patent text database long enough for me to download the text and mail it out as a news item, only for the patent to be retracted by the Patent Office and therefore never formally issued (TRW claimed to know of only two other such instances in the past 100 years). The action puzzled many. "All I can say is that the Patent Office told us they wanted more time to review their internal quality control methods", one TRW spokesman said. "We had expected to receive the patent certificates on May 16, as scheduled. It was not until that date that we were told otherwise". I quess that it is rare that a patent gets this far before being pulled. "It is our responsibility to not knowingly issue an invalid claim", said Stephen Kunin, the Patent Office's deputy assistant commissioner for patent policy and projects. "If, on internal review, it comes to our attention that we may have a claim that should not go out, and we have strong evidence that this is the case, we try to prevent it from going out. TRW will most certainly be given an opportunity to get the case ship shape. They may end up with the claims they thought they would get. From our standpoint of administering the law, we want to be sure we have done the job we are paid to do", Kunin said. I suspect Inmarsat must have some good lobbyists and pulled a few strings [The timing of the above events, with the patent temporarily issuing, is in conflict with the timing of an internal review catching the patent in time]. As it should, and should be able to, given that Inmarsat is investing $2.6 billion in its satellite telephone constellation system that will compete with TRW's Odyssey. As TRW was claiming that their patents would stop Inmarsat from deploying its satellites, Inmarsat must have done something to get the PTO to reconsider (though Inmarsat denies doing anything), especially given skepticism many in the space industry have about satellite orbit patents in general. Earlier in the year, TRW had said it would sue Inmarsat once the patents issued. TRW was notified in April that their patents were to be awarded, and due to TRW press releases, the PTO had been repeatedly contacted by members of the space industry to find out what was up. As Olof Lundberg, CEO of the Inmarsat project stated, "We have always been of the view that the concept of using intermediate circular orbits in connection with global mobile satellite communications has been known for decades and that any patent obtained by TRW for this general concept would be of questionable validity". The rivalry between the two companies is intense. Last June, TRW petitioned the Federal Communications Commission to deny the application of Comsat Corp. for authority to participate in the purchase of facilities of Inmarsat-P, the proposed private off-shot of Inmarsat. Comsat is the US signatory to Intelsat. Last month, TRW was awarded one patent, 5,433,726. Interestingly, the issued patent had 35 claims, while the original version that was reconsidered had 51 claims. TRW shortly thereafter warned Inmarsat that it could be infringing TRW's patent. According to Bruce Gerding, TRW vice president and managing director of the company's Odyssey program, "The broad scope of its coverage poses a major concern for any aspiring imitators in the field of space-based personal communications systems. We believe that any imitator would have difficulty in launching a commercially viable medium Earth orbit system without infringing our patent". Inmarsat's Lundberg countered, "We are certainly not in the business of infringing other people's patents. We cannot believe that any patent office would issue patents that are so broad that they cover orbits and the general ability to communicate through satellites. Our detailed system design is quite different from our competitor's." According to industry analysts, TRW has the fewest partners and the least capital and is least likely to get its system off the ground, and suspect TRW will use the patent offensively to buy time and raise more resources. (Other than Inmarsat, TRW also is competing with two low Earth orbit ventures which all will be targeting the personal communication systems market). Here are some of the details of the patent: 5433726 Medium-earth-altitude satellite-based cellular telecommunications system ABSTRACT A satellite-based cellular telecommunications system employing a constellation of telecommunications satellites in medium earth orbit to provide multibeam radio frequency (rf) communications links for worldwide cellular telephone service with a minimum number of satellites. The telecommunications satellites are placed in a plurality of inclined orbits about the earth at an altitude of between approximately 5600 and 10,000 nautical miles. The characteristics of the orbits, such as the number of orbits, the inclination of each orbit, the number of satellites in each orbit and the altitude of the satellites, are tailored to maximize the coverage area of the satellites and their related line-of-sight elevation angles, while minimizing propagation time delays, the number of beam-to-beam and satellite-to-satellite handovers, and the total number of satellites. The present invention also includes several additional features which essentially eliminate beam-to-beam and satellite-to-satellite handovers, thus dramatically reducing the likelihood of dropouts. between the plug and the anchor to prevent the plug from entering the opening in the vessel. CLAIM ONE A method of providing medium-earth-orbit satellite-based communications between low-power mobile handsets having an omni-directional antenna and a gateway station through a satellite forming part of a satellite constellation, comprising the steps of: launching a plurality of satellites to an orbiting altitude between 5600 and 10,000 nautical miles, wherein at least one satellite has a reduced antenna field of view (FOV) less than full earth coverage; orienting said satellites in a plurality of orbital planes which are inclined at a predetermined inclination angle with respect to the equatorial plane of the earth; receiving, by at least one of said satellites, radio frequency (RF) signals from a plurality of mobile handsets which transmit said RF signals using their omni-directional antennas; and overlapping a portion of a coverage region of a departing satellite with a portion of a coverage region of an arriving satellite, including assignment means having a predetermined criterion of assignment that calls placed to or from a user located within the coverage overlap region are assigned to said arriving satellite. Interestingly, the prior art cited includes 59 US patents, 8 foreign patents, and 36 literature references, which is a pretty good amount compared to most other patents, though no NASA or DoD technical reports were cited. I am curious to see what prior art will be dug up if the patent is ever challenged. In the end, all of this will end up in the courts. Stay tuned, the fireworks should be great. As a bit of advice to the PTO, there is a pending biotech patent that will cause a global morality outroar when it is issues. I suggest you crank up the internal reviews, and save yourself a massive headache. Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA, 02178 617-489-3727, patents@world.std.com (for info on free subscription, send 'help' to patents@world.std.com ) (for prior art search services info, send 'prior' to patents@world.std.com ) (for WWW patent searching, try http://sunsite.unc.edu/patents/intropat.html ) ------------------------------ From: polikoff@castle.asel.udel.edu (Jim Polikoff) Subject: 4th Int'l. Conference on Spoken Language Processing '96 Date: 22 Aug 1995 10:59:16 -0400 Organization: AI duPont Institute Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing October 3-6, 1996 Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel Philadelphia, PA, USA __________ICSLP 96 Organizers___________ H. Timothy Bunnell, Chair Richard A. Foulds, Vice-Chair Applied Science & Engineering Laboratories Wilmington, DE, USA ICSLP unites researchers, developers, and clinicians for an exchange on a wide variety of topics related to the spoken language processing of humans and machines. Conference presentations range from basic acoustic phonetic research to clinically oriented speech training devices to speech-based natural language interfaces for man-machine interaction. ICSLP 96 will feature technical sessions of both oral and poster format, plenary talks, commercial exhibits, and daily special sessions. In addition, satellite workshops will be held in conjunction with the conference in the areas of interactive voice technology, spoken dialogue, speech databases and speech I/O, and gestures and speech. A new emphasis for ICSLP 96 will be on the clinical applications of speech technology, including the use of speech technology based applications for persons with disabilities. _________________________Conference Update_________________________8/10/95 Dates to Note: January 15, 1996 - Paper abstracts due for review March 15, 1996 - Acceptance notification May 1, 1996 - Deadline for papers (camera-ready, 4 pages) Prospective authors are invited to submit papers relevant to spoken language processing in any of the conference Technical Areas. Abstracts of proposed papers must be received by the ICSLP 96 Organizing Committee no later than January 15, 1996. Papers will be selected by the ICSLP 96 Technical Program Committee and assigned for presentation in poster or oral format. English is the working language for the conference. Submission of an abstract implies a commitment to submit a four page, camera-ready version of the paper and to present the paper in either an oral or poster session if the abstract is accepted. Participants will be expected to pay their own registration fees, travel, and accommodations for ICSLP 96. _____________________Submission of Abstracts____________________________ Abstracts must be received by the ICSLP 96 Organizing Committee no later than January 15, 1996. Abstracts may be submitted either by post or by e-mail following these guidelines: + One page, 400 word maximum + Technical Area(s) indicated in order of preference using the codes (A - X) below. + Title of the proposed paper clearly indicated + Preference for paper or poster clearly indicated + If sent by post, submit four (4) copies of the abstract + If sent by e-mail, use plain text (ASCII) format only Each abstract must also include the following contact information: + Author name(s)* + Postal mailing address + Phone number + Fax number + E-mail address E-mailed abstracts will be acknowledged by e-mail within 48 hours of submission. If you do not receive e-mail confirmation, we have not received your abstract! Please check the e-mail address and resubmit. Please do not e-mail multiple copies for any other reason. *Please be sure that the primary contact person is noted if it is someone other than the First Author. Mail or send abstracts to: ICSLP 96 Applied Science & Engineering Laboratories A.I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE 19899 E-mail: ICSLP-abstract@asel.udel.edu ________________________Technical Areas___________________________________ A. Production of spoken language B. Perception of spoken language C. Robust speech modeling and speech enhancement D. Speech coding and transmission E. Automatic speech recognition F. Spoken language processing for special populations G. Phonetics and phonology H. Spoken discourse analysis/synthesis I. Synthesis of spoken language J. Applications for people with speech/language/hearing disorders K. Databases and standards for speech technology L. Prosody of spoken language M. Speech analysis and parameterization N. Spoken language acquisition/learning O. Integrating spoken language and natural language processing P. Hardware for speech processing Q. Neural networks and stochastic modeling of spoken language R. Dialects and speaking styles S. Instructional technology for spoken language T. Speaker/language identification and verification U. Human factors and assessment in spoken language applications V. Spoken language dialogue and conversation W. Gesture and Multimodal Spoken Language Processing X. Other ________________________Satellite Workshops___________________________ The following Satellite Workshops will be held immediately before or after the ICSLP 96 conference. 1. IVTTA - The 3rd IEEE workshop on Interactive Voice Technology for Telecommunications Applications (IVTTA) will be held at the AT&T Learning Center, Basking Ridge, New Jersey, from September 30 - October 1, 1996. The IVTTA workshop brings together applications researchers planning to conduct or who have recently conducted field trials of new applications of speech technologies. Due to workshop facility constraints, attendance will be limited primarily to contributors. For further information about the workshop, contact: Dr. Murray Spiegel Bellcore 445 South Street Morristown, NJ, USA e-mail: spiegel@bellcore.com Phone: 1-201-829-4519; Fax: 1-201-829-5963 Submit abstracts (400 words, maximum 1 page) before April 1, 1996 to: Dr. David Roe IEEE IVTTA `96 AT&T Bell Laboratories, Room 2D-533 Murray Hill, NJ 07974 e-mail: roe@hogpb.att.com Phone: 908 582-2548; Fax: 908 582-3306 2. ISSD-96 The 1996 International Symposium on Spoken Dialogue (ISSD-96) will be held on October 2 and 3 at the venue of ICSLP 96. It is intended to be a forum of interdisciplinary exchange between researchers working on spoken dialogues from various points of view. The first day is devoted to invited lectures followed by sessions of both invited and contributed papers, which will be continued on the second day as special sessions of ICSLP 96. Papers submitted to ICSLP 96 (Technical Areas H,L,O,U,&V) may be selected for presentation at the symposium. For further information about the symposium, contact: Prof. Hiroya Fujisaki, Chairman, ISSD-96 Dept. of Applied Electronics Science University of Tokyo 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, 278 Japan e-mail: fujisaki@te.noda.sut.ad.jp Phone: +81-471-23-4327; Fax: +81-471-22-9195 3. COCOSDA Workshop 96 COCOSDA Workshop 96 will be held on Monday, October 7 at the Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel. The International Coordinating Committee on Speech Databases and Speech I/O Systems Assessment (COCOSDA) has been established to promote international cooperation in the fundamental areas of Spoken Language Engineering. Previous meetings have taken place in Banff 1992, Berlin 1993, Yokohama 1994 and Madrid 1995. Program and registration information for COCOSDA 96 will be forthcoming in later announcements. For more information about COCOSDA, consult the Web Page at http://www.itl.atr.co.jp/cocosda. 4. Workshop on Gesture and Speech The Applied Science and Engineering Laboratories of the University of Delaware will host a Workshop on Multimodal use of Gesture and Speech October 7 - 8, 1996. This Workshop will consider the integration of gesture and spoken language in intelligent human/computer interfaces, in advanced assisitve technology for individuals with disabilities, in telemanipulation and robotics systems, and in human conversation. Gestures including hand postures, dynamic arm movements, facial expression, and eye gaze will be considered along with more traditional lip shapes and handwriting movements. For further information, contact: Dr. Lynn Messing A. I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE 19899 e-mail: messing@asel.udel.edu Phone: +1 302 651 6830; Fax: +1-302-651-6895 _____________Sponsoring and Cooperating Organizations_________________ The Acoustical Society of America American Speech and Hearing Association (Pending) The Acoustical Society of Japan Canadian Acoustical Association European Speech Communication Association IEEE Signal Processing Society International Phonetic Association Others - contact ICSLP 96. ______________For more information, contact____________________________ ICSLP 96 Applied Science & Engineering Laboratories A.I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE 19899 Phone: +1 302 651 6830 TDD: +1 302 651 6834 Fax: +1 302 651 6895 Email: ICSLP96@asel.udel.edu WWW: http://www.asel.udel.edu/speech/icslp.html FTP: zeppo.asel.udel.edu:pub/ICSLP A two-page PostScript format copy of the most recent Conference Announcement and Call for Papers can also be obtained by anonyomus ftp. Connect to host zeppo.asel.udel.edu, cd to directory pub/ICSLP96, and get call.ps.Z in binary mode. The file must be uncompressed with a unix compatable uncompress program before being printed. This plain text version of the announcement is located in the same directory as file call.txt _______________________International Advisory Board_______________ Hiroya Fujisaki Science University of Tokyo Tokyo, Japan Jens Blauert John Ohala Ruhr-Universitat Bochum University of California Bochum, Germany Berkeley, CA, USA Anne Cutler Lawrence Rabiner Max Planck Institute for AT&T Bell Labs Psycholinguistics Murray Hill, NJ, USA Nijmegen, The Netherlands Gunnar Fant Katsuhiko Shirai Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) Waseda University Stockholm, Sweden Tokyo, Japan John Laver Kenneth Stevens Humanities Research Board of Massachusetts Institute the British Academy of Technology Edinburgh, Scotland Cambridge, MA, USA Joseph Mariani Yoh'ichi Tohkura LIMSI-CNRS ATR Human Information Orsay, France Processing Research Lab Kyoto, Japan J. Bruce Millar Victor Zue Australian National University Massachusetts Institute Canberra, Australia of Technology Cambridge, MA, USA ------------------------------ From: philjohn@eznet.net Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 13:50:51 -0400 Subject: New Area Code Test Numbers US West issued a press release on August 17th that included supposedly "toll-free" test numbers for reaching new area codes. These are generally used by people who are concerned whether their PBX's have been updated sufficiently to allow calls to new area codes. I can't be certain these are toll-free, but calling them gets you what sounds like a standard intercept. State Old AC New AC Test Number ======================================================================= Alabama 205 334 (334) 223-0600 Arizona 602 520 (520) 782-0100 Colorado 303 970 (970) 241-0022 Georgia 404 770 (770) 666-9999 Oregon 503 541 (541) 334-0057 or 276-0192 (*) Texas 713 281 (281) 792-8378 Washington 206 360 (360) 532-0023 or 576-0023 (*) - Effective November 5, 1995 Phillip M. Dampier + Fidonet: 1:2613/225 3176 Elmwood Avenue + E-Mail: philjohn@eznet.net Rochester, New York 14618-2096 + Faxes: +1 716 461 3169 ** PhilJohn Home Page: http://roch0.eznet.net/~philjohn ** ** Rochester Free-Net: http://www.vivanet.com/freenet ** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:49:31 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Educator's Internet Companion" by Giagnocavo BKEDINCM.RVW 950529 %A Gregory Giagnocavo jgg@wentworth.com %A Tim McLain %A Vince DiStefano %A Chris Noonan Sturm cnsturm@wentworth.com %C 1866 Colonial Village Lane, PO Box 10488, Landcaster, PA 17605-0488 %D 1995 %G 0-932577-10-5 %I Wentworth Worldwide Media, Inc. %O U$39.99/C$53.99 800-638-1639 fax 717-393-5752 connect@wentworth.com %P 271 %T "Educator's Internet Companion" "Educator's Internet Companion", Gregory Giagnocavo, 1995, 0-932577-10-5, U$39.99/C$53.99 The video which accompanies this book (little more than an ad for Internet access -- and "Classroom Connect") states at one point that the Internet's educational resources are almost uncharted. This is true only in comparison to the overexposure that other topics get. "Educator's Internet Companion" is, too, almost a sampler of other Wentworth products. Still, it is worth consideration for some practical ideas and a quick, easy-to-follow resource guide. The lesson plans of chapter one are quite terse and provide more suggestions and sites than usable curriculum. Still, the thirty outlines do cover a range of topics and activities (albeit they rely heavily on Gopher, and World Wide Web). The idea of "guided" tours through menu-driven systems is odd, but the Internet can be daunting initially. The lists of Gopher, telnet, ftp, and WWW sites, as well as mailing lists and newsgroups, are brief, but to the point and easy to read. A discussion of funding sources is limited in specifics to the United States, but possibly extremely helpful there. A series of appendices cover, concisely, Internet concepts and tools, acceptable use policies, and the major commercial online services. Wentworth seems to be quite serious about the educational market, and their offerings are practical in both content and prices. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKEDINCM.RVW 950529. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. Vancouver roberts@decus.ca | "If a train station Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca | is where a train Research into rslade@cyberstore.ca | stops, what happens User Rob_Slade@mindlink.bc.ca | at a workstation?" Security Canada V7K 2G6 | Frederick Wheeler ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #353 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29471; 23 Aug 95 2:46 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA02271 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:24:14 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA02263; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:24:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:24:11 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508230124.UAA02263@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #354 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Aug 95 20:24:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 354 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson IntegreTel/VRS Billing-Bulk Block Procedure (Joshua G. Fenton) Re: Integratel Customer Service (John Levine) WKP, Infotext, and Carrier Assignments (Van Heffner) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (Nathan Duehr) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (Darryl Kipps) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (bkron@netcom.com) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (David Devereaux-Weber) 2500 Set Schematics Wanted (Charles B. Robey) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Linc Madison) Sending Telegrams via the World Wide Web (Nigel Allen) AT&T Credit For Cut Calls (Steven Lichter) Government Restricts Internet!! (John Bach) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joshua G. Fenton Organization: Augustana College - Rock Island IL Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 07:03:21 CST Subject: IntegreTel/VRS Billing-Bulk Block Procedure Pat, The accounts payble administrator here has been working very hard to get through to IntegreTel, Inc. & VRS Billing Systems, Inc. to block numbers from our campus. After several weeks, she managed to get a decent rep who provided the following information via fax: (My paraphrasing, exact text is denoted by "") To block 10 numbers or less, call 1-800-BLOCKME (800-256-2563) [TELECOM Editor's Note: Really, 1-800-4-BLOCKME (800-425-6256, optional 3) See my note at the end of this file. PAT] Larger quantities of numbers, you can send an ASCII text file on diskette. The file must be a flag text file, not WordPerfect, Excel, etc. Each phone number should be on a separate line, 10 digit number, followed by carriage return. No dashes, commas, or blanks. "If numbers are within a range, please include the range in a cover letter". Enclose a cover letter with: company, organization, or institution name, address, contact person with phone number in case of processing errors. Mail diskette to: IntegreTel/VRS Billing Systems, Inc. Consumer Relations Department PO Box 611987 San Jose CA 95161-1987 Questions should be directed to the 1-800-BLOCKME number. "Please note: This blocking services if free of charge and normally takes 10 working days to take effect. This blocking service takes advantage of modern blocking technology that should prohibit access to services, but is not 100% guaranteed and only effective for such services that are billed by VRS Billing Systems and/or IntegreTel." Hope all of you find this information helpful! Joshua Fenton ccjf@augustana.edu or joshuaf@sparc5.augustana.edu Joshua G. Fenton, Augustana College Computing Services Phone +1.309.794.7309, Fax +1.309.794.7431 639-38th Street, Rock Island IL 61201-2296 USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it your way and got a sort of irritated lady who told me it was 4-BLOCK-ME **not** BLOCK-ME. So I redialed it as suggested and did indeed get through to an automatic service. I only have a couple of complaints about it and both are minor. Your ANI is delivered to them at the time you call, and if you indicate you wish to block your home number, they respond by blocking the ANI given to them without an opportunity to block *additional* residence numbers unless apparently you call them from each line involved, one at time. They offer the choice of blocking '800 callback services' as well as 'international services'. A third option is to block 'all services billed by Integratel/VRS'. They do offer a menu selection for blocking of business phones but I did not try that one. Perhaps it allows more than one entry per call. To repeat though, as the irritated lady told me -- after apparently receiving many such calls -- 'the number for those people is eight digits long': (1-800) 4BLOCK-ME, or 1-800-425-6256. What you do with the '3' on the end is up to you, I guess. Maybe this could be the start of something new in the USA: Eight digit numbers, with Integratel boldly providing the leadership and setting the example for other telco organizations -- even Bellcore! PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John Levine) Subject: Re: Integratel Customer Service Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 04:11:25 GMT > me: "I can be charged for 800 number calls? I thought they were free." > Her: "You sure can - calls to psychic hotline, chat lines, others." > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: She was speaking a little shorthand in > the call and should have perhaps been more precise. There is no charge > to the caller for carriage of his traffic to an 800 number. ... I was under the distinct impression that IXCs were permitted to charge to an 800 caller's line only with a prior written agreement, under a recent FCC rule. We went around with this a while ago, with many people pointing out that often someone who was using a phone to call an 800 number had no authority to charge anything to that phone line. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It can be a 'verbal agreement' as well, or an 'agreement' that is implied by some single action on the part of the caller such as pressing a touchtone button. In fairness to the folks who run those services, bear in mind that many magazine and mail order purchases come with forms already addressed in your name with your only action required being to check a box entitled "YES ... send me a subscription and bill me later." Those have been upheld as legal, with the rule being that as long as the respondent is required to take 'some positive action in agreement with the proposal made by the seller' then the contract is enforceable. If you and I mutually agree that your pressing a button on the phone and causing the phone to make a noise that my computer understands to mean 'yes' will commence the sale or delivery of my goods or services to you, then I gotcha! Since voicemail and the pressing of buttons on phone to communicate requests and decisions is very common these days, one can hardly claim that the same principle, when used by Information Providers is somehow too unusual or different in nature. Check a box ... press a button ... etc. The other thing the IP's successfully claimed was that in 'regular telephone calls' the operator is allowed to accept your verbal approval to charge your number for a collect call. No prior written agreement is required when the operator asks, "I have a collect call will you accept the charges." Therefore, the IP's said it is an unfair advantage for telco to be able to work with verbal agreements on charges to telephone accounts but for us to be required to have written agreements." And in these times in which we live -- the era of post-divestiture and all -- the telco is required to deal with one and all at 'arms length' as they say. If Western Union, an entity separate and not associated with telco, is permitted to speak with you on the telephone and charge the cost of your transaction to your telephone bill based on your verbal statements, then other vendors similarly situated must be permitted to do so as well said one IP. You dial an 800 number to speak with the Western Union operator don't you? It never occurred to you that you were being 'charged for a call to an 800 number' when Western Union charges were placed on your phone bill, did it? Good ... now we understand one another. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:51:27 -0700 From: vantek@northcoast.com (VANTEK COMMUNICATIONS) Subject: WKP, Infotext, and Carrier Assignments I don't know of any way to identify 500 carrier assignments at the moment, but if you are looking for 800/900 number assignments there is a relatively quick (and cheap) way to do so. Infotext Magazine (the trade journal of the pay-per-call industry) sponsors a toll-free audiotext service called The Interactive Exchange. It contains some useful information, including: * 800 & 900 NXX CARRIER ASSIGNMENTS Let's you quickly access 800 and 900 NXX assignments. Just enter the 3-Digit NXX code. * WEEKLY NEWS Weekly news updates on the pay-per-call industry. * STATE INFORMATION Enter the two-letter state postal abbreviation to hear pay-per-call regulatory news for that state. A list of all area codes (including NANP) for that state is also given. * CARRIER INFORMATION Supposedly updated information on new carrier features. All I ever hear when using this feature is the carrier's address and phone number. Press 'A' for AT&T, 'M' for MCI, and 'S' for Sprint. THE INTERACTIVE EXCHANGE: 1-800-321-TEXT Like any voicemail-type IVR system, it seems to send you to the wrong places at times, and can be a bit confusing. The price is right though! You don't even have to pay for the phone call (and NO, it is not an 800 number that bills you back onto your phone bill). I would also highly recommend reading {Infotext Magazine}. It is really the only publication (left) that caters to the 'service bureau industry'. Just reading some of the ads from the service bureaus gives an interesting insight into what is going on in the industry. It is free to qualified subscribers. You can find subscription info at our FAQ File homepage below. P.S. FYI, I just looked at their latest issue, and guess who has the centerfold ad? WKP, Incorporated! Here is a little snippet of their ad: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: WKP is the audiotext industry's only full-service carrier serving domestic and international markets. WKP has emerged as the leader in the US market providing solutions for all forms of domestic and international dialing. WKP Offers: * All transport, switching, call processing and accounting. * Multiple dialing plans including: 10XXX, 011, 500, 800 and many alternative transport vehicles. * A choice of service bureaus that provide audiotext, live one-on-on (SIC), psychic, conference calling and many other live and recorded services. * Billing company choices that process call records at WKP tariffed/dominant carrier rates. * 800 billing on LEC Calling Card, Visa/Mastercard and Check Debit. * Comprehensive fraud control and caller screening. * Customized tag messaging. * No start-up fees, no number fees and no minimum volumes required. For more information (on WKP) please contact Brayton Johnson at 206-622-4187. WKP INCORPORATED 1200 Fifth Ave., #1206 Seattle, WA 98101 Tel: (800) 882-9215 (!) Fax: (206) 622-3708 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: BTW, I have ABSOLUTELY NO association with Infotext or WKP whatsoever. I do find Infotext facinating reading though. Van Hefner Publisher Discount Long Distance Digest vantek@northcoast.com FAQ FILE HOMEPAGE http://www.webcom.com/~longdist/dldfaq.html ------------------------------ From: nduehr@rmii.com (Nathan Duehr) Subject: Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 01:20:59 GMT Organization: Rocky Mountain Internet Inc. Reply-To: nduehr@rmii.com Michael Fumich <0003311835@mcimail.com> wrote: [Clipped a big story about how Michael called Allnet Long Distance and was trying to find out who is responsible for some phony 500 numbers that are sending calls overseas to "adult phone services" at horrendous rates. Allnet responded that they don't do that kind of business, and that their company practice is not to do so.] > The plot thickens!: > When I dial 10718-1-700-555-4141, the equal access test number, I find > that I have reached "The Equal Access Dialing" network. When I dial > 10718 +0 + # to reach an operator the call does not complete and gives me > Switch "WCCH2". > The exact same thing happens with 10509, assigned to International > Audiotext Network Inc. , also of Seattle WA. In fact, several PIC's > known to be used by Adult Service Providers gave me the recordings > described above. > The heart of the matter?: > "WCCH2" in fact indicates the call is being handled by WCT, Inc. a > long distance company located in San Luis Obispo CA. I was informed > that "Worldcall" was one of their brands. WCT is owned by Frontier > Communications International as is (surprise!) ALLNET. I probed > further (and higher up) and when I mentioned WKP? BOOM! "Who are YOU!" > "What do you REALLY want?" "No Comment!" etc., etc. etc. There is no secret here, Allnet and WCT were both purchased by Frontier Communications *very recently*. In fact, Allnet's shareholders just agreed to the merger Wednesday. Other companies purchased include ConferTech, American Sharecom, Schneider Communications, LinkUSA, and ETI. The only company expected to be operating under their old name after the merger is complete is LinkUSA. All of the other companies will become Frontier Communications. > My mother had a saying she was rather fond of ... "Oh what a tangled > web we weave, when we practice to deceive" . This is a very tangled > web indeed! I think you are looking in the wrong place. My guess would be that as these companies merge, their traffic will be handled on the "other" company's switches, etc. Allnet probably has no idea that they are carrying this traffic. Nathan Duehr, Technical Service Associate ConferTech International, Wholly Owned by ALC Communications (Allnet) The opinions above are my own, and not the opinions of ALC. I guess I'd better say that. ------------------------------ From: dkipps@globalcom.net (Darryl Kipps) Subject: Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services Date: 22 Aug 1995 05:07:50 GMT Organization: Shentel In article , 0003311835@mcimail.com is: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well readers, if your PBX is capable of > screening as far the prefix within an area code, you might want to Snip > also. And don't forget 900-999. That one is very bizarre and very > expensive. Pat ... are you referring to (900) 999-XXXX or (500) 900-XXXX thru 999-XXXX? > And I do not grouse about them because they do sex talk on the phone. > My complaint is that they moved out the tidy little box we had for > them known as 900/976 where phone system admins could be protected > against abuse, and began abusing 800 as well. I don't care what anyone > chats about on the phone or their computer as long as they pay their > own bills, and 900/976 along with billed number screening was one way > to assure that was pretty much done. PAT] AMEN! Darryl Kipps dkipps@globalcom.net CIS: 72623.456 Winchester, VA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was referring to 900-999. Those can really get raunchy, and quite expensive. I guess we can assume the adult phone services are like any other business in the 'community' which a large segment of the community finds distasteful. Consider the adult bookstore in your community: how many different times have petitions been passed and motions made at city council meetings to have them closed down or moved to a different location under the guise of zoning restrictions, etc. People say adult bookstores and prostitution should all be confined to a so-called 'red light district' and as to be expected, the people involved in those businesses fight such efforts to restrict them. You say they bring down the neighborhood and cause a lot of 'victimless crimes' to occur. There is no such thing as victimless crime (if some action has been codified as a crime, then by definition there are victims involved), but that is not the point I wish to make. It takes a major effort to remove nuisances of that sort if indeed there is any constitutional right to remove them at all. We sort of had it nicely controlled before with the equivilent of a 'red light district' in the 900/976 territory. But when business started to go to down because the assigned district was so out of the way and difficult to reach that most citizens did not go past there on a regular basis anyway, the merchants in that district decided they needed to expand. They moved out on Main Street once again with their wares in plain view, knowing full well that as the poet John Bunyan said, "what we say, and what we do, in real life are often two." So here they are once again on Main Street: Alexander Graham Bell Boulevard, with new and shiny storefronts in the 500 block, instead of their old location down in the 900 block where no one goes any longer except a few people who still know ways of getting around all the barricades the community put up down there. So *now* what do you propose to do people? Block 500's as well? PAT] ------------------------------ From: bkron@netcom.com (BUBEYE!) Subject: Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 08:11:20 GMT jensoft@blarg.com (Jensoft) writes: > Baylan Communications Inc > Vienna VA It's actually in Sterling, VA. > International Audiotext Network > Seattle WA > 206-286-5200 This one answers "Callback Services" with a voice-prompt menu offering to connect you with various departments. When you select "information about our services" and are routed to the "telesales" department, you get a live human being ... at 1 o'clock in the morning! > This last one isn't exact, but it's a likely culprit! > W K Enterprises Inc > Tacoma WA Hardly! They're a cabinet shop here in Washington state! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 12:49:29 -0500 From: David Devereaux-Weber Subject: Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services Pat, I have reservations about distributing this information, but it may help someone who is attempting to investigate this company. Regarding WKP.COM: If you point your World Wide Web browser at http://www.wkp.com you get "Internet Strip Show". For $15(?) per day (charged to your VISA or Mastercard), you can watch "live strippers" over the Internet. David Devereaux-Weber, P.E. djdevere@facstaff.wisc.edu The University of Wisconsin - Madison Division of Information Technology Network Engineering (608)262-3584(voice) (608)265-5838(FAX) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How fascinating. I wonder if as a service to bored office workers sitting around at four in the afternoon waiting for five o'clock to come they also allow you to charge it to the phone number to which your modem is connected? That would sure get things in an uproar wouldn't it ... ... Speaking of c-sex, I am amazed at the large number of office workers and assorted bureaucrats with computers and modems at their disposal one will find on Compuserve CB in the middle of the afternoon. Check it out sometime. Login to the adult CB simulator some afternoon and see all the business executives, etc sitting on there, purportedly reading 'email' or working on the company's latest 'contract proposal' ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: chuckr@Glue.umd.edu (Charles B. Robey) Subject: 2500 Set Schematics Date: 22 Aug 1995 19:58:18 GMT Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland, College Park, MD I have a friend who has, squirreled away in his garage, a very old wood telephone, with the crank and all. I offered to get it working for him if he could find me an old 2500 set, to take the network from. He got it, but when I went looking for my old ITT maintenance manual, well, I couldn't find it. Does anyone have a schematic for a 2500 set, so I can figure how do the wiring involved with this? If this is in computer form, could you mail it to me? I don't work in telecom any more, but I know what to do with it. Chuck Robey chuckr@eng.umd.edu 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 Greenbelt, MD 20770 (301) 220-2114 ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 05:49:41 GMT James E. Bellaire (bellaire@tk.com) wrote: > Q. Why should NPAs be required to split rather than be overlaid? > A. They should not. NPA overlays have been in use for several years in > New York and California. This means 10 or 11 digit dialing for local > calls, with the old users being able to keep their numbers. Sometimes > 7 digit dialing is allowed IF the area code is the same. This is utterly false. There are no (zero) NPA overlays in California and there is only one that is in VERY limited use in New York. The 415/510 split was a split, not an overlay. The 213/818/310 and 714/619/909 splits were splits, not overlays. The 212/718/718 split (I list 718 twice because the Bronx initially kept 212 but later moved into 718) was a split, not an overlay. The 917 overlay on 212/718 is used only by a small number of cellular phones. In none of these cases were old users able to keep their numbers, except to the extent that the original plan for 917 was abandoned. (The plan was to force all cellular and beeper numbers into 917.) There is one planned NPA overlay coming to California, but the details are still in flux. I believe the first fully operational overlay in the U.S. will be Houston, Texas, ACs 713/281, and the people in Houston are NOT happy about it, either. In California, all calls to a different NPA, whether local or toll, must be dialed as 11 digits. All calls within a given NPA, whether local or toll, may be dialed as 7 digits. Thus, from my home in San Francisco, a local call to Oakland is 11 digits but a toll call to Palo Alto is 7. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 07:47:29 -0400 From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Subject: Sending Telegrams via the World Wide Web Unitel Communications Inc. now allows users to file telegrams using the World Wide Web. If your Web browser supports forms, go to http://www.alliance9000.com/E/10/ORDER.HTML to send your telegram. For more information, see http://www.alliance9000.com/E/10/10.HTML I realize that the telegram is now largely obsolete, but it's interesting seeing Unitel do this. It's quite a change from walking down to CNCP's Halifax telegraph office late at night eighteen or nineteen years ago to have stories from the student newspaper at Dalhousie University sent as press-rate telegrams to the telex machine in Ottawa of Canadian University Press, the co-operative news agency of student newspapers. Nigel Allen (formerly of The Dalhousie Gazette) 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M6G 1V3, Canada Internet: ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen Telephone: (416) 535-8916 ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: AT&T Credit For Cut Calls Date: 22 Aug 1995 10:51:22 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University It seems that AT&T now has a new policy on giving you credit for calls of one minute. My BBS calls its Hub during the night to get its mail and newsgroups. At times for one reason or another the call will get cut off; maybe because of something in the network or noise or god knows what; remember it is a modem and not voice. Up until this month when I called to get the credit; most times it is just a few cents and never amounts to much, but money is money when you run a BBS and don't charge. Now they will not give you credit unless there is another call right after the bad one. Well this last month was a real bad one and in one case my system tried 14 times right in a row and never got connected; other times it was just a time or two and then maybe did not get connected because the other end got busy or did not answer. I took my complaint through the system and yesterday got a call from the Ofice of The Chairman of AT&T, who said that a credit would be issued for a grand total of $4.95 with tax. It seems that the manager with AT&T at a lower level was willing to lose a customer for such a be issued for a grand total of $4.95 with tax. It seems that the manager with AT&T at a lower level was willing to lose a customer for such a small amount because of their so called new policy. They would have lost both my phones as well as my wats line, which is a lot more. This person told me that they could not say that they would issue a credit each month this happens, but if it is just a couple of times I never even bother. The reason behind this policy is they can't be sure if it is their equipment, local equipment or the subscriber's equipment on either end and besides the phone circuts are made for voice. Right on all of the above, but I never got anything for the call since I was cut off, and the newer modems are made to work over the voice network just fine as is proved by my 95% trouble free operation. I also pointed out that the modems we are using are made by AT&T Paredyne, so maybe there is a problem with them. Also AT&T now has Internet access and they will have the same problems we all have. He agreed that this is an ongoing problem that they will live with, this was not the chairman and I don't think he will even hear about it, but should this occur again I will move my service as with the small users the costs are almost all the same, I have checked. The above are my ideas and have nothing to do with whoever my employer is. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They were not 'willing to lose your business over $4.95', they were willing to lose your business because you nickle and dime them to death month after month over credit for stuff that in all likely- hood is *not* their fault. People seem to feel that whenever there is a problem with a phone call the phone company is automatically at fault and should be required to absorb the loss. I disagree. AT&T and the local telcos are usually more than generous about making allowances when there is any question at all about who is at fault. The local telcos routinely write off small amounts as a courtesy to the IXC's rather than charge them back for investigation and the IXC's do the same for the local telcos. Rarely is it worth the time to investigate *where* the fault occured in a telephone connection. Both the IXC's and the local telcos also write off a lot of charges due to just plain customer stupidity and stubborness also; it costs less than it does to have to respond to a commission complaint filed by a subscriber who read some consumer journal and knows his rights by God! and wants his money back. Everyone knows that the human ear is far less sensitive to noise on the line than a modem, and that the human brain can make sense out of things a modem would be completely confused by. Telephones come with receivers which are placed against your ear, not with modem connections. That over simplfies it a little, but I have seen idiots ask for credit on the dumbest things. A few years ago a lady goes to a payphone and dials my *modem* number in error. Or rather, she dialed it correctly because her basic premise -- the number she thought she wanted -- was incorrect. She stands there at the payphone and makes five calls in a row to my modem, then has the unmitigated gall to call up repair service and report my number out of order 'because there are just loud noises on the line when I call it.' The repair guy calls me on my other line to ask me if there is a problem. I told him there was not, and he tells me about this lady, and how after turning me in to repair then wants to know how to get back the money she lost in the payphone due to this 'phone company screwup' ... everything is the phone company's fault, you see. Ask the newspapers, ask any talking head on your television set. Area codes change on every street corner? Must be a plot by the phone company to turn more local calls into long distance ones. As we used to say in years past to CB'ers with poor quality radios, "Take it back to K-Mart or Radio Schlock and demand a refund. Tell 'em to give you back your welfare check for this month then go by a decent radio that doesn't sound like pooh!" Put in 1995 terms, check those modems and their settings. Look for loose connections on your own premises. Consult with other users of the same hub and see if they also have hassles like this every night during the National Mail Hour. Ask the sysop of your hub to relate his experiences. Once you have completely eliminated yourself and your hub as the source of this problem ... or at least 75 percent of it, *then* go to telco and get your refund for this month. Otherwise quit bothering them. And by the way, if you think AT&T is stingy with refunds due to customer goodwill, try one of the others you highly tout. See how soon they get a bellyful of your complaints also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: johnbach@net.ix.netcom.com (Restrict) Subject: Government Restricts Internet!! Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 21:40:36 GMT Organization: Netcom [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This one could be retitled as a "Last Laugh!", my periodic joke feature ... but then I realized the guy is serious. Read on ... PAT] SPEAK UP AMERICA -- MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT Question: Should the United States Government interfere and put restrictions on the use of the Internet?? CALL: 1-900-945-5600 ext 163 and cast your vote. Cost: $1.98 per call (NOT per minute) Call Today Must be 18+/Touch Tones Only InfoService/Studio City, CA/213-993-3366 Results of this survey will be compiled and sent to members of the House and Senate. Thank you for casting your vote and for making your voice heard. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Isn't that precious! I wonder what he thinks 202-225-3121 is used for? I wonder if he has ever heard of whitehouse.gov or of the various representatives in Congress who have email addresses? *Why* -- pray tell -- would anyone with an Internet address who reads his message not simply send email to the proper people? Oh? You don't know what net addresses to use? That's okay, I have dozens of long winded messages in my queue here from the EFF/ACLU/CPSR and other groups who will be more than glad to tell you who you should be email bombing on a daily basis. Not only that, they know just what you should say when you write. When this guy wrote me, he cross-posted to about a hundred other groups on Noisenet. I suspect when the software saw me in there (moderated) it probably jinxed his message from reaching all the other groups. At the same time as the above arrived, I got another one touting a 900 'dateline' service, where if I so choose, I may meet the man of my dreams. He wanted that one printed also, to the same hundred or so noisegroups. Perhaps as a courtesy, I should carefully remove my name out of the newsgroups line, and feed the whole thing back into the stream again so that others may be as amused as I was by this fellow. So you see, it isn't just AOL that comes up with rather incredible people sending out messages. Obviously netcom has a few stashed away also. As I said, a last laugh for today ... but not a very funny one. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #354 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29255; 23 Aug 95 2:37 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA02816 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:58:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA02807; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:58:04 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:58:04 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508230158.UAA02807@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #355 TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Aug 95 20:58:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 355 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Bell Canada Calling Cards (Chris Gettings) Re: Door-to-Door Ethernet (Jon Mellott) Re: Some Questions on HR1555 (James E. Bellaire) Re: Bell Atlantic: A Scandal Ready to Blow Up in its Face (Erez Levav) Re: Bell Atlantic: A Scandal Ready to Blow Up in its Face (Thomas Lapp) Re: AT&T Business Practices (Mike King) Re: AT&T Business Practices (Bhaktha Keshavachar) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:34:00 -0600 From: gettings@tcel.com (Chris Gettings) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Cards > Unitel and Bell Canada are in competition. As a result, AT&T will > *not* 'validate' (check on and accept) Bell Canada calling cards! MCI > and Sprint will accept Bell Canada calling cards. This suprises me. I have an AGT Calling Card which *is* accepted by AT&T. I used it extensively this past week in Missouri, Colorado and Montana. AGT is the provincial phone company for Alberta, a member of Stentor, the Canadian phone cartel. Bell Canada is also a Stentor company. Bell Canada provides service in Ontario and Quebec. BC Tel is the Stentor in British Columbia, Manitoba Tel in Manitoba etc. MCI is allied with Stentor as a whole, not Bell Canada individually so if they were blocking Bell Canada cards it would seem that they would also block AGT and other Stentor cards. Are you sure AT&T blocks Bell Canada cards or were you just told this by someone at Bell? Stentor thrives on this kind of "dis-information" and other dirty tricks to try to keep their monopoly grip on Canada. Stentor is determined to thwart true competition despite laws providing for it and the regulators are frustrated and powerless against Stentor's financial muscle. Stentor has armies of lawyers and lobbyists to dilatory tactics and obfuscate the truth when responding to CRTC queries. Potential competitors are destroyed by Stentor's predatory pricing and unfair competition; and Stentor is too stupid, closed minded and anachronistic to realize that all the Bell Companies and AT&T have benefited from competition in the United States. Sales and profits are up and markets are expanding for the Bells in the States. Who suffers in Canada? Canadian individuals and businesses who can ill afford it considering the state of their economy. Chris Gettings N5589D BE-35H email: gettings@tcel.com http://canam.dgsys.com/cg/planes.html ------------------------------ From: jon@mu.ee.ufl.edu (Jon Mellott) Subject: Re: Door-to-Door Ethernet Date: 22 Aug 1995 01:42:32 GMT Organization: EE Dept at UF In article , Dan Cromer writes: > NIMLI (sp? - I've heard it said, not actually seen it written) is > offered in Gainesville, Florida, by Southern Bell/BellSouth. I think > that stands for something like "Native IP Mode LAN Interface", and is > a fiber(?) connection to the premise equipment, which then can either > be ethernet or token ring and offer full LAN speed connections. I > didn't pay too close attention to the specifics, since the original > pricing was ~$1200/month, though I think that price has perhaps been > cut in half to about $600/month over the last year or two, especially > since local Cox Cable was seriously discussing using set-top boxes to > do a similar thing with reserved 6mHz channels on the TV cable. The municipal utility company (Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU)) that currently handles (reasonably competently) electric, water, and gas is also beginning to participate in the telecom market. GRU is currently leasing access to its fiber network for implementation of MAN service. The most notable use of this network has been by Shands Hospital which is affiliated with the University. Due to physical plant constraints a lot of outpatient facilities have been distributed around Gainesville with the facilities linked via a MAN allowing the remote sites to have the same sort of bandwidth available within the primary facility. I recall a quote attributed to a city commissioner who said something to the effect that GRU would be providing local phone service throughout Gainesville. I find this idea to be a little unsettling: I doubt that the electric company (which has little or no experience in telecom) is going to be able to compete with the big boys. > [...] I wanted ISDN for my home and due to a "hairpin turn" > environment, whatever that is, I was offered a special assembly of > $130/month, not the $52/month in the tariff. Interesting. Gainesville seems to have one of the cheaper ISDN rates that I've seen: last year I was quoted $34/month for a residential BRI within 15,000 feet of the switch with no usage charges for local connections. Jon Mellott (jon@alpha.ee.ufl.edu) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 16:40:33 -0500 From: bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) Subject: Re: Some Wuestions on HR1555 In TD347 ng@mprgate.mpr.ca (Steve Ng) wrote: > I am a newcomer to the telecom regulations (and the US legislative > procedures), please excuse for my novice questions: > What is the difference between HR1555 "The Telecommunications Act of > 1995" and s652 "Telecommunications Competition and Deregulation Act of > 1995"? The HR version was passed by the House of Representatives, the S version was passed by the Senate. These two bodies are seperate halves of our legislative branch. Once each decides independently what they want in a bill, sometimes each holding separate hearings, the two bills are sent to a conference committee made up of a few members of the House and a few members of the Senate. They decide what is the same in each bill and take the differences and try to decide which way to go. Once the conference committee decides how the unified bill will look it goes back to both the House and the Senate and must be passed by both in its final form. If passed it is sent on to the president, the leader of the Executive branch of our government, for him to sign into law. If President Clinton decides to veto the bill (he has threatened this) he sends it back for another possible vote in the House and Senate. If both the House and Senate each vote a 2/3rds majority in favor of the bill then they 'override' the veto and it becomes law. > When do you expect HR1555 and s652 be passed? will these become a law > (legislation) or a FCC regulation? (or what do we call them when they > are passed?) When the conference committee gets done with the bill it will be voted on again. I don't believe that they have even started looking at it yet. HR1555/S652 will become a law when it gets through the remaining steps. Reading through HR1555 shows that the law will require the FCC to set up regulations to enforce this law. If anyone does not agree that the FCC regulations are the same as the law they can go to court (the judicial system is the third branch of government). > Appearently, each State can introduce its own telecom regulations. I > have read some articles talking about the Public Service Commission > (from one of the State) has allowed a LEC to offer intraLATA services. > Is this correct? How is this related to HR1555 or s652? When HR1555 is > passed, what kind of impact will we see on LEC? allowing them to offer > interLATA services? (I guess the IXC can offer local access services if > HR1555 is passed, right?) The states have similar arrangements as the federal government. Each body as its own method of getting bills passed into laws requiring the PUC to write a conforming regulation. The federal government has authority over the state governments. The states cannot do anything that violates a federal law. Likewise the PUCs must form regulations within their state's law. If the federal law or conforming FCC regulation does not prohibit an activity and the state law does not prohibit the activity then the PUC can allow the activity. LEC intraLATA service was permitted (and is standard) since the breakup of the Bell system. Your LEC is the default carrier for all IntraLATA calls. Recently the IXCs have been asking people to use the 10xxx codes so that the IXC carrier carries the intraLATA calls. The LECs want to provide interLATA service. That is part of HR1555. The IXCs want to provide LEC service. Some PUCs have approved this based on certain loopholes in the federal law, FCC regulations, and their state laws. HR1555 will permit this kind of service, and force the old LECs to compete based on national rules instead of state rules. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Twin Kings Communications - Sturgis, MI ------------------------------ From: levav@yulara.fccc.edu (Erez Levav) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic: A Scandal Ready to Blow up in its' Face Date: 22 Aug 1995 21:43:37 GMT Organization: Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA Reply-To: levav@yulara.rm.fccc.edu (Erez Levav) In article , Paul Robinson writes: > No, the problem lies with what happens to orders which are received by > the company and are either being performed internally or are being > scheduled for processing by a technician, or are otherwise not > finished. Since the issue is over cost, the "back office" processing > which is handled, allegedly by a contractor's employees, is not only > being done badly, in some cases *it isn't even being done at all*! > Both a Federal Government Employee in that agency's telecom section, > and a C&P Telephone Installer, who each work in two different states, > have both independently told me that when orders come into the back > office processing center, the clerks there more-or-less enter them > into the system, and there's really either no- or not-much quality > control. And there's simply not enough people to handle all the > orders that come in to enter them all in the same day without running > overtime, which they are of course, not going to do. So the employees > have a method of handling the excess orders that they can't get done > by the end of their shift. > ** They throw them in the wastebasket without even processing them! ** > That means that the order has been entered, the customer has probably > either been billed for the service or expects it to be changed, but > the order was never even done by the back-office clerks! > And *this* explains why sometimes I place an order for service and > don't get it done. It also explains why I've had orders that are done > incorrectly unless they were complicated; a simple order, the > back-office clerk just throws in the system any-old way, but a > complicated order probably requires that the clerk look up the coding > to process it. BA horror stories? Should we start a contest? Not that I dispute the above, but I have a fresh-from-the-press story that indicates that all is not well at the "front-office" either: Last week I ordered another line. I was told that since I do my own on-premises-wire maintainnence, I do *NOT* have to be there for the installation. When I came back from my client site the day installation was supposed to happen there was a note and phone message telling me that they could not install the line since I was not there. Hmm, interesting -- but expected. So, I called and was promised an early installation (the next morning between 8 - 10). When 10am passed without a show from our friend at BA, I called. I had to wait about 20 minutes to get through. Then I was informed that they do not have my new number as an install-item. Ok, so "we" trace the order by my current number. Found. Now I'm told that the person assigned is delayed at another job. Now I start to get annoyed. First, they promised to be within the time frame. Second, if they have a problem -- they can call, after all they are the *PHONE* co. I inform the lady on the other end that I'm waiting just for the installer, and that since I am paid by the hour I expect them to come ASAP. She promises me that the person will stop what he is doing and come to my place NOW. I wait. I wait. it is 11:15, no one is here. I call again -- using a different number to try and cut the on-hold time. That worked. I speak to another person (that still can't find the record of my new number ...) and when she finaly finds it I'm told that there was *NO ONE* assigned to the install, and it will not be done before 5pm. Now I'm angry -- real angry! I ask to talk to a supervisor. The super is all apologies, yes they screwed-up, yes there is a problem, what can they do to make me happy? Of course, I say come install the line *NOW*. Well, since it is after 11:30, and the union rules dictate a 12 - 1 lunch break, she can not promise me anything will be done until sometime after 1pm. By now I wasted 3 1/2 hours, so I figure I cut the losses, and try for the next day. She promisses me (1) my install will be the first one done the next day (right after 8am) (2) she will call to make sure it was done right. Next day: 8:50 - no one here. I call. As I'm being transferred, a knock on the doorr. It took an hour to get here? I can drive from center city Phila to Princeton NJ or past Wilmingtom DE in that time span. But, at least some one is here. The installer does what they usually do, and comes back after 30 minutes with the big news: he can not get a tone to any of the three free pairs I have. It seems the five pair I have goes somewhere, but not far enough (note that I have two pairs working fine). So this is a job for the cable crew. He tells me there was a cable-person around the corner, and he told him about the problem and it will be handled soon. I insist on a phone number where I can check on the status of the installation. As soon as he leaves I call. What number? We can't find it ... oh, that works order, no -- we do not have a cable crew assigned. The next available crew just started a job and we don't know when they will be over. Time now: 10:30 or so. I'm pissed. I tell them that this is not acceptable, and I demand someone to come *now*. OK, they say -- we will tell them to stop and come to your place. Good. I wait. I wait some more. An hour later -- no one here (do I sound like a broken record???). I call -- by the time I reach the supervisor, a knock on the door. The cable guy is here. Great!? Not quite. He tests the wires and informs me that they seem to be 180 and 100 feet long. That distance goes nowhere close to the junction box where they are supposed to terminate. So, for the next two 1/2 hours he tries to figure out where the cables goes. He can't. The microfiche says one thing, reality is not quite the same. By 1:30 he gives up. There is one possibility he can't check (cuz the people are not there) so he will ask the next crew to try that location. At this point I'm ready to kill. It is pretty clear that I'm not willing to just sit there and wait, and we agrees to a temp solution: he will extend the three pairs and leave the ends "exposed" outside, so the other team can test and look, etc. They will mark the "live" pair when it is done. Today is the day after -- needless to say, the supervisor did NOT call back. Also there was no sign that anyone was testing the pairs last night when I came back ... So, after this long saga, and almost a week after the order, there is no line and not even an idea when one will be there. I do have a question: does anyone know if there is a legal basis for me to bill the BA for the wasted time (the first day -- when they acknowledge that someone did lie to me and messed-up big time)? Thanks for listening, Erez Levav Fox Chase Cancer Center E_Levav@fccc.edu 7701 Burholme Avenue (215) 728-3160 Philadelphia, PA 19111 ATT: 0-700-2xpress 0-700-2101010 (FAX) ------------------------------ From: thomas@menno.com (Thomas Lapp) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic: A Scandal Ready to Blow Up in its Face Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 08:19:36 EDT > ** They throw them in the wastebasket without even processing them! ** > That means that the order has been entered, the customer has probably > either been billed for the service or expects it to be changed, but > the order was never even done by the back-office clerks! On the other hand, this can result in benefits to the customer, so it isn't always the customer that loses. Example: When I switched LD carriers, the new one put in the order to switch from 222 to 333 on my line. The order was put in, and the business office duly noted the change, charged me the switching charge (which I'd already received a check from 333 to cover). But the switch program was never changed. So, 222 closed my account, 333 created one for me, and I continued to use 1+ LD dialing. The result: 222 kept getting charged for the calls, 333 had a zero balance, and I never saw the charges for calls made during that time, since I no longer had an account with 222. So, I won, 222 lost, and if there is a scam, I would think that 222 would want to expose it to keep from getting billed for closed accounts. I actually didn't consider it a scam: more like technical doesn't communicate very well with billing and so there are lots of discrepencies. It happens with any large company. In the end, a call to repair to explain the situation got everything corrected, since the tech could go in and look at the billing office record, see that a change SHOULD have been made, then go in and change the switch on the spot to match. tom internet: thomas@menno.com ------------------------------ From: mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) Subject: Re: AT&T Business Practices Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 15:32:21 PDT In TELECOM Digest, V15 #342, keshavac@enuxsa.eas.asu.edu (Bhaktha Keshavachar) wrote: > Last week a AT&T long distance rep called me at home and offered > me a deal (aka a sweet package) so that I switch to them. The deal [...] > Now this week I call them and they reply saying that they haven't > heard of such a deal! I thought it was rather funny. A rep called me one night and I wanted time to think about the package and compare what I'd pay (and the "rewards") against what I currently pay (and the rewards I get) using Sprint. I asked for a number to call back once I'd decided, and the rep gave me a number, but cautioned that the people at the inbound call center do not have the authority to offer the same deals as the reps at the outbound call center. Makes sense. My guess is the reps who originate the calls have a bigger list of enticements than the inbound call center. After all, if someone calls AT&T, then they must already be somewhat interested -- they're less likely to make a compulsive decision. Mike King * mk@tfs.com * Oakland, CA, USA * +1 510.645.3152 ------------------------------ From: KESHAVAC.SMTMHS@smtmhs.sharpwa.com (Bhaktha Keshavachar) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 17:21:00 PST Subject: Re: AT&T Business Practices In TELECOM Digest, V15 #342, keshavac@enuxsa.eas.asu.edu (Bhaktha Keshavachar) wrote: > A rep called me one night and I wanted time to think about the package > and compare what I'd pay (and the "rewards") against what I currently > pay (and the rewards I get) using Sprint. I asked for a number to call > back once I'd decided, and the rep gave me a number, but cautioned that > the people at the inbound call center do not have the authority to > offer the same deals as the reps at the outbound call center. Hmm... interesting. > Makes sense. My guess is the reps who originate the calls have a > bigger list of enticements than the inbound call center. After all, if > someone calls AT&T, then they must already be somewhat > interested -- they're less likely to make a compulsive decision. True. But there should be a way to handle cases like what happened to me. Maybe the rep who offered me the deal could have made a entry in their data bases against my phone number, so that when I called back whoever received the call would know that. I was under the impression that AT&T service was better than the others (well ... I was a AT&T customer back in Arizona before moving to NorthWest) but now I would think twice before switching to AT&T (with or withour $100 !) Bhaktha ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #355 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04079; 24 Aug 95 21:49 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA09758 for telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:04:13 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA09744; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:04:09 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:04:09 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508241904.OAA09744@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #356 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Aug 95 14:04:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 356 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines, 1+ And All That (John Levine) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Stan Schwartz) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Al Varney) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Matthew P. Downs) AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market (Neeraj Vora) International Plus North American Area Codes (Richard Shockey) Re: Bell Canada Calling Cards (Mark Williston) Wiltel: No More Caller ID? (B.J. Guillot) Snakes In The Net (was Allnet Tries to Hide....) (Michael Fumich) Reward for Private Line Information (Greg Nemec) New Twist in SJ Network (Steve Cogorno) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: johnl@iecc.com (John Levine) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines, 1+ And All That Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 03:30:58 GMT > In *most* area where you may dial local across an NPA boundry you dial > 7D. 'The rule' in *most* rural areas is 'if it is local, it is 7D' > regardless of NPA. The exception is in *metropolitan* areas where you > dial 10D or 11D to cross NPAs. Don't you hate it when people think the entire world is just like their neighborhood? In NYNEX territory, you cannot dial any inter-NPA calls with seven digits. None, zero, zip. This is equally true in New York City as it is in Derby Line VT. It used to be the case that local calls across NPA borders such as 617->401 and 802->819 could be dialed with seven digits, but a year or so ago they changed the rules so now all inter-NPA calls are 11D, even free local calls. It seems to vary by operating company: in highly urban New Jersey, they've still managed to protect enough prefixes that all intra-state local calls can be dialed with 7 digits (11D also works) although with the continued growth in 201 and 908 it's hard to say how much longer that'll be the case. In the related area of whether 1+ means toll or means 11D, that's also a deeply religious issue where the religion varies from area to area. In New York, New Jersey, and California, toll dialing was never closely associated with 1+, so in those states you dial intra-NPA calls with 7D and inter-NPA calls with 11D, regardless of whether they're local or toll. But in New England they must have had more SxS exchanges since the PUCs in 5 out of 6 states mandated that all toll calls must be dialed with 11D. (In New Hampshire it's a customer option.) Local inter-NPA calls are dialed 11D as well, so 1+ means "toll, maybe". This leads to some rather silly situations, e.g. if you're in Boston, all but about 25 of the prefixes in 617 are considered local, so you have to remember a special rule for dialing Marblehead, Marshfield, Whitman and a few other places in 617 that are toll from Boston. This is particularly silly since Boston has a peculiar combination of rates so that the message rate charge for a 7D "local" call to Lexington can be considerably higher than for a "toll" call to Marblehead. Regards, John R. Levine, Trumansburg NY Primary perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies" and Information Superhighwayman wanna-be ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 23:27:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Linc Madison wrote: > James E. Bellaire (bellaire@tk.com) wrote: >> Q. Why should NPAs be required to split rather than be overlaid? >> A. They should not. NPA overlays have been in use for several years in >> New York and California. This means 10 or 11 digit dialing for local >> calls, with the old users being able to keep their numbers. Sometimes >> 7 digit dialing is allowed IF the area code is the same. > This is utterly false. There are no (zero) NPA overlays in California > and there is only one that is in VERY limited use in New York. The > 415/510 split was a split, not an overlay. The 213/818/310 and > 714/619/909 splits were splits, not overlays. The 212/718/718 split > (I list 718 twice because the Bronx initially kept 212 but later moved > into 718) was a split, not an overlay. The 917 overlay on 212/718 is > used only by a small number of cellular phones. In none of these > cases were old users able to keep their numbers, except to the extent > that the original plan for 917 was abandoned. (The plan was to force > all cellular and beeper numbers into 917.) You'll have to define "small number of cellular phones". As far as cellular is concerned, last year CellOne NY/NJ forced all of its existing 212 customers to have their phones re-programmed for new 917 numbers (the customers did NOT get the same number in 917, as the plan is/was to combine all wireless services from 212 and 718 into 917). They told 718 customers that they would have to be reprogrammed sometime in the future. BAMS/NYNEX "asked" their customers to change earlier this year. As of Jan 1, 1994 (or maybe even earlier), new cellular customers were no longer assigned numbers in 212 or 718. The last I heard, there was talk about moving upper Manhattan land lines to either 917 or a new NPA within the next two years. The problem with moving landlines to 917 NOW is that a customer is not guaranteed the same number in the new NPA, since it has been in use for a few years. Stan ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp4.ih.att.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 13:16:59 GMT In article , James E. Bellaire wrote: > I, bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) wrote: >>> Q. Why should users be forced to use area codes when dialing across NPA >>> boundries [sic]? >>> A. They are not. Suprised? In many rural areas users can dial across >>> NPA and state lines with 7 digits. The only time 10 or 11 digits are used >>> is in major metropolitan areas. > goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) replied: >> This latter statement is certainly false. Inter-NPA 7D dialing is the >> exception, not the rule, even in rural areas. > In *most* area where you may dial local across an NPA boundry you dial > 7D. 'The rule' in *most* rural areas is 'if it is local, it is 7D' > regardless of NPA. The exception is in *metropolitan* areas where you > dial 10D or 11D to cross NPAs. In general, 'the rule' is not based on metropolitan vs. rural, but on a state-by-state LEC basis. For example, the "Indiana rule" is for Foreign NPA Local calls is '7D'. The "Illinois rule" is '1+10D'. > The only 1+ NPA requirement I have seen in all of Indiana is from East > Chicago, Hammond, and Whiting, Indiana who can call Calumet City, Illinois, > locally by dialing 1+708. I believe the "1 + NPA local" communities in Indiana are really served by Illinois Bell (or at least are part of the Chicago LATA). So they follow the "Illinois rule". > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is quite interesting that you mention > the Hammond, Whiting and East Chicago area of northern Indiana in your > article. > A similar case existed in Antioch, Illinois and North Antioch, Wisconsin > where 312-395 could dial 414-396 as seven digits and vice-versa. This > did not however prevent the use of 396 elsewhere in northern Illinois; > the rule was that subscribers in Antioch had to dial 1+ to reach anywhere > in northern Illinois *other than their immediate local area*. North Antioch, while in Wisconsin, is served by the Antioch switch, is in Illinois Bell territory and part of the Chicago LATA. They do have to make 'Toll calls' using 1+708 to reach Blue Island, violating the usual Illinois rule of Home NPA Toll calls being '7D'. And they violate the Illinois rule for Foreign NPA Local calls by permitting '7D' to North Antioch. For all practical purposes, Illinois Bell treats North Antioch as part of the 708 NPA, except for taxes, PUC rules, etc. But for MOST purposes, cross-NPA local calls are dialed '1 + NPA' in Illinois, Alabama, Alaska (are there any such calls from Alaska?? To Canada, perhaps?), California, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Wisconsin and virtually all of the East Coast and the traditional Southern states (Texas excepted). Maryland, part of Virginia 703 NPA (DC area treated like Maryland)), DC itself, Missouri in the St. Louis area (314 NPA), Texas and all of Canada have cross-NPA local calls dialed as '10D'. The rest (most of the West minus Pac Bell/Nevada Bell, and the Plains states) uses '7D' for cross-NPA local calling. Or doesn't have such calling at all. Note that there are exceptions to the 1 + NPA and 10D rules in such states, usually when a Foreign NPA is served by a switch in another NPA. This happens a lot in Independent areas, which are typically 'rural'. Thus the observation that '7D' is a 'rural rule'. Al Varney [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: While Hammond, East Chicago, Whiting and Gary, Indiana *were* part of Illinois Bell in the past, they have been part of Indiana Bell for many years now. How they got to be part of Illinois Bell in the first place is an interesting bit of history. If you go back to the start of this century or before, John Rockefeller had his offices in Chicago, but his refinery in Whiting. William Gary had the offices of US Steel in Chicago, but the steel mill in a small company town named after himself on the shore of Lake Michigan just east of Whiting. As phones increased in popularity and usage and it got to the point that every company had to have at least one , Mssrs. Gary and Rockefeller both thought it would be a good idea to have this new form of rapid communication between their offices in Chicago and their respective plant and refinery superintendents. The Chicago Telephone Company (Illinois Bell's predecessor here prior to its purchase by AT&T in the early 1920's) was more than happy to oblige, and soon wires were strung all the way to the southern shore of Lake Michigan. Telephone directories for the period about 1900 show but one entry each for that area: the Whiting Refinery, ask operator for Whiting Toll Station 1; and the United States Steel Gary Works, ask operator for Gary Works. US Steel also had their 'South Chicago Works' running but it was served by the South Chicago exchange of CTC (which is perhaps why in much more recent years when they were still in business there their phone number was SOUth Chicago-2111.) The CTC was more than pleased to get phone lines installed all across the part of northern Indiana at the southern tip of Lake Michigan with the industrial barons largely footing the bill for the initial work. When AT&T bought CTC and put it into the 'Bell System' family of companies under the name 'Illinois Bell' the existing contracts and arrangements in place were simply kept intact. Earliest instance of 'reseller' that I can think of: when workers in Gary (the company town) inquired about getting telephones of their own -- those who could afford it since Mr. Gary was chintzy with wages and most of the 'salary' earned by the workers went back to US Steel to pay for rent and merchandise from the company store -- who do you suppose supplied it? The Turner Telephone Exchange ... a subsidiary of US Steel run by an executive of US Steel named, ummm .. Turner I think ... In the early 1920's the United States Supreme Court divested US Steel, just as happened to AT&T sixty years later. Part of the deal was they had to divest themselves of the Gary Municipal Corporation and anything to do with the town. CTC/Illinois Bell took over the phone service aspect of it. They all thought so highly of Mr. Turner that they retained his name for the exchange, not once mind you -- but six times as the (now indepen- dent) town of Gary, Indiana grew, prospered and required more and more telephone service; i.e. Turner-2, Turner-3, Turner-4, Turner-5, Turner-6 and Turner-7. The exchange split six times over the next forty or so years, with the subscribers asking the operator for five digit numbers of the form 2xxxx through 7xxxx. Gary 'went dial' in 1956 and it finally evolved to where it is today as 219-882 through 219-887. Things, you see, don't just happen by chance. There are reasons things are numbered the way they are as often as not, especially where the very, very old telephone prefixes are concerned. Then one day US Steel for all intents and purposes closed down its Chicago area operation, and Gary went belly-up. It, like the 'downtown' areas of Hammond, Whiting and East Chicago is now mostly just boarded up storefronts, and deserted streets. Another early 'reseller' of phone service was George Pullman. His company town by the same name was just south of Chicago, and along with rent and groceries which the workers bought at stores he operated in the town he owned, they could get phone service from him also if they could afford it. When he became 'enlightened' and decided to stick to making railroad sleeping cars and servicing them (when attached to railroad trains around the USA) he sold off the town of Pullman to the workers who incorporated with their own government. Eventually the town of Pullman was annexed into the City of Chicago whence it became the Chicago neighborhood known as Pullman as it is today. From the days when the Emperor owned everything in sight and had the telephone exchange named after himself comes our present day 312-785 or PULlman, named after the man who used to own it all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mpd@adc.com (Matthew P. Downs) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: 23 Aug 1995 11:37:49 GMT Organization: ADC Telecommunications To sum it all up, people are not happy about area code splitting, nor are they happy about area code overlays. So damned if you do and damned if you don't. Just suck it up and go to 10 digits for every thing! Matt ------------------------------ From: NEERAJ VORA Subject: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market Date: 23 Aug 95 11:12:05 EDT Organization: Univ of Miami IR There are reports that AT&T is all set to enter the local call arena and provide some fierce competition. According to Newsbytes reports they are ready to take a beating at first to gain ground in the market. What are the implications of this move? How is AT&T going to do it? Can we be looking at an era where we could get local, long distance, cellular, pager, PCS and even online services through the same provider? What about monopoly fears, you think the courts/DOJ/FCC will like this? Neeraj "Nick" Vora Programmer/Analyst Dept of Pathology Unversity of Miami NICKVORA@UMIAMI.IR.MIAMI.EDU [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As long as there are 'several monopolies' to choose from, there should be no objection. There was quite a large article in the {Wall Street Journal} a couple days ago discussing this very same thing. According to WSJ, the 'secret plans' of AT&T call for a massive strike entry into the market early in 1996. I really suspect they must have gone back and studied closely how Ted Vail did business when he ran the company a century ago: move in, take such huge losses at first that you bankrupt all your competition in the process, then consolidate it all back into one large company. Ted Vail was like that, you know. When the patent on the telephone expired, and AT&T no longer could prevent other people from manufacturing them, that is when all the small independent telcos started appearing all over the USA. Vail would send his representatives into a small town with an independent telco to make an offer to buy the company. Some would sell out when the price was good enough but even then, back in the early part of this century, there was sufficient hostility to AT&T that many of the small telcos flatly refused to sell out. Outraged, they would tell anyone who wanted to listen that, 'we will never become part of the Bell ...'. They wanted to retain their independence. Vail's response would be, "then fine, don't sell. See how much value your service is to anyone when you can't interconnect with anyone else." He would pull the plug, literally, and refuse interconnection, leaving a small town telco with just whatever subscribers it had and nowhere to connect them except each other. Then he would start a competing telco in the very same town and of course, as part of the 'System' it would be interconnected with other 'Bell System' telcos. **Then he would give the service away to all new subscribers for six months or so ... whatever it took.** The day the independent was driven out of business by these tactics was the day the susbcribers to the new 'Bell System' company in that town had to start paying, and paying plenty to make up for the losses to date. What's interesting about this alleged plan by AT&T to 'take over' local service next year is that they already have several new switches in place largely sitting idle waiting for the day to arrive when they go in service and (according to the WSJ story) AT&T plans to do something quite ridiculous and offer their existing long distance customers 'local area service' for some very small amount of money; far less than what the BOCs are getting. Full custom calling features, the works. Interesting times. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rshockey@ix.netcom.com (Richard Shockey) Subject: International Plus North American Area Codes Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 23:36:57 GMT Organization: Nuntius Corporation Is there a site that has the current lists (Hopefully in Binary form) of all current and anticipated North American Area Codes as well as all International Dialing Country codes? Richard Shockey Nuntius Coropration 8045 Big Bend Blvd S.110 St. Louis, MO 63119 Voice 314.968.1009 FAX 314.968.3163 Internet rshockey@ix.netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Mr. Shockey, you might look at the Telecom Archives. Our list is as good as any these days with all the changes going on. Use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. When connected, then 'cd telecom-archives'. If you do not have anonymous ftp at your site then use the Telecom Archives Email Information Service by sending email to 'tel-archives@lcs.mit.edu'. If you need the help file for using the email service, just send me a note asking for it. PAT]. ------------------------------ From: Mark Williston Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Cards Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 07:40:18 CST Organization: Nova Scotia Technology Network Reply-To: On Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:34:00 -0600, Chris Gettings wrote: > Stentor thrives on this kind of "dis-information" and other dirty > tricks to try to keep their monopoly grip on Canada. The Stentor group plays the same game the competition plays. And, what do you classify as dirty tricks? Pricing competetive? Thats the name of the game. "Squish the competition!" Like all other companies trying to make it in this world. > Stentor is determined to thwart true competition despite laws > providing for it and the regulators are frustrated and powerless > against Stentor's financial muscle. Stentor has armies of lawyers > and lobbyists to dilatory tactics and obfuscate the truth when > responding to CRTC queries. What the heck is real competition? We have a regulated competition here in Canada. The CRTC regulates the pricing of the Stentor telcos the same as they did when they were not in competition. If we want true competition, get rid of the CRTC. Anything the government touches here always goes to hell. This one will too! > Potential competitors are destroyed by Stentor's predatory > pricing and unfair competition; You mean Stentor's LD pricing is cheaper that the competition. That's not unfair, that's competition! > and Stentor is too stupid, closed minded and anachronistic to > realize that all the Bell Companies and AT&T have benefited from > competition in the United States. Sales and profits are up and > markets are expanding for the Bells in the States. Who suffers in > Canada? Canadian individuals and businesses who can ill afford it > considering the state of their economy. Until the local competition is implemented in a year or three, things are not going to be like the USA up here. After local goes, LD rates here will drop drastically. The Stentor group still has to up keep the local network. Policies of the past dictated that people out in the boon-docks 60 miles away deserved telephone service as did the city dwellers. Since LD traditionally helped upkeep this local network and LD rates now being lowered below this help point, one of two things have to happen. The Stentor group either drops out of local, which won't happen, or the local rates go up. (Way UP!) As this happens, local competition will start popping up because it becomes a viable business. (At this point, it's not.) Then, with local costs not digging into the funds anymore, LD prices go down as the competition comes in. ]\/[ark ]/\[illiston - Freelance Games & Graphics Programmer Author of: Two Bit Poker, Lucky Sevens & Ringing Bells. ------------------------------ From: bjg@bgfax.com (B.J. Guillot) Subject: Wiltel: No More Caller ID? Date: 23 Aug 1995 21:08:37 GMT Organization: Tranquility Base Reply-To: bjg90783@jetson.uh.edu (B.J. Guillot) Can anyone give me a yes-or-no answer on whether Wiltel has stopped passing Caller ID from one area to the next? I regularly call from Houston to Colorado. The Houston numbers are using a Wiltel reseller, and the Colorado number would always get my Houston telephone number on their Caller ID box. For the past month, the Colorado Caller ID box has been getting "OUT OF AREA" every time I call it. When I call my Wiltel reseller, they are clueless. So, I call the Wiltel operator (00#), and they give me some 800 number to call for more information. At this 800 number, they say they "can't tell me" the answer and that I will have to call my reseller to find out the answer. (Runaround). The funny thing is, when I first signed up with this reseller, I would ask "you transmit Caller ID" and I'd get "you betcha" from everybody. Now, everyone seems to have forgotten what Caller ID is. Caller ID was transmitted, and was very useful, but it's gone, and my reseller even raised by rates about two months ago. Argh! Regards, B.J. Guillot ... Houston, Texas USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 95 16:05 EST From: Michael Fumich <0003311835@mcimail.com> Subject: Snakes In The Net (was Allnet Tries to Hide....) Yesterday I spoke with a high-level AT&T person who has put me on the right information track in the "500" number situation. He informed me of the following. Bellcore is the agency that handles prefix assignments for the 500 NPA. 500-200 & 500-938 are actually ASSIGNED to WKP Communications/ Long Distance. 500-738 is assigned to International Teleservices Ltd. of Los Angeles CA. Brian Cartmell of WKP made the application for the prefixes for both companies, so they may be related. My source indicated to me that there are certain guidelines to be followed with use of the 500 NPA by companies, among them, that they are not to be used by "Adult Services". He said he was aware of Mr. ("an old hand in that business") Cartmell and WKP. My source also stated they were aware of WKP's reputation but that they were assured by WKP that everything would fall within the guidelines. My source said he would forword those guidelines to me and I will post them here when received. He was very disturbed by my report. He stated if there was a FORMAL COMPLAINT and/or WKP was in violation of the guidelines, or they willfully misrepresented themselves in the application, THE PREFIXES CAN BE REVOKED!!! ;+) So, ALLNET/Frontier et al may NOT be directly aware after all of what is going on. Many times the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, and my impression is this was so filtered that they truly did not know. They know NOW however :+), as the numerous calls from various VP's indicate. So "tentative" apologies to ALLNET. Pat, you are absolutely right in your analogy of the adult bookstore and the "red light" district. I am not concerned about the content of what they do, in fact I am a STRONG free speech advocate. But it really galls me that these people polluted the 800 "block", and now the "500" block of our neighborhood. You indicated in one response that you thought it would be a good public service of TELECOM Digest to expose these people. I AGREE!! I am willing to act as a clearing house for this information, post file's and "alert" lists to the archives, and to post findings and reports to this Digest. Interested? One further note, (if you would indulge me for a few more lines) the LAMEST phone call I received over the past few days was a d00d (sorry) from "Bank One", whom I have no business relationship with whatsoever. He said please call 800-939-3306 ext xxxx "it's important". WHY do you suppose this number gets a reorder from pay phones and only works from "regular" lines? WHY do you suppose there is no attendant, or live person available anywhere or at any extension? (I don't have any collection agencies after me.) Maybe that person will see this and leave a more detailed message on my Voice Mail. Pretty lame attempt to get a direct voice number (ANI) if you ask me. I wasn't born yesterday! Michael L. Fumich / E-Mail: <3311835@mcimail.com> / Phone: 708-461-5770 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone is looking for you apparently. You may have been placed with an agency and don't yet realize it. Remember folks, whenever you get a postcard or a call saying 'call this 800 number to extension xxx' it is very likely the person or company sending it is trying to get your phone number using ANI provided with 800 service. So take care. You might want to call it from some number other than your home. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gnemec@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Greg Nemec) Subject: Reward for Private Line Information Date: 23 Aug 1995 16:48:04 GMT Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. USA I'm working a study which compares the ordering and installation performance of major providers of communications services and I will pay a cash reward to qualified people who will participate in a 15-20 minute phone interview. If you have ordered the following within the past 60 or next 60 days: Interlata private line (DS0 - 56/64K, DS1/T1 - 1.544 Mbps, Fractional T1, or DS3 - 45 Mbps) or Frame Relay service from AT&T, MCI, Sprint, or WilTel (LDDS) and/or Intralata private line from Ameritech, Bell South, or PacTel Please e-mail your name and phone number to gnemec@merle.acns.nwu.edu. You can then be called for a quick phone interview. Thank you, Greg gnemec@merle.acns.nwu.edu ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: New Twist in SJ Network Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 08:54:23 -0700 (PDT) In yesterday's {Mercury}, there was another article about Pacific Bell's new network in San Jose. A San Jose woman refused to allow Pacific Bell to connect her house to the new network. She legally has this right, because Pacific Bell cannot install equipment more than ten feet from the property line. She said she is not interested in video or internet service: though she does own a computer she doesn't have a TV. Pacific Bell finally agreed not to hook up her home, but they also told her that she would lose her POTS service in a year or so when the copper network is abandoned. She said that was fine with her, because she doesn't want any part of the new technology. The CPUC said that Pacific Bell has agreed to not pass network costs on to customers through their basic service phone charges. The article also mentioned that since locla competition may be coming to California, another company may buy Pacific Bell's then obsolete copper network. Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #356 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09485; 25 Aug 95 6:45 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA27141 for telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:18:55 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA27133; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:18:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:18:53 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508250318.WAA27133@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #357 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Aug 95 22:18:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 357 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (Eric Bennett) Re: AT&T Credit For Cut Calls (Steven Lichter) Re: Wideband SATCOM Nets to Support WWW (Darren Alex Griffiths) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Stan Schwartz) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Leonard Erickson) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Nevin Liber) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Ralph Hyre) Re: PacBell's New Network (Steven Lichter) Re: PacBell's New Network (Steve Cogorno) Re: Questions on ISDX's (Mark Beresford) Re: Atlanta Automated 411 (pbxtalk@ccnet.com) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bennett@hpel.umd.edu (Eric Bennett) Subject: Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services Date: 23 Aug 1995 05:30:03 GMT Organization: Horn Point Labs,Cambridge MD,USA In article , Darryl Kipps wrote: > In article is: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was referring to 900-999. Those can > really get raunchy, and quite expensive. I guess we can assume the > adult phone services are like any other business in the 'community' > which a large segment of the community finds distasteful. This analogy is flawed, (unless I have misunderstood). People are not objecting to the existance of these services but to their billing practices. To extend your scenario, the adult bookstore sends the bill to me because whoever shopped there happened to get to main street via my driveway. It seems to me unfair to have a product the cost of which cannot be determined until the purchase is made. I think a mechanism should exist for dynamically charging calls. Imagine how long the teleslime would last if that $5/min popped up on a display before the call was connected. Obviously this would take a big investment for only marginal gain. Encoding the "Billing Class" by using certain number forms (900) is a fair trade-off. > So *now* what do you propose to do people? Block 500's as well? PAT] What other option is there? 500s are a billing lottery unless you trust who/what ever you are calling. Folks who can't get through to 500s being used as intended will come to my attention much sooner than people who are "only making a long distance call" to some landmine 500. Eric B. ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: AT&T Credit For Cut Calls Date: 23 Aug 1995 22:33:06 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They were not 'willing to lose your business > over $4.95', they were willing to lose your business because you nickle and > dime them to death month after month over credit for stuff that in all > likelyhood is *not* their fault. People seem to feel that whenever ... Right after I made the post I got a call from a tech at AT&T, they had opened a ticket since there had been several complaints over a number of months. It turned out that the Hub I call is right next to an Interstate and the noise is truckers running hight powered CB radios. They had been aware of it for years, but PacBell never took any action. They are putting a filter; if that will help, never did on my TV; to take care of the problem. By the way, I only called AT&T when there were a lot of them, not just a few, and it was not the money as I said it was always just under $5.00, but this was a real pain since it slowed the net down. The above are my ideas and have nothingg to do with whoever my employer is. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II. slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: dag@ossi.com (Darren Alex Griffiths) Subject: Re: Wideband SATCOM Nets to Support WWW Date: 23 Aug 1995 09:20:32 GMT Organization: Fujitsu Open Systems Solutions, Inc. Kramer <102564.2255@CompuServe.COM> writes: > Is there a market to support the wideband download of data (imagery, > video, bulk files, etc.) from www sites based on narrow band requests? > Considering developing asymetrical net using DBS satellites (similar > to Spaceways concept) to provide 23MBS downlink to 20cm antennas and > embedded terminals with 14.4 teresstial and/or satcom uplinks for > request channel. Price targets $1/2k per terminal. $3/4 per 15 > second @ 23MBS. What do you think? I don't know what the demand is, but cable TV companies have already thought about this. For a while there was a company that distributed a full newsfeed via the veritcal blank of WTBS (I think) and it was available to anyone who bought a special modem and payed a monthly fee, actually that service may still be around. You got a high speed, cheap, newsfeed but you had to send news via conventional nntp of uucp methods. There was also talk of cable companies setting up ppp connections over regular phone lines, you'd send over the phone line but you'd receive data via your cable TV hookup. I've never heard of that going beyond some test customers, but with the advent of deregulation it could become more popular. Cheers, Alex Griffiths Senior Software Engineer Fujitsu Open Systems Solutions, Inc. ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 01:10:57 -0400 The new Southern Bell (BellSouth) phone book for Charlotte, NC arrived this week, and I bet there are others on the Digest like me who do the Steve Martin routine when they hear the phone book slam against the door ("The new phone book's here!"). To quote directly from Page 10 of the White Pages: "Calls into Charlotte's expanded area within North Carolina may be dialed with just seven digits. Calls into Charlotte's expanded area within South Carolina require the 803 area code plus seven digits - no need to dial '1' before the area code." I guess this is another case of "1+ means toll". I had assumed that all of the 10D inter-NPA areas had been changed to 11D. I guess not. Charlotte has a local calling area that covers a 40-mile radius from the city all for a flat rate (something I'm not used to, coming from NYNEX/NY). It was also recently mentioned that Atlanta has the world's largest local calling area. Can someone confirm this? Stan ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Date: Wed, 23 Aug 95 05:43:25 PDT Organization: Shadownet Our Esteemed Moderator writes: > Even if we assume there is some validity in the 'one = toll' argument -- > and it probably was valid a number of years ago when area codes did not > change with every street corner and back yard neighbor's fence -- there is > not a lot of consistency there now. One does not equal toll for large > segments of customers in 312/708 who are near each other. There are many > many cases now where inter-areacode dialing is purely local. I'll grant > you in more rural and lesser populated areas of the USA -- let us take > Wyoming, or Montana as examples -- you still have to go the entire state > before you change area codes and toll generated from seven digit dialing > is pretty common. But do they dial 1 plus seven digits in that case, in > order to catch the attention of the originator of the call? I would think > they would do that if alerting the caller to the existence of toll was > the reason for the leading one. PAT] They did do that. Heck, here in Oregon and Washington, up until the introduction of N0X and N1X exchanges forced a change, the rules were as follows: Local inside NPA: xxx-yyyy Toll inside NPA: 1-xxx-yyy Toll outside NPA: 1-NPA-xxx-yyy I don't know of any cases of local calls acroos NPA boundaries, but I suspect that they were dialed as seven digits, because my older copies of exchange info for NPA 503 list a number of "protected" exchanges for 708 and the like. Of course, since Jan 15, 1995, 1 + seven digits is not allowable *anywhere* in the NANP. But both from previous discussions here, and helping people across the US and Canada set up dialing translation tables for Fidonet mailers, I'd have to say that the practice of "1 means toll" was far more prevalent than the reverse (going both by area, and number of NPAs). Take a good look at how long distance is dialed *now* (after the the introduction of NNX area codes). There's a pretty clear pattern of "1 means toll" vs "dial it all as 7 digits" (10 for inter-NPA). It's places like Califormia, New York, and Chicago that are not using 1 to indicate toll. And these are the places where other "comsumer unfriendly" practices such as *mandatory* measured service exist. "1 means toll" is alive and well. And maybe someday, it'll penetrate to the telephone hells like Chicago and LA. :-) BTW, I have no problem with *allowing* 10/11 digit dialing of local numbers. I think it makes sense. But I do think it'd a good idea to have to dial a 0 or 1 before any long distance call. If nothing else, it makes programming dialing equipment easier, because you can set some defaults such that you won't accidentally treat a new exchange clear across the state as a local call. Forcing the call to wait until "cheap" time doesn't interfere seriously with delivering the email, but it certainly prevents unpleasant surprises. (this is less critical now that in-state rates are getting rational. But it's still a good thing). ------------------------------ From: nevin@cs.arizona.edu (Nevin Liber) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 13:37:44 -0700 Organization: University of Arizona CS Department, Tucson In article , lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) wrote: > In California, all calls to a different NPA, whether local or toll, > must be dialed as 11 digits. All calls within a given NPA, whether > local or toll, may be dialed as 7 digits. That must be a fairly recent change. About two years ago, I remember having to make some phone calls at pay phones from Monterey to Sunnyvale (both in 408) and having to dial the 1 before the seven digits. Nevin ":-)" Liber nevin@CS.Arizona.EDU (520) 293-2799 ------------------------------ From: rhyre@pitbull.uhc.com (ralph hyre) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: 22 Aug 1995 20:54:13 GMT Organization: United HealthCare Corporation James E. Bellaire (bellaire@tk.com) wrote: > Q. Why should users be forced to use area codes when dialing across NPA > boundries? > A. They are not. Suprised? In many rural areas users can dial across NPA > and state lines with 7 digits. The only time 10 or 11 digits are used > is in major metropolitan areas. In CBT-land (parts of 513, 606, 317) we can use seven digits for 'local' calls. I can call across NPA boundaries to points in Northern Kentucky (606) and Southeastern Indiana (317) We recently lost the ability to do 1+ seven digits (now all TOLL calls are 1+ ten digits), but that's a small price to pay. > The plan: > Overlay the area with a new area code. > Require 1+NPA+local number for LD and ZONE calls. > Permit 7 digit dialing to local exchanges, regardless of NPA. > Prohibit 7 digit dialing to same NPA, except for local exchanges. > Allow 1+NPA dialing for all calls AND BILL AT THE PROPER RATE. > I doubt if the telcos would want to mess with cross-NPA 7 digits in > major metropolitan areas, so I don't expect this to be implemented > without PUC or FCC pressure. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There really is no reason to ever go to > eleven digits as in 1+anything. The reason is that when we get to the > point that all calls must be dialed as AC + seven digits, we will no > longer need the initial '1' as a flag. The Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana Public Utilities Commissions disagree with you. 1+ still serves a 'Toll-Alerting' feature, indicating that the call will cost more than a local call. When the phone companies react to Internet Telephony and make all calls cost the same, then we won't need the 'toll alerting' feature anymore, I suppose :-) ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: PacBell's New Network Date: 24 Aug 1995 12:02:49 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) writes: > It seems the issues between Pacific Bell and the City of San Jose (CA) > have been resolved and PacBell has resumed installing it's new > network. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think PacBell should appeal the city's > ruling regards negotiations with each property owner. Most cases involving > utility easement rights over the years have gone in favor of the utility > and that is how I think it should be. PAT] The above it not always true. Some years ago the City of Riverside, California put a transformer in my back yard next to my house on the ground. They did it without asking or checking for right-a-way or easement. They did a lot of damage working on it over the years. I always claimed they had not right to put it there, but they said they had my permission in writing, they would not or could not show me their claim. In time it finally after years fighting them I got it to court, the paper they had was an eaement, but it was a copy and from what it looked like they had copied my signature onto it from something else and then just copied it over. They could never produce the form They then claimed that even though they may not have had the paper they had the right to have it there since it was needed to supply me my power. That did not hold up since it also supplied the whole block. It turned out because of a change in the planning department that the city required for the builder to get his permits, the house was build there, where that would have been the street. What finally happened was I was paid for ten years of it being there and they finally moved it. The judge said that they did not have the the right to just take the property and on top of that the placment violated the cities own electrical regulations. The above are my ideas and have nothing to do with whoever my employer is. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II. ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: PacBell's New Network Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 19:37:14 PDT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think PacBell should appeal the city's > ruling regards negotiations with each property owner. Most cases involving > utility easement rights over the years have gone in favor of the utility > and that is how I think it should be. PAT] Yes, but PacBell wants to install equipment where they currently have no easement rights. Remember, these boxes are to be placed *every 10 to 12 houses* in the front yard. The city contends that since there will be so many of these amplifier boxes, Pacific Bell should try to negotiate the location with the homeowner. I certainly wouldn't want the telco coming out and saying "Well, we're putting our box here and we want to rip out this concrete work here, and some of your trees." I personally wouldn't mind have an amplifier box in my yard, but I would like to have a little control over *where* it would be placed (ie: somewhere that's not very noticeable). Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: markb@ncp.gpt.co.uk (Mark Beresford) Subject: Re: Questions on ISDX's Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 09:04:55 GMT Organization: GPT Business Systems (I.S. Dept) In article , dsumka@NetVision.net.il says: > I am hoping someone out there might be able to give me some information > about GPT's ISDX PBX's. (that was enough initials for a while). > I have heard rumours that these PBX's sometimes "lose" switch information, > does anyone know anything about that? > Also, can anyone reccomend good Call Detail Recording software for these > switches? The software we are using currently seems to lose calls and > minutes when we compare that data to the invoices from our carriers, more > then a 5% loss in duration. GPT Business Systems read with concern the recent information on the Internet regarding the GPT iSDX. GPT prides itself in the quality of the iSDX and its resilience. GPT would like to assure all iSDX users and readers of this note that the iSDX is a long standing and very reliable product now being actively supported and sold in over 40 countries world-wide. It does not have any problems of loss of information relating to switched call traffic. With reference to "Call Detail Recording software" for the iSDX, GPT has always maintained an open policy on records output on the V.24 port. As a result over 40 companies have been registered with GPT to receive the descriptions of the call logging records. Prominent amongst these are Databit, SR Comms, BTS, Datapulse, TISL, Wayland, Moscom, ASL, Christie Softech and Tiger. We hope that all readers will feel renewed in their confidence with regard to this issue. Anyone who has any further questions or queries regarding iSDX should contact the GPT Help Desk on + 44 115 943 3015. ------------------------------ From: pbxtalk@ccnet.com Subject: Re: Atlanta Automated 411 Date: 24 Aug 1995 01:34:13 GMT Organization: RBOC Wage Slaves of America In article , Nick Vora wrote: > In article , kpolking@nyx10.cs.du.edu > (Kent Polkinghorne) writes: >> Andrew B. Hawthorn writes: >>> Atlanta has recently added an automated directory assistance system >>> and I was curious if anyone knew how it works. When a person dials >>> 411, they are connected to a recorded female voice that says "What >>> city please?" The caller responds and the voice asks "What listing?" >>> The caller replies. > Miami (Southern Bell) has a similar (if not the same system). The > operator comes on line to confirm any discrepancies with you and then > patches you through to an automated voice that tells you the number > and informs you that for an additional charge it can be dialed for > you. However I've found that even when there is no doubt and no > discrepancy the operator comes on line, if only to say "Thank you" and > then patches you through? Is there a reason beyond alleviating the > fears of people who believe machines are taking over? Can't the > computer system handle it fully?! You want it fully automated? I think it's scary! But then again, I know 411 operators, they support their families with their jobs, etc, yakity shmack. I know you probably don't care, so I won't go on. But the first thing I thought of was Berbet Doodah. When I was working 411 one night, we had a caller come in who wanted Berbet Doodah. The operator looked for it, checked the spelling, didn't find it, and the customer would not accept that. So he was routed to the SA. Now I get him. We checked the spelling again, phonetically, "B for Bravo?" "Chess!" "E for Echo?" "Chess!"etc. until we had spelled out Berbet Doodah. I checked the whole area code, reversed the words (Doodah Berbet) and even went through the Residence files. No Berbet Doodah! I informed him of this, and now he was very upset. I asked him if he was sure of the spelling, and he started to spell it phonetically again, only this time, it was "B as in Bictory, E like Edward, L rike Rarry, B like Bictory, E like Edward, T like Tango, nest vord T like Tango, U like Umbrella," etc, etc. until he had spelled out enough to parse it together as "Velvet Turtle", a local restarant. As I was giving him the number, I was glad I wasn't his waitress. ;-) Let's see what your automated system does with Berbet Doodah! pbxtalk@ccnet.com "The right to be heard does not include the right to be taken seriously." Hubert H. Humphrey ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #357 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02341; 27 Aug 95 11:27 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA27493 for telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:37:12 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA27485; Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:37:09 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 22:37:09 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508250337.WAA27485@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #358 TELECOM Digest Thu, 24 Aug 95 22:37:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 358 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Before You Call Telco (was Re: AT&T Credit For Cut Calls) (Peter M. Weiss) UCLA Short Course on Optical Fiber Communications (Bill Goodin) What Does Internet Information Transmission Really Cost? (A. E. Siegman) Online Telephone Directories Wanted (Bob Coret) Text to Speech Test Assistants Wanted (David A. Rivkin) Re: Telecom and the End of WW-2 (Mark Brader) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 16:21:48 EDT From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Before You Call Telco (was Re: AT&T Credit For Cut Calls) Organization: Penn State University Here is a checklist that PSU computer support personnel have developed for dialup network users. Though it was customized to the PSU community, I think it is worthy of consideration in many environments. The author is Herman "Skip" Knoble who has given permission for me to re-post for non-commercial use. Pete Weiss -- Penn State Subject: Why Did My PSU Dial Up Connection Drop? - A Check List Organization: Penn State University Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 10:11:23 EDT From: H. D. Knoble (Qualified feedback to this posting is solicited, particularly for platforms not mentioned herein. Please send to: Skip Knoble, hdk@psuvm.psu.edu) Why Did My Penn State Successful Dial-Up Connection Drop? A Checklist by H. D. Knoble 08/15/95 The Pennsylvania State University Center for Academic Computing Library Computing Services Office of Administrative Systems Office of Telecommunications Once an Access dial-up connection is established at a data rate compatible with your modem and serial port to Penn State TCP/IP services, the connection may drop; the following is a check list of possible reasons for this specific scenario. We recommend that you copy and check this list before calling for technical assistance if and when you experience seemingly random connection drops (disconnections). This not only will help us; but it will help you improve the reliability of your microcomputer communications. The checklist follows: (1) a) Between the hours of Monday-Thursday -- noon to midnight, Friday -- noon to 6:00 p.m., and Sunday -- 6:00 p.m. to Midnight, the CAC Serial Protocol (dial-up) servers (xxx-xxxx, xxx-xxxx, and phone numbers at other Penn State locations) drop data (drop the modem connection) after 1 hour of Internet activity or after 15 minutes of inactivity. "Inactivity" is defined as no Internet data exchange. E.g., using Eudora to compose a letter taking more than 15 minutes to compose it while using no other Access clients; e.g., while connected using any Windows applica- tions that are not Access clients - like Word Perfect, Excel, etc. - for more than 15 minutes at a time would cause no Internet data exchange and so would be considered Internet "inactivity." b) Twenty-four hours per day, the OTC Serial Protocol (dial-up) servers (xxx-xxxx) drop everyone after one hour of inactivity. "Inactivity" is defined as no Internet data exchange. This was done because some people were staying connected (using a Server rack modem) for hours (sometimes 24 hours) at a time, even when not using their PC; therefore many others were often getting a BUSY signal when dialing the Servers. (2) In addition to (1) above, when accessing specific hosts through Telnet/TN3270 the following applies: a) For LIAS (or dial-up connections to LIAS) after approximately 6 minutes of inactivity, the connection is dropped. After 5 minutes of inactivity a message and a beep is sent; then after 1 more minute of activity the connection to LIAS will be dropped. b) For OAS, 15 minutes of inactivity causes re-authentication via password; after one hour of inactivity, the connection is then dropped. (3) For both CACSLIP (DOS clients) and CACTWIN (Windows clients) (rarely for MacTCP), some screen savers (some TSR's in general) do interfere with communications. Typical symptoms in this case are "random" line drops (when screen saver kicks in/out), and file transfer via FTP interrupted and aborted. We do not recommend running screen savers or other timer-related DOS Terminate and Stay Ready programs when using modems--period. (4) For Windows Access clients, a Windows GPF (General Protection Fault) may cause the connection to be dropped. Please see the file: pub/dos/windows/gpfguide.txt on FTP.CAC.PSU.EDU for more about Windows General Protection Faults. (5) There are lots of external (environmental) causes for faulty modem communications, especially (but not only) for high-speed (14.4/28.8) connections. Most of these are related to the phone line itself. Sometimes (but rarely) this is a Bell Atlantic problem. More often the problem is related to the phone line between the phone jack and modem, or serial connection between modem and microcomputer serial port. Our recommendations, based on years of experience and experiments involving actual cases, follow: a) Do not route the phone line within three inches of any electrical cord or extension cord, or PC CPU cord, or Printer cord, or Monitor cord, or any electrical appliance or power supply. This often means taping or stapling the phone line away from such places between jack and modem. Symptoms are random dropping of the line, problems with TCP/IP clients, logging in, etc. Inductance from electrical lines wreaks havoc with phone lines. b) Do not route a phone line being used by a modem through answering machines. Some of the "smarter" (and cheaper) ones have been known to intercept/inject data, which of course is undesirable. c) Do not route a phone line underneath a carpet since people probably will walk on it, thus crushing the very fine wires therein. The same is true for running phone lines where doors will close on them, etc. d) Do not use old phone lines from jack to modem. Use a new phone line of the correct length, without splicing (splicers also have been known to cause loose connections, and thus problems, in some cases). e) For external modems, if your serial adaptors or serial cable is old, adaptor pins bent, or cable cracked, replace them. Make sure your serial connections are TIGHT. Parts (a) and (c) above above also apply to serial cables. f) For internal modems, and for all microcomputers in general, dust buildup on internal components compromises built-in PC cooling systems. While any PC is running, fans circulate air around internal components. We recommend that after unplugging all related electrical connections, you remove the CPU cover and carefully blow dust off all computer components, including internal modem cards, at least once a year; compressed air cans (purchased where electronic components are sold) or reversible vacuum cleaners may be used this purpose. Dust free components PREVENT communications problems. g) Surge protectors for both computer power and phone connections are recommended. But we recommend that you unplug your computer and modem during electrical storms (which may do more than interfere with a TCP/IP dial up connection). 6) When dialing with a modem through a phone with the Bell Atlantic feature "Call Waiting", if "Tone Block" is not activated (i.e.,Call Waiting is not canceled for this call) then if someone calls after such a dial-up connection has been made, it is highly likely that the data connection will be dropped. (Please see page 43 of the 1995-1996 Bell Atlantic phone book for State College for information.) That in fact is most often the case if the connection is via CACSLIP or CACTWIN via CAC or OTC Serial Protocol servers. One activates tone block (downtown State College) by prefixing the four characters "*70," to the phone number to be computer dialed; for example: *70,xxx-xxxx. The CACTWIN and CACSLIP install/customization menus provide the option to select dial-up numbers with the tone block prefix. (7) Hours of availability for the Penn State Data Backbone are advertised as follows by OTC: "Normal operating hours for the Data Backbone are from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 a.m.; 5:00 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. is the time designated for normal maintenance. Most often, the historical record shows that the maintenance period was given over to normal operations. However, normal maintenance may disrupt the data backbone so no guarantees about quality are made for the normal maintenance time." (8) Finally, the Backbone, a Nameserver, Router, or Mainframe (such as PSUVM, LIAS, or OAS) is down or was down (or hung, or overloaded) when the problem was being experienced. One of the CAC Help Desks can help confirm these instances. Call them AFTER you checked out possibilities (1) thru (6) above: (1) and (2) can be monitored by being alert and using a watch; (3) thru (6) should be attended to as regular maintenance as good computing practice. ------------------------------ From: Goodin, Bill Subject: UCLA Short Course on Optical Fiber Communications Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 18:37:00 PDT On September 26-29, 1995, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Optical Fiber Communications: Techniques and Applications", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Tran V. Muoi, PhD, President, Optical Communication Products, Del Hanson, PhD, Principal Engineer, Hewlett-Packard, and Richard E. Wagner, PhD, District Manager, Bellcore. This course offers a review of optical fiber communications fundamentals, then focuses on state-of-the-art technology and its applications in present and future communication networks. The course begins with the major building blocks of optical fiber communications systems (fiber and passive components, sources and transmitters, detectors and receivers). Actual design examples of fiber optic links for short-haul and long-haul applications are studied, and recent technological advances in addressing problems due to fiber loss and dispersion are presented. The impact of fiber optic technology on communications is highlighted in the latter half of the course. Recent developments in local and metropolitan area networks to support multimedia traffic (i.e., data, voice, and video) and their evolving architectures and standards are fully covered. The treatment on telecommunications systems includes various technological options for subscriber networks, exchange networks, and the global undersea networks. Network architectures evolving from the traditional telephone and CATV networks are contrasted. Technology trends and directions for realizing the so-called information superhighway are examined as well. Finally, optical networks using wavelength routing and multi-wavelength cross-connects are presented. The course fee is $1295, which includes extensive course materials. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu ------------------------------ From: siegman@ee.stanford.edu (A. E. Siegman) Subject: What Does Internet Information Transmission Really Cost? Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 17:54:23 -0800 Organization: Stanford University Out of curiosity, and an engineer's natural tendency to want to understand the order of magnitude costs of things, I'd like to have even the roughest estimate of what it costs to send, say, a megabyte of data from one point to another over the Internet? I appreciate this is a very poorly defined quantity and that these costs are spread (and hidden) all over the place. But, let's say we peel out all the costs (hardware, software and peopleware) associated with what people do with Internet data after they get it, or the costs of generating it before they send it, and just consider some reasonable estimate of the transmission costs (phone lines) plus some reasonable estimate of the real costs associated with the activities of individual Internet nodes in receiving, processing and passing on data that flows through them. How much, averaged in some way over all the worldwide links, to send a megabyte (or a gigabyte, if a megabyte is too small) from here to there? ------------------------------ From: b.coret@cs.utwente.nl (Bob Coret) Subject: Online Telephone Directories Wanted Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 15:28:08 PST Organization: University of Twente, Netherlands Does anyone know of on-line telephone directories? Currently I found the following: - France (minitel) >> http://www.epita.fr:5000/11/ - Italy (Electronic Yellow Pages) >> http://www.saritel.interbusiness.it/pge/LoginPgeEn.html - Switserland (Telecom) >> http://etv.eunet.ch/cgi-bin/etvq I need to look up adresses and telephonenumber for my genealogical research. Please mail me if you know any other online telephone directories. Bob Coret, The Netherlands b.coret@cs.utwente http://www.cs.utwente.nl/~coret/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't forget the service available on Compuserve. Although not a complete listing of all USA telephone numbers, it is rather large and quite useful. PAT] ------------------------------ From: RivkinDA@PE-Nelson.COM (David A. Rivkin) Subject: Text to Speech Test Assistants Wanted Date: 24 Aug 95 20:41:29 GMT Organization: PE-Nelson I am looking for people to evaluate a few text to speech systems and grade the quality based on fidelity and proper conversion to spoken English (American). This will be blind test where you will receive wave(.wav) file output from the various systems and the text that they all read and a questionaire to fill out and return. Please let me know if you can help me out. I am not a developer of any of these, just wanting to get several peoples opinions on the systems. Thanks, David Rivkin Rivkin Science and Technology, Inc. RivkinDA@PE-Nelson.com ------------------------------ From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: Telecom and the End of WW-2 Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 02:39:53 GMT Pat writes in Volume 15 Issue 349: > ... I was very privileged to be a nearby neighbor of Laura Fermi, the > widow of Enrico Fermi. She often took her dinner in the Anchorage, > which was the name of the hotel dining room as did I, and she told a > story once ... Her words from this point forward ... Except that the story has appeared in this newsgroup/digest twice before -- in January 1990 in Volume 10 Issue 12, and again two and a half years later in Volume 12 Issue 667. It turns out that the previous posting was transcribed by Pat from tape, but this time he was reconstructing the story from memory. It was at my suggestion that Pat reran the article in 1992, but after making the suggestion then, it occurred to me to have a look at the applicable section of Richard Rhodes's superb book "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" (Simon & Schuster, 1986, ISBN 0-671-44133-7). The book turns out to imply, on pretty good evidence, that there is something quite wrong with Mrs. Fermi's story. Following is the "rebuttal" which I wrote in 1992. Text quoted with "|" signs is from the accurate version of the story, as posted then. Notes that are [[double-bracketed, like this]] are being added this time, in 1995. ---+--- Let me summarize the timetable: | "The test was set for 4:30 AM the next morning, so we returned to the | hotel and went to bed early. We got up at 3 the next morning and drove | out to the location ... The chronology that she gives after that is: 4:45... they return to town to telephone, but can't get the operator. 5:00 or just after... Fermi finds and wakes up the operator. They are back at their observation point 5 minutes before the explosion. | .... later, we got together with the others who had | been assigned there and found out that it wasn't the rain that delayed | things; it was that woman asleep; you see, the main people responsible | were linked by phones through Alamogordo; they had to coordinate what | they were doing and sychronize their work. All of them got the same | thing on the phone we got: no answer from the operator for 45 minutes! So this would imply that the operator's nap started at about 4:15, if not earlier. Okay, now to Rhodes. On page 664 of my copy: # [Robert] Oppenheimer, [Gen. Leslie] Groves, [Kenneth] Bainbridge, # [Gen. Thomas] Farrell, [Richard] Tolman and an Army meteorologist met # with [the meteorologist for the test, Jack] Hubbard at McDonald Ranch # at four that afternoon [the day before the test] to consider the # weather. ... They decided to wait and see. They had scheduled # a last weather conference for the next morning at 0200 hours; # they would make up their minds then. The shot was set for 0400 # and they let that time stand. As a source for at least part of this paragraph, Rhodes cites "The Day the Sun Rose Twice" by Ferenc Morton Szasz (Univ. of N.M. Press, 1984). Now on page 666: # Thunderstorms began lashing the Jornada [del Muerto] at about 0200 # hours ... Winds gusted to thirty miles an hour. Hubbard hung # on at Zero for last-minute readings -- only misting drizzle had yet # reached the tower area -- and arrived eight minutes late for the # 0200 weather conference at Base Camp, to find Oppenheimer waiting # for him outside the weather center there. Hubbard told him they # would have to scrub 0400 but should be able to shoot between # 0500 and 0600. Oppenheimer looked relieved. # # Inside they found an agitated Groves waiting with his advisors. # "What the hell is wrong with the weather?" the general greeted # his forecaster. ... Groves demanded to know when the storm would # pass. Hubbard explained its dynamics: a tropical air mass, night # rain. Afternoon thunderstorms took their energy from the heating of # the earth and collapsed at sunset; this one, contrariwise, would # collapse at dawn. Groves growled that he wanted a specific time, # not an explanation. I'm giving you both, Hubbard rejoined. ... # # Oppenheimer applied himself to soothe his bulky comrade. Hubbard # was the best man around, he insisted, and they ought to trust his # forecast. The others at the meeting--Tolman and two army meteor- # ologists, one more than before--agreed. Groves relented. "You'd # better be right on this", he threatened Hubbard, "or I will hang # you." He ordered the meteorologist to sign his forecast and set # the shot for 0530. Then he went off to roust the governor of New # Mexico out of bed to the telephone to warn him he might have to # declare martial law. For all of this material, Rhodes again cites Szasz, but he notes that Szasz in turn cites Hubbard's *contemporary* personal journal. This is pretty solid evidence, unless Hubbard had some reason to falsify it. The signed forecast would be even better evidence: has anyone seen it or seen it reproduced somewhere? According to Rhodes, Hubbard gave it to Bainbridge at "about 0508", following which the master switches were unlocked and the bomb fired with a 20-minute delay. There is further evidence that the telephones were not all down during the period that Mrs. Fermi mentions. From page 667 of Rhodes: # The meteorologist prepared his final forecast at S-10000 [the command # center, 10000 yards south of Zero]. He called Bainbridge at 0440. # "Hubbard gave me a complete weather report", the Trinity director # recalls, "and a prediction that at 5:30 am the weather would be # possible but not ideal. ... I called Oppenheimer and General # Farrell to get their agreement that 5:30 would be T = 0." Hubbard, # Bainbridge, Oppenheimer and Farrell each had veto power over the shot. # They all agreed. Rhodes cites a different source for this: "All in our Time" by Jane Wilson (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1975). There is a further problem with Mrs. Fermi's story, which is this: the Trinity test site is 60 miles from Alamogordo! From her account it seems to be at most a 25-minute drive from the telephone exchange to the observing point, which she says is 15 miles from the site. (Unfortunately, while Rhodes mentions something about what Fermi did during the test, he doesn't mention where he did it.) [[ In the version posted this year, she doesn't say how far the observing point is from the Trinity test site, but does say it's 5 miles from Alamogordo, and refers to people being stationed *50* miles out. I guess Pat remembered *part* of this exchange of postings from 1992, and unconsciously adjusted the distances this time to fit the times. Before I found out that the recent posting was unreliable for fine detail, it occurred to me that Mrs. Fermi might still have had an Italian accent in 1965, really said "50 miles", and Pat misheard it when transcribing the tape in 1990. Unfortunately for this explanation, the complete sentence is: | It was set up that the scientists were deployed over about a | two hundred square mile area; we were about fifteen miles from | the target. A circular area of 200 square miles would have a radius of just 8 miles. Of course, the observing locations need not have formed a complete circle. In fact the main observing points were 10 miles out. I don't know if Fermi was at one of those points, though. ]] I am left with three possible interpretations. One is that Mrs. Fermi's story simply never happened. A second is that it happened exactly as she said, except that after 20 years she got some of the times wrong, while Hubbard participated in a cover-up, and Wilson's source was also misleading. And the third, which I think most likely, is that Fermi's drive into town did happen, but the operator's nap did not really affect the timing of the test. In this interpretation, not all the telephones for everyone went through that operator; perhaps it was only the lines between the test site and the hotels where the scientists were staying, say. (Also, maybe the operator was not in Alamogordo but in a smaller town closer to the site, such as Tularosa or Carrizozo.) Maybe what someone really said was that they had been afraid that the test would have to be cancelled because certain people couldn't be telephoned, and then it was all right. I dunno. I'd like to believe the original story. But the evidence... Mark Brader, msb@sq.com, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto "But even though they probably certainly know that you probably wouldn't, they don't certainly know that although you probably wouldn't there's no probability that you certainly would." -- Sir Humphrey Appleby ("Yes, Prime Minister") on nuclear deterrence My text in this article is in the public domain. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #358 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23925; 26 Aug 95 2:59 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA18745 for telecomlist-outbound; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 21:13:43 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA18737; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 21:13:40 -0500 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 21:13:40 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508260213.VAA18737@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #361 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Aug 95 21:13:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 359 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson A Few More Notes About TWX (Mark Cuccia) India's VSNL Offers Corporate Domains, Internet Access (Rishab A. Ghosh) Re: Smartcard Phone Spotted in Oshawa Ontario! (Sam Spens Clason) Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market (Robert Levandowski) Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Richard Barry) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Cuccia Subject: A Few More Notes About TWX Date: Fri, 25 Aug 95 13:47:00 GMT This article is about the operation of a TWX from a user's view, during the DDD period, 1962-1982, when TWX was an *integral* part of the DDD Telephone network- whether AT&T owned it outright, or during the 1970's, when it was a marketing function of WUTC but still routed/switched/numbered/dialed over the Bell System's DDD Telephone network. This is when The Bell System DDD (AT&T Long Lines with its Bell Op.Companies, and interconnecting 'independent' GTE's, etc) was a predominantly Crossbar switched network, and Common Channel Signalling was only a theory at Bell Labs, when inbound MF address and SF supervisory signals were the thing. When Bell automated the TWX network and retrofitted Model 28 teletypes with a dial/handset-earpiece/modem/keyset control, and the 'teen' series (Model 10, 14, 15) teletypes had a '6-line-keyset-500-deskset' telephone (with mouthpiece insert removed/disconnected) in 1962/63, all TWX teletype machines were only 3-row keyboards, 60-66 Baud, 5-level Baudot punch-tape code. They had numbers assigned with their geographic telephone NPA, plus seven digits, using a centrally located NNX code for that city or region, ususally that of a #5XB. A year or so later, Bell began the N10 special areacode series of TWX, 4-row keyboards, Model 33 & 35 TTY machines, 8-level ASCII punch-tape code, and 100-150 Baud rate, with a built in speaker, dial or touchtone pad, modem, and built in 6-keyset control. For dialing purposes- you pressed 'originate' on the control keyset (or associated modified 500 deskset telephone), listened for regular dialtone thru the 'half-a-handset', earpiece, or microphone-disabled 500 set handset. You dialed *the full ten digit number* of the TWX customer you wished. There was NO prefix of 1+ no matter WHAT type of TWX machine you were calling from, even if your area DID USE a mandatory 1+ for toll telephone DDD. For the most part, TWX machines got dialtone from a #5XB office, regardless of where they were located. Even if a TWX was out in the 'sticks', it usually was FX-ed to get dialtone from a nearby specially modified #5XB office, however, INCOMMING calls could be routed thru its own local telephone Step by Step, Panel, #1XB, or non-modified #5XB office. This special arrangement was known as 'divided-line' access. I think that many TWX's on the 510 special areacode were the original divided line access customers, altho' they could have been upgraded later on, but still kept the 510 special areacode. Within a matter of seconds, you either got ringing, busy, reorder, recording, whatever. If it rang and was answered manually or automatically, you then heard the 'modem' high pitched tone for a few seconds, handshaking occurred, then the loud high tone was disabled from your speaker or earpiece, and data/text transmission occurred (answerbacks first). As I stated in my earlier article, for the most part, regular telephones could NOT dial N10 areacodes, but 3-row keyboard TWX machines (with regular geographic telephone areacodes) could; they'd HAVE to, since they were TWX to TWX calls! N10 (4-row keyboard) TWX machines could dial to ANY N10 or geographic telephone NPA-NXX code, EVEN IF THE TELEPHONE NUMBER WAS A TELEPHONE! Since there was no way to speak, the person on the telephone receiving the call would just keep saying 'Hello, Hello, Hello' and then hang up, thinking they were getting a 'bad' call, just like fax users or data users today dialing (by mistake) telephone users. You would hear ALL voice/speech thru your earpiece or half-a-handset or built-in-speaker. You COULD enter the full ten digit number for any local Time/Weather/Temp service and 'broadcast' it on the speaker on Model 33 & 35's! If you were on a N10 4-row keyboard machine, you'd probably chalk-up a charge for that call, since it was ID'd by the #5XB as a N10 origination. However, a 3-row keyboard geographic telephone NPA machine *might* not chalk-up any charges, since it was 'local-telephone' call (this was WELL BEFORE any 976-PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call-numbers, too!). I remember visiting the local offices of WUTC, WUIntl, ITT, RCA Americom/Globcom, TRT, etc. back when I was in high school in the late 1970's, requesting TWX/Telex directories and user's manuals, and seeing how the USER managed a TWX machine, including calling up the local weather report's telephone number! Using a TELEX machine involved pressing an originate key, but NOT hearing any dialtone. On WUTC Telex, a lamp lit up under the rotary dial, you spun the dial just like a telephone, and when there was a data connection, the motor in the machine turned on, answerbacks were exchanged, and you could send/type your message. On ITT, RCA, WUI, TRT, FTC, etc. domestic telex 'private' networks arranged for primarily international calls, you either pressed originate, or you turned a knob switch from 'off' to line, your motor turned on right away, a line and data connection was established with that IRC's switch, you got the switch's ID code, and you TYPED your destination's telex number, similar to the way it was in many foreign countries, according to THEIR telex directories instructions pages! Busy circuits and other 'call progress' info was TYPED by the switch onto your machine's paper roll-except for WU Telex machines, where the lamp underneath the plastic dial would blink or flash at specified rates. BTW, the dial or touchtone pad on TWX terminals did NOT have the letters- only numbers! Except for the oldest (teen series model 10, 14, 15) terminals which had an associated BLACK 500-deskset, rotary dial, with 6-key controls- THAT had the regular dialface with letters, numbers, 'Operator' over the zero! BUT since telephone numbers were assigned to TWX in 1962/63 (when automated by integrating it with the DDD Telephone network), 'ALL-NUMBER-CALLING' was being phased in, and even if the NPA-NNX code for TWX had an exchange name at one time, NO TWX numbers were ever identified as '504-VAlley-2-5XXX'; only as 504-822-5XXX, which was the series of numbers used in the New Orleans metro area for 3-row keyboard TWX machines in the 1960's and 70's. How far we've come now with email & the Internet! (and let's not forget Fax machines, too!). MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 13:07:19 -0700 From: Rishab Aiyer Ghosh Subject: India's VSNL Offers Corporate Domains, Internet Access -==This Indian Techonomist bulletin (C) Copyright 1995 Rishab Aiyer Ghosh India's VSNL offers corporate domains, Internet access for $800 August 25, 1995: India's overseas communications monopoly, Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL), will allow corporate users of its new Internet service to have their own domain names. Although individuals can pay $160 for 250 hours of use, institutions have to pay $300 to $800 for the same use, if they choose to connect through dial-up lines. Amitabh Kumar, VSNL's Chief General Manager for Planning told The Indian Techonomist that corporate users will be able to register their own domain names - such as techonomist.com.in - through VSNL's name server, and will have multi-user accounts. The only previously announced distinction between institutional and individual dial-up accounts was that the former would only get shell access. Although VSNL's service is a result of loopholes defining its monopoly - it is strictly speaking a "gateway" to the Internet outside India, and cannot provide connectivity within the country - it seems happy to encourage competition. This is not very surprising, as VSNL makes money anyway - the overseas communications link must be acquired from it, even by competing Internet providers. Competing providers don't exist, thanks to government restrictions on datacom (see http://dxm.org/techonomist/dcom.html) - but Mr Kumar said VSNL is "discussing [this] with the DoT," and would "prefer to work with Internet service providers while providing wholesale services to them." Mr Kumar adds that VSNL is prepared "to meet the requirements" of datacom after deregulation of restricted "value added services." Meanwhile, the first week after the launch of VSNL services has gone reasonably well, with individual accounts growing the most rapidly. Service is available through the Department of Telecom's national X.25 network, I-NET, and through local calls from Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta and Madras. VSNL claims it will connect Bangalore and Pune, two centres of much hi-tech activity, later this year. The excuse for this delay of some months is lame - apparently a lack of space to locate their servers. A more likely reason is the nature of the loophole that lets them offer the service at all - their limited rights to provide last-leg connectivity for overseas traffic. GPSS, an old VSNL X.25 gateway, is also available only in India's four major cities. For the pricing structure and more on VSNL, see http://dxm.org/techonomist/news/vsnl.html -==(C) Copyright 1995 Rishab Aiyer Ghosh. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. -==Licensed for ELECTRONIC distribution, including commercial, provided -==this notice is attached. This bulletin is from The Indian Techonomist, -==the newsletter on India's information industry. -==http://dxm.org/techonomist/ - e-mail rishab@arbornet.org -==Phone +91 11 6853410; H-34-C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA. The Indian Techonomist - newsletter on India's information industry http://dxm.org/techonomist/ rishab@dxm.org Editor and publisher: Rishab Aiyer Ghosh rishab@arbornet.org Vox +91 11 6853410; 3760335; H 34 C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA ------------------------------ From: d92-sam@dront.nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: Smartcard Phone Spotted in Oshawa Ontario! Date: 25 Aug 1995 18:37:32 GMT In srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) writes: > Last week I was in Oshawa visiting friends and we stopped at a food > store. The pay phones in the lobby were the standard Nortel 'Millennium' > model, but the top housing above the screen was bright blue with the > new Bell logo, and the card reader housing was bright yellow. Both of > these were changed from the previous grey-blue. The graphic by the > card slot showed two cards, one with a stripe and one with a small > square. > Intrigued, I remembered them and turned to the Web when I got home. > Earlier, I had seen an ad in French for a new Bell phone card with a > chip, in a promotional magazine for the Montreal Jazz Festival. Bell > Canada serves most of Ontario and part of Quebec. > A check of Bell's Web site, http://www.bell.ca, turned up a media > release dated 7 April, which described the new card and its rollout > across Quebec and (in September) Ontario. The card was supposed to be > easily buyable in convenience stores, depanneurs, etc. > My question is: are these cards reusable? Can you put more money in > them when they run out? Will they be refillable in an ATM? Is there > some sort of standard for these cards so that they could be used, say, > in other countries? Will other countries' cards work in a Bell phone? > All this hints at a vast behind-the-scenes transaction network > rivaling the banks'. We have this kind (?) of telephone cards in Sweden. They're not reusable and only carries a number of units. Of course this will be expanded to real smart cards sometime in a not to distant future. I think the French have real smart cards in their pay-phones, I'm almost sure they've got cards that don't run out of units. Whether they're smarter than that I don't know. Using smart cards for identification is very secure and can be used by e.g. banks. There are a great number of tests being carried out at the moment, I don't know all to much about France and France Telecom. But they've been pushing for smart cards for a looong time now. There has been French tests with pay-phone-and-ATM card all in one. There was however great administrative problems since neither France Telecom nor the banks wanted to give up to much control to the other part. Ergo failure. We have smart card styled SIM cards carrying the equivalent of the ESN etc in GSM phones and there are no technical problems with expanding this for home use, i.e. having a home terminal plugged in the wall and thus implementing UPT. The main driving force for smart card home terminals isn't very likely going to be UPT but rather new banks not wanting to invest in offices having a lot of staff etc. Of course the telecom business has be active so that they can use the terminals and the cards for telephone services too. I.e. not only secure transportation and identification over the telephone network but also personal telecom services. "New banks" could be insurance companies, larger corporations etc. This will revolutionize the banking business -- and if the telcos play their cards right -- and the telecom business. The major obstacle is again who's to have control over the system and especially the identification part while still maintaining all services -- financial and communicational -- integrated. Sam www.nada.kth.se/~d92-sam, sam@nada.kth.se, +46 7 01234567 ------------------------------ From: rlvd_cif@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Robert Levandowski) Subject: Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York Date: Fri, 25 Aug 95 18:17:01 GMT In NEERAJ VORA writes: > There are reports that AT&T is all set to enter the local call arena > and provide some fierce competition. According to Newsbytes reports > they are ready to take a beating at first to gain ground in the > market. Then Pat writes: > What's interesting about this alleged plan by AT&T to 'take over' local > service next year is that they already have several new switches in place > largely sitting idle waiting for the day to arrive when they go in > service and (according to the WSJ story) AT&T plans to do something quite > ridiculous and offer their existing long distance customers 'local area > service' for some very small amount of money; far less than what the BOCs > are getting. Full custom calling features, the works. Interesting times. AT&T is one of the companies providing competitive local phone service here in Rochester, NY. As you may know, Rochester Telephone (a division of Frontier Communications) is an independent phone company, not a RBOC. RochTel came up with an Open Market Plan where "Rochester Telephone" would have regulated rates, but other companies could buy time on the RochTel networks and switches to resell as dialtone to consumers. AT&T is one such reseller here. Time Warner Communications, the local cable co., is also offering phone service via their fiber-optic CATV distribution network, which means they don't have to give RochTel money for the network. Anyhow, a few months ago AT&T was complaining that they were having trouble competing in Rochester, because it was taking so long for RochTel to configure their equipment as necessary to process new customers. Apparently AT&T has to ask RochTel to set up each new customer in the switches or something ... and it means long delays in getting hooked up to AT&T or if you need repair as an AT&T customer. Sounds like another case of what goes around, comes around. Frontier, RochTel's parent company, is partners with Nynex and several other cellular providers in New York and New England. In the next few months, the current company -- RochesterTel Mobile Communications / NYNEX Cellular / Advantage Cellular / Mountain Cellular -- will become Frontier Cellular throughout New York State and other markets in the Northeast. Frontier Communications International, the long distance company, has been buying up other LD carriers left and right. Right now, they are the fifth largest LD carrier, behind AT&T, Sprint, MCI, and LDDS. (In my opinion, they also offer far better customer service than most other LD carriers I've tried, including AT&T.) Frontier owns local telephone companies in several states throughout the Northeast and midwestern states, including Frontier Communications of Minnesota. While I'm not unhappy with RochTel/Frontier service, I must say that recently they've been reminding me a bit of a younger, leaner, meaner AT&T -- a juggernaut. Since they were never part of Bell, they have much more of a free hand than the RBOCs and AT&T ... and I wonder if they don't aim to be the next pre-breakup AT&T. Rob Levandowski Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester macwhiz@cif.rochester.edu [Opinions expressed are mine, not UR's.] ------------------------------ From: rbarry@iol.ie (Richard Barry) Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 04:45:13 GMT Organization: Ireland On-Line Reply-To: rbarry@iol.ie fritz@mirage.hc.ti.com (Fritz Whittington) wrote: > There is an extremely interesting document available at: > http://www.open.gov.uk/oftel/oftelwww/oftcons.htm > which explains how the UK intends to handle the area-code and number > shortage problems, in a very flexible and user-friendly way. Makes me > wonder why we couldn't do it the same way (I know, North America is a > lot bigger and has more people, but the scheme is scaleable). It also > (horrors!) asks for *feedback* and *comments* on the various > proposals. I wouldn't suggest that anyone looking for an ideal numbering strategy look at the UK model (except on a what not to do basis!) The reason the authorities there are entering a pretent public consultation process is because they have done so much damage and screwed up so badly up to now. There is no long term numbering strategy in the UK - it changes virtually every year, which is great for the printing industry! Since "PhONEday", the UK has enough numbering space for about 8 billion phone lines, which means that phone numbers are much longer than they need be, under any population / user terminal growth scenario. You can't tell which part of the country an area code is located from the first digit or two, as one can in virtually every other European country -- (eg area code 01232 is Belfast, Northern Ireland while 01233 is in Kent in the South East of England). The UK has several codes for toll-free and similar numbers including 0800, 0500, 0345 and 0645. In surveys, about 20% of the population don't know that 0800 is toll free and nearly half the population don't know that 0500 is toll-free. Mobile phone numbers, paging, and premium rate numbers are found all over the numbering space. Instead of giving London 8 digit local numbers (like Paris and Tokyo), it now has two area codes, which can mean having to dial 11 digits to reach someone in a neighboring suburb. Anyone looking for logical or radical numbering plan ideas should consider other numbering plans such as found in Switzerland or Ireland or Denmark or Norway (where they have done away area codes altogether). Most European numbering plans have the following characteristics: *Hierarchical area code structure* (like the US Zip code. While one mightn't know where Zip 90234 is precisely, even a non-American can guess that it is on the West coast and probably in California. Someone who knows California can probably guess it is in the LA area, etc.) This structure follows on to some extent from the country code layout (eg all country codes beginning with 3 are in Europe). *Variable number length* so that cities that outgrow 7 digits can have 8 digit local numbers. No multiple area code confusion. Small towns can have even shorter local numbers, if desirable. *Distinctive non-geographic codes* so that anyone can tell a mobile number or a pager or a premium rate number from a regular phone number easily. *A single code for a single function* - all toll-free numbers should begin with the same code to assist public recognition. So if you run out of numbering space in the 800 range, add an extra digit to the bit that follows 800 - (ie 800 nnnn nnnn). This goes back to variable number length flexibility. Richard Barry rbarry@iol.ie ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #359 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa12952; 25 Aug 95 10:41 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA29985 for telecomlist-outbound; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 02:12:42 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id CAA29977; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 02:12:40 -0500 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 02:12:40 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508250712.CAA29977@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #360 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Aug 95 02:12:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 360 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Scott Robert Dawson) Questions: History of AC 905; What's a TWX? (Scott Robert Dawson) Digital Dictation Equipment (D. Matthew Ford) V&H Questions (Douglas Frank) IntegreTel/VRS Billing-Bulk Block Procedure (Randal L. Schwartz) Billing Goof-ups (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Bell Canada Calling Cards in USA (Scott Robert Dawson) Smartcard Phone Spotted in Oshawa Ontario! (Scott Robert Dawson) L.A. Times 800-Number Article (Carl Moore) 860 Working Early (Scott D. Fybush) Future of 809 D.A.? (Linc Madison) Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market (S. Bapat) Re: War on Payphones (Rich Szabo) Re: War on Payphones (Dave Levenson) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 04:10:39 GMT Organization: InterLog Internet Services bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) wrote: > I, bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) wrote: >>> Q. Why should users be forced to use area codes when dialing across NPA >>> boundries [sic]? >>> A. They are not. Suprised? In many rural areas users can dial across >>> NPA and state lines with 7 digits. The only time 10 or 11 digits are used >>> is in major metropolitan areas. > goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) replied: >> This latter statement is certainly false. Inter-NPA 7D dialing is the >> exception, not the rule, even in rural areas. > In *most* area where you may dial local across an NPA boundry you dial > 7D. 'The rule' in *most* rural areas is 'if it is local, it is 7D' > regardless of NPA. The exception is in *metropolitan* areas where you > dial 10D or 11D to cross NPAs. > Check the boundry lines between NPAs in 'rural' areas, such as the=20 > Michigan/Indiana border, where South Bend, IN, can call Niles, MI, and > Elkhart, IN, can call Union and Edwardsburg, MI. > Along every NPA border there are several rural communities who can dial > across the line 7D. A viewpoint from Ontario (Bell Canada country) ... In the National Capital Region (613: Ottawa, Ontario and 819: Hull, Quebec) there is 7D _local_ dialing across the NPA boundary (also the Ottawa River, the provincial boundary, and if Quebec separates from Canada, an international boundary). By contrast, the Greater Toronto Area was recently split (1993) with Metro Toronto remaining 416 and the outlying region becoming 905. (This must have used one of the last remaining NZX style area codes). Local calls across this NPA boundary are dialed 10-digits only; however there are areas on the outer boundary of 905 where one can dial 7D local across the NPA boundary to other area codes (519, 705, 613). No local calls are dialed with a 1 in front. However, all long-distance calls between or within NPAs are dialed as either 0+ or 1+ ten digits. (Up to about five years ago it was still possible to dial 1+ 7D for long-distance within the same NPA. This ended when the NZX area codes started to run out). It was not until I started to go to the States, and also talk to US enployees of the company I work for, that I realised that many people dial 1+ for local calls. Is this because 'local' service in the States can be metered? All our local service is flat-rate. Bell got stomped when it recently tried to introduce metered local service for business. There was mention of this on this group not long ago. I suspect the 1+ now tends to signify some kind of metered service, and as far as the user is concerned, the difference between 'local' or 'long-distance' service becomes more a matter of cost. Incidentally, we do not have the same separation between local and long-distance carriers also; Bell Canada operates the local monopoly in its territory, and also competes in the long-distance market. (The 400-kilo gorilla ...) Scott Robert Dawson srdawson@interlog.com http://www.interlog.com/~srdawson/scothmpg.htm ------------------------------ From: srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) Subject: Questions: History of AC 905; What's a TWX? Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 04:14:01 GMT Organization: InterLog Internet Services I've two questions: 1) Old catalogues at my work give 905 as the area code for northern Mexico, and 903 as the area code for Mexico City! 905 is now _my_ area code in southern Ontario (outside Toronto). Mexico is country code 52 now. What happened? Did their phone system get rebuilt and centralised? Was north and central Mexico part of country code 1 once, and then the whole country was put under country code 52? 2) What is or was a TWX? The same old catalogues give 10-digit TWX numbers all in what are now area codes N10 (310, 410, 510... ); but the locations are much more scattered, and don't correspond to the present area codes. Scott Robert Dawson srdawson@interlog.com http://www.interlog.com/~srdawson/scothmpg.htm [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Gee, I feel old today. These are both topics we have covered here in the past, but a brief summary might be good for people new to the Digest in recent months. Mexico never was in code 1. They were always 52. But for a number of years, international direct dialing was in flux here in the USA with some people able to do it and others not able. For those who were not able to place a call to Mexico using 011-52, the 903/905 hack was available. These were two previously unused area codes which were set up to call Mexico. They were never actually known by those numbers; instead the official rule was that one could call Mexico by dialing '90' followed by '3' and the local number in many towns in northern Mexico or '5' followed by the loal number in Mexico City. Once IDDD was universal throughout the USA, there was no longer a need for 90-3 or 90-5 and they were retired from service pending assignment as regular area codes elsewhere. What is TWX, the man asks. Well, the yperiter Echange was AT&T's competition to Western Union's Telex, or egraph change. Earlier in this century, Western Union had expanded their telegraph services to include a 'do it yourself' network where telegrams (essentially messages typed out on paper transmitted long distances over wires) no longer had to be sent from a public telegram office. Businesses could lease a telegraph sending/receiving machine and do it themselves in their offices via a switched network Western Union constructed, in large part with the help of their very good freind, AT&T. After awhile, AT&T thought that Telex looked like a very profitable thing, so they decided to do it themselves. They had to call it a different name of course, so they chose TWX, which is pronounced 'Twix'. They were also just getting into area codes about the same time, so they reserved area codes 310,410,510,610,710,810 and 910 for TWX machines. Where 310,410,510 and 710 covered the eastern part of the USA, 910 covered the entire western part of the USA from Chicago westward. 610 was Canadian TWX and 810 was Mexican TWX, although I never once saw a single example of 810 back in those days. One day Western Union got in a snit about the success of AT&T's TWX network and filed suit to force AT&T out of that business. Their claim was that they (WUTCO) had the exclusive rights to written communication by wire just as AT&T had the exclusive right to verbal communication by wire. Remember, this was *long* before divestiture; I guess it was in the early to middle 1960's. AT&T lost the case and the Supreme Court ordered them to divest themselves of TWX. 'Conveniently', WUTCO was more than happy to purchase it. The purchase was made 'in place' with the switching equipment, etc, remaining in AT&T (really local telco) central offices, but belonging to WUTCO. The 'area codes' assigned for TWX use went along with it, and for about twenty years or longer, WUTCO operated two separate and distinct networks, their original Telex network and their TWX network, with Telex network switches and equipment in their custody and maintained by them and TWX network switches and equipment owned by them but maintained by the various local Bell System telcos under contract. Is that all clear as mud now? . A number of years ago WUTCO decided to change the name of the service from TWX to 'Telex II'. Then they started 'Easy Link' with a gateway into both Telex and Telex II from Easy Link. Easy Link subscribers got email, and those who wanted an address for the receipt of telegrams were assigned network addresses in the 910 'area code' regardless of where they were. Then AT&T eventually bought the whole thing back from WUTCO, and I guess all the Telex II (TWX) machines were moved over onto the original Telex network and all the reserved area codes were put back into service for voice telephony. Honestly, I have no idea these days who -- if anyone -- operates and maintains the Telex network, if it even still exists. Does AT&T still operate it domestically in the USA? I know that the company known as 'Western Union International' which was never part of Western Union, is owned by MCI, or at least it was. Anyone have updated stuff on this? PAT] ------------------------------ From: dmatthewf@aol.com (DMatthewF) Subject: Digital Dictation Equipment Date: 24 Aug 1995 21:53:11 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: dmatthewf@aol.com (DMatthewF) I am looking for PC-based dictation equipment (like Dialogic cards) that can be used for transcription. Mainly looking for a way to control voice playback with a foot pedal - start, stop, ff, rew, etc. Our current setup is dictation is called into a pc with 32 ports of Retorex cards. Transcriptionist get voice via a VDI superstation, which is essentially a DTMF pad with a volume knob and a foot pedal connection. The foot pedal is a Sony FS-75 which has three switches in it. The VDI is programmed to send the appropriate DTMF when the foot pedal is pressed. I have checked with Dialogic, and Retorex and they dont make anything like that. Does anyone have any suggestions? D Matthew Ford Programmer Analyst DMatthewF@aol.com ------------------------------ From: dougf@startel.com (Douglas Frank) Subject: V&H Questions Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 04:49:08 GMT Organization: Silicon Beach - Business Internet Services Can anyone tell me where V&H coordinates came from, and how they actually represent distances in the U.S.? Does anyone know how to translate V&H coordinates (such as those found in Bellcore's LERG data) into standard lattitude and longitude? I am creating a real-time network map, and need this translation. The answer in any form would be appreciated, though programming code or algorithm form would be best. Thanks, Doug Frank STAR Telecommunications Santa Barbara, CA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 10:43:39 -0700 From: Randal L. Schwartz Subject: IntegreTel/VRS Billing-Bulk Block Procedure > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it your way and got a sort > of irritated lady who told me it was 4-BLOCK-ME **not** BLOCK-ME. > So I redialed it as suggested and did indeed get through to an > automatic service. I only have a couple of complaints about it > and both are minor. Your ANI is delivered to them at the time you > call, and if you indicate you wish to block your home number, they > respond by blocking the ANI given to them without an opportunity > to block *additional* residence numbers unless apparently you call > them from each line involved, one at time. They offer the choice of > blocking '800 callback services' as well as 'international services'. Do they read the ANI to you? If they do, we now have another way of getting ANI. (I'm trying it as soon as I get off line.) Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 Email: Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger merlyn@ora.com) Web: My Home Page! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, they read the ANI back but only after you have indicated you want the line blocked. I guess you could use them to find out the number on lines which are unidentified as long as you or the owner of the line don't object to being blocked from Integratel charges. The way they phrase it is cute: "As a courtesy, your local telephone company forwarded your number to us at the time they connected your call. The number we are blocking is xxx-xxx-xxxx." ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@delphi.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Billing Goof-ups Date: 24 Aug 1995 01:03:47 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As part of the investigative process, > if it is just a couple dollars or less then the clerks usually write > it off on the assumption it costs more to do the paperwork charging it > back to the other telco and arguing with the other telco about it > ("you sent it to us"; "no we didn't, you must have gotten it from > another telco"). And sometimes for whatever reason in those days the > paperwork would get so mutilated and banged up they did not know where > they got the charge from so they had to write it off. This time > around, someone decided to dial the number and see if it was actually > in service or not. Of course it rang; of course I answered. Bingo, > that set off an audit with accounting making an inquiry of plant to > see what the actual status of the line was. Plant reconstructed what > paperwork they had on it and accounting had to turn on the service > after the fact. You're fortunate that they found it. It took me over eight months to convince Nynex that they made the exact same mistake on my line. I'd call them FROM the line through an operator and have the operator read back the number to customer service. The nice lady on the other end of the phone would always come back with "I have no record that the number exists." to the amusement of both myself and the operator. They never did find all my toll charges but I know where they went. Seems that the local VA hospital is on the same exchange as me but their numbers are xxx-71xx where mine is xxx-071x ... so it's obvious that someone shifted a digit. I found out because in years of old I used to, well, know my way around other carrier's networks and a friend in NJ called me and asked if I was up to old tricks again. I got a bill for eight months of flat rate local service -- which came to a grand total of $160 because even the end-user charges weren't added in. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would happen a lot that if the subscriber was on the same premises as some major account (for instance, a switchboard serving most of a large building) that the installer who came to do the work 'just assumed' without reading the order carefully that the new install was part of the larger customer's account, and they would turn the service on but not submit the paperwork correctly. Likewise, a major organization or institution occupies most -- but not all -- of an exchange with a centrex account and then here and there a few independent subscribers are stuck in on the same exchange ... the centrex admin had better watch out, because someone processing the paperwork says 'oh, exchange xxx, that is all used by the Universal Amalgamated Corporation,' and just toss the new charges on their bill. PAT] ------------------------------ From: srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Cards in USA Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 23:44:19 GMT Organization: InterLog Internet Services A week or so ago I wrote that Bell Canada calling cards would not be accepted by AT&T in the States. Several people have replied to me, stating that they've had no problems using their cards. I checked with my source and she admitted that, okay, it sometimes works. But then sometimes it doesn't. I guess this is something that bears watching. I _am_ going to the States soon and I'll be sure to give this a test ... more info later. Scott Robert Dawson srdawson@interlog.com http://www.interlog.com/~srdawson/scothmpg.htm ------------------------------ From: srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) Subject: Smartcard Phone Spotted in Oshawa Ontario! Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 00:04:26 GMT Organization: InterLog Internet Services Last week I was in Oshawa visiting friends and we stopped at a food store. The pay phones in the lobby were the standard Nortel 'Millennium' model, but the top housing above the screen was bright blue with the new Bell logo, and the card reader housing was bright yellow. Both of these were changed from the previous grey-blue. The graphic by the card slot showed two cards, one with a stripe and one with a small square. Intrigued, I remembered them and turned to the Web when I got home. Earlier, I had seen an ad in French for a new Bell phone card with a chip, in a promotional magazine for the Montreal Jazz Festival. Bell Canada serves most of Ontario and part of Quebec. A check of Bell's Web site, http://www.bell.ca, turned up a media release dated 7 April, which described the new card and its rollout across Quebec and (in September) Ontario. The card was supposed to be easily buyable in convenience stores, depanneurs, etc. My question is: are these cards reusable? Can you put more money in them when they run out? Will they be refillable in an ATM? Is there some sort of standard for these cards so that they could be used, say, in other countries? Will other countries' cards work in a Bell phone? All this hints at a vast behind-the-scenes transaction network rivaling the banks'. Scott Robert Dawson srdawson@interlog.com http://www.interlog.com/~srdawson/scothmpg.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 17:37:54 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: L.A. Times 800-Number Article Today (Aug. 22) the {Baltimore Sun} had a reprint of an {L.A. Times} article "800 numbers have the ring of success" by Roy Rivenburg. There is no hint of area code 888 or the rumbles involving it, but it does note that 800 numbers are relatively new with regard to consumer affairs (the phones replace at least some of the mail). Also, it says: "The granddaddy of toll-free product numbers emerged at Whirlpool, which christened its 'Cool Line" in 1967, the year AT&T introduced 800 service." ------------------------------ From: fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) Subject: 860 Working Early Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 03:08:44 GMT NYNEX is already allowing calls to Connecticut's new 860 NPA, two weeks before permissive dialing is scheduled to start. I can call 860 from my office in 617-254 (Brighton MA), although not through the office PBX, which does not yet recognize 860. SNET's announced test number, 860-203-0950, is not yet operational. I'd be interested to know whether other areas are getting early access to 860. BTW, on a trip to New Jersey the last weekend of July, I passed a glass-company truck on the highway that had already been altered to show (860) instead of (203) ... and this a full month before permissive dialing started! Glad to see the message is getting through to some people. Scott Fybush - fybush@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Future of 809 D.A.? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 06:36:56 GMT I was reading in TELECOM Digest recently that plans are being made to allow any of the various small countries and territories in area code 809 to get its own area code. The first of these is Bermuda, area code 441, going into effect later this year. Under the current system, directory assistance for all of 809 is centralized (I think somewhere in Florida) -- you reach the same operator for Bermuda, Puerto Rico, or Jamaica. However, if each of those has its own area code, they could decide independently whether to continue contracting with the folks in Florida (or wherever) or to set up their own operation. Conceivably they could even try to set different charges for access to their directory assistance. Ironically, if every different country got its own area code, it would simplify the determination of rates: only the area code would be needed to figure the cost of a call, instead of the area code and prefix. Just one of those little bits of technotrivia that preoccupy me when I really should be asleep. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think 809-555-1212 is physically located in South Carolina. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bapat@gate.net (S. Bapat) Subject: Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market Date: 25 Aug 1995 01:34:45 -0400 TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > What's interesting about this alleged plan by AT&T to 'take over' local > service next year is that they already have several new switches in place > largely sitting idle waiting for the day to arrive when they go in > service and (according to the WSJ story) AT&T plans to do something quite > ridiculous and offer their existing long distance customers 'local area > service' for some very small amount of money; far less than what the BOCs > are getting. Full custom calling features, the works. Interesting times. Interesting, indeed. Taking this argument to its logical extreme, since now there are no restrictions as to who can be in whose market, it is possible that using Ted Vail's old tactics AT&T might end up buying USWest, PacTel, SWBT, Nynex, BellAtlantic, BellSouth, Ameritech, and GTE, and we will be back to square one. S. Bapat bapat@gate.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, I don't think they could buy up those companies. I think all those former AT&T companies have to be left alone where AT&T is concerned. That is what I meant by saying 'several monopolies'. Today, a hundred years after the government-ordered breakup of the Standard Oil Trust owned by John Rockefeller, any of the various parts of the former oil monopoly (Exxon, Amoco, Chevron, etc) are by themselves larger than the original monopoly. Competition, eh? So let's open a gasoline refinery and oil producing business and see how far it gets us ... Within the next dozen years or so watch and see if each of the Baby Bells are just as powerful and sassy as AT&T ever was in the old days if not more so. No one today remembers when Exxon, Chevron and Amoco were all one and the same; and I venture to say in a few years very few Americans around will still remember when there was a single 'telephone company'. Instead there will be a half-dozen or so large, major players in the industry, each a complete full service phone company with long distance service, local service and everything else they offer. So instead of one monopoly to 'choose from' we will have six to choose from. Still, I guess that's better than just one. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ac220@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Szabo) Subject: Re: War on Payphones Date: 24 Aug 1995 11:05:08 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Reply-To: ac220@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Szabo) In a previous article, dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) says: > It has previously been recounted here. The War on Drugs turns into a > War on Payphones. The politicians have finally found a way of > accomplishing something visible; the payphones don't fight back. [much snipped] This brings to mind a terrifying episode that occurred when my wife was about to give birth to our daughter. We were in a public building at the time my wife realized that the baby's movements were very diminished, which indicates that the baby could be dying. We called the OB/GYN from a payphone and the answering service wanted our number for a return call. I read the fine print on the phone which said "no incoming calls accepted". The service refused to give us the OB/GYN's home number. We panicked for a short time until I realized we had our brand new cell phone in the car which we were able to receive the OB's calls on. Rich Szabo ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: War on Payphones Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:50:25 GMT Pat writes: > ...even the County Jail, where the payphones are among the worst > ripoff phones to be found anywhere. PAT] Even the telephone companies know a `captive market' when they see one, no? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #360 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21184; 25 Aug 95 19:08 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA08545 for telecomlist-outbound; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 12:11:18 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA08537; Fri, 25 Aug 1995 12:11:15 -0500 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 12:11:15 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508251711.MAA08537@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #361 TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Aug 95 12:11:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 361 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Mexico and TWX (was History of 905, etc) (Mark Cuccia) Re: Smartcard Phone Spotted in Oshawa Ontario! (Jeff Bamford) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Future of 809 D.A.? (Randy Finder) Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market (Steven Lichter) Determining Your Telephone Number (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: War on Payphones (p23610@email.mot.com) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Cuccia Subject: Mexico and TWX (was History of 905, etc) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 95 09:58:00 +6C PAT, PLEASE, PLEASE lets get the history of Mexico and TWX correct - Only yesterday I was looking thru the TD ftp archives of older back issues and found some replies dated 18 Jan 1989 regarding TWX and 'supplementary' Area Codes postings in the Guide to N.America/Area Codes. FIRST, MEXICO. Mexico had been developing its OWN internal automated network probably in the 1950's, but most likely during the 1960's. The EXTREME Mexican northwest border with the US (California, Arizona, New Mexico), covering about a dozon or so border towns in the Mexican states of Baja California (N), Sonora, and Chihuahua were 'assigned' a special Area Code of 903 (not 905) circa 1962 or 63. Whether they were readily dialable or not in 62/63 I don't know. I was unaware of 903 for NW Mexico until the early 1970's when researching out-of-town telephone directories at the Public Library. The New Orleans directory did NOT list 903, 808, 907, or 809 (or 905) until around the mid 1970's. 903 was ALSO used as a 'billing-identification' or 'mark-sense' code for 'all' of rural (non-dial, local manual) Mexico as well. Automated Mexico (within +52) was also operator dialable from US/Canada using routing code 180+the eight digit Mexican National number, and became customer dialable (if you had IDDD) as 011+52+the eight digit Mexican National Number around 1979 or 80. Northwest Mexican 903 border towns 'seem' to have had a NNX-XXXX number, as I have seen such in various travel/tourist/hotel guides from back in the 1960's and 70's, and I even remember seeing 903 as the (N.American) areacode for such towns as Ensenada, Tijuanna, Rosarito, etc. in *other* countries' telephone books. While 903 was in use in the 1970's (and 60's), those border towns were NOT listed in the Mexico City directory as dialable towns using Mexico's internal automated dial toll network (+52). In 1970, Mexico City became dialable from many points in US/Canada using 90-5. Mexico City's +52 city code is a single digit, 5. Their local numbers are seven digits long. This makes up an eight digit Mexican National numbers. Some towns (dialable, too) on the outskirts of Mexico City had *five-digit* local numbers, and a Mexican (dialable) city code of *three* digits, beginning with 5. Any Mexican (dialable) city code starting with '5' could be dialed from (most/many) US/Canadian points as (1+/0+) 90+ the eight digit Mexican National Number IF it began with a '5'. In 1980, AT&T Long-Lines and Telefonos de Mexico re-arranged the Mexican border towns in '903'. They were re-numbered and re-routed to conform with Mexico's internal numbering scheme, and were assigned city codes beginning with '6'. Mexico's zone 6 covered a LARGE chunk of northwest Mexico, but prior to 1980 did not include those dozon or so border towns. In 1980, it did. I haven't had a chance to compare pre-1980 with post-1980 Tijuana directories, but its pre-1980 numbers of 903-NNX-XXXX were changed to (+52) 66 + a six digit local number. I don't know how the 'central-office' codes were changed, other than that they were 'shortened'. You could reach ALL of Mexican Zone 6 points now (from US/Canada) with (1+/0+) 70+ the eight digit Mexican National Number IF it began with a '6'. ANYONE in the US/Canada could use 90-5 and 70-6, although AT&T promoted the IDDD method (011/01+52+eight digits) and ONLY publicized the 1+/0+ 70-6 & 90-5 for those who did NOT have IDDD, altho' even IDDD capable customers COULD use them as well. By 1991, Bellcore 'reclaimed' 90-5 and 70-6, and insisted on IDDD access *only* as they reassigned 905 to the 416 Ontario split which took place in 1993, and 706 to the 404 Georgia split which took place in 1992. 903 had been reclaimed in 1980, and was reassigned to the 214 Texas split in 1990. NOW for TWX (TeletypeWriter eXchange service) AT&T began its TWX network as far back as *1931* as a MANUALLY connected teletype service. It was NOT an integrated part of the telephone network, and had its OWN numbering scheme. It only served the continental US. In the mid 1950's, CNCP (now Unitel) began automated telex service in Canada. By 1958, Western Union began an automated telex network in the US. Mexico as well had a telex service by the late 50's or early 60's. All of these networks, including AT&T TWX used 5-level punch tape Baudot code, at a speed of roughly 60 to 66 baud. AT&T's TWX was still manual by 1960, but traffic was growing and connection set up times were getting longer. In 1962, AT&T did a splash cut of TWX from manual to automated. There is an article in a 1962 issue of 'Bell Laboratories Record' magazine describing this. MOST TWX terminals were retrofitted with an attatchment consisting of a modem, '6-line-keyset', rotary-dial, and a 'half-a-handset'. The half-a-handset was like a 500 telephone set's handset cut in half with only an earpiece on it. Some of the oldest teletype TWX machines had an actual 500-desk-set with the 6-keys hooked up to it. In those, the transmitter insert was either removed or it was disconnected. The 6-keys were not actually lines, but controls. One was for originate, one was for (attendant) answer (altho' later machines had an auto-answer capability), one was for clearing or releasing the connection, another for testing, and another for 'local' or more specifically offline typing or tape-punching. I don't know what the other key was used for right now. ALL TWX customers were assigned 'telephone' numbers, using their OWN GEOGRAPHIC telephone areacode, and a 'centrally' located NNX code, which was usually that of a #5Crossbar office in that city or in the larger town nearby. TWX machines could DIAL telephone numbers, but couldn't talk to them, and telephones could DIAL to TWX machines!!! All of these TWX machines had three rows on the keyboard, and still used 5-level-Baudot code, just like the telex machines in telegraphy. About a year after AT&T had automated their TWX network by *integrating* it with the DDD Telephone network, they announced that there would be a *new* TWX service, using 8-level-ASCII code, faster speeds, and 4-row keyboards (Model 33 & 35 teletype machines). They reserved FIVE special areacodes for this service: 510, 610, 710, 810, 910. Please note: 210, 310, 410 were NOT used for TWX- 410 was used in many parts of the country for reaching telephone Repair Service, while all three were used in some areas for various testing purposes such as ANAC (Auto reading back of your telephone number) or Ring-Back. Pat, please note the geography of the TWX N10's in the 1960's: 610 TWX Canada 710 TWX US (Northeast - states now serviced by NYNEX, Bell Atlantic, So.NewEnglandTel) 810 TWX US (Midwest/Southeast - states now serviced by Bell South, Cincinnati Bell, Ameritech- Michigan, Ohio, Indiana EXCEPT the NW corner near Chicago) 910 TWX US (Midwest, West of Mississippi River- states now serviced by US West, SW Bell, Pac*Bell/Nevada*Bell, and the remainder of Ameritech- Wisconsin, Illinois, northwest corner of Indiana near Chicago) 510 TWX US (smaller towns ALL OVER the US, which were not near a #5XB office at the time) 710, 810, 910 were part of the 'TWX Switching Plan' (TWX-SP) 610 (Canada) was not initially part of the TWX-SP 510 was NOT part of the TWX-SP The Independents worked closely with AT&T Long-Lines to provide TWX as well. TWX was routed over the DDD Telephone network, but for the most part, regular telephone NPA's could NOT dial to a N10-NNX TWX machine, but a 3-row 5-level TWX machine with its own telephone NPA could. N10 TWX machines could dial ANY telephone NPA, including telephone numbers. Model 33 & 35 TWX teletypes had a built in 6-key control set, dial or touchtone pad, and a speaker instead of a handset earpiece. This is the 'snit' that Western Union got into. They brought complaints against AT&T for this newer and faster TWX service, stating that AT&T shouldn't be involved in telegraphy! By 1970, after legal/court/FCC hearings and investigations, AT&T agreed to 'sell' its TWX (ALL of it) over to WUTC. Canada was NOT involved in this. TWX in the US thus became the 'marketing domain' of WUTC. For the next ten or so years, TWX was *still* numbered, dialed, routed, switched over the Bell System's DDD Telephone network *as-if-it-were* an integral part of the Bell System. WUTC 'sold' the service, billed the customers, repaired the terminals, and leased loops and trunks (and the switching capability) from AT&T, Bell, and the independents. Canadian TWX was always the part of the telephone companies themselves up in Canada. 3-row slower speed TWX machines in the US (using their geographic telephone NPA codes) were declining thru the 70's, and by 1979 were discontinued altogather. Throughout the 1970's, WUTC and AT&T were planning for WU to do its OWN routing/switching of TWX (US ONLY). By 1982, WU completed the 'removal' of TWX from the DDD telephone network (US only). Within a year or two, there was no need for geographic meanings of the N10 codes, so WU began assigning numbers ANYWHERE from ANY N10 (510, 710, 810, 910). There was also no more need for geographic meaning to the NNX's within any N10, and WU also began to assign 'central office' codes of the form N0X, N1X, and even 0XX and 1XX! (I have TWX/Telex directories from 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1989/90, and 1991). As far as AT&T (and later Bellcore) were concerned, the N10's were now reclaimed, except for 610 Canada. The VERY FIRST N10 to be re-assigned was 710, to the US Federal Government for some still unspecified private service. It was assigned sometime around 1983 or 84. I was not aware of its use until I saw it in a Bellcore LERG in 1990 in a list of NPA codes. In the meantime, WU had plans for the other N10's on TWX -- the only one I ever saw being used was 310. It was a special access prefix to be used for TWX customers to directly dial US Telex terminals (WU and the other IRC Domestic US Telex networks) without having to go thru WU's 'Infomaster' store-and-forward setup computer. 210 was 'supposed' to be used for WU US TWX to dial direct to CNCP/Unitel's Canadian Telex, and 410 was to be used for WU US TWX to dial direct to Mexico's Telex (BTW, Mexico, Hawaii, Alaska, Caribbean never had TWX as such; only Telex, altho' they have had telephone numbers for Data and Fax, of course). I saw references to plans for 210+ & 410+ but never saw any actual instructions in WU's TWX/Telex directories as such, only actual references to 310+. The other N10 codes for TELEPHONE purposes have been 'reassigned' as such: 510 to the 415 California split, 1991 410 to the 301 Maryland split, 1991 310 to the 213 California split, 1991 210 to the 512 Texas split, 1992 910 to the 919 North Carolina split, 1993 810 to the 313 Michigan split, 1993 610 to the 215 Pennsylvania split, 1994 Canadian 610 TWX had been on the decline in the 1980's, and incidently never did reach the popularity of CNCP/Unitel's Telex service. The local telephone companies of Telecom-Canada (now Stentor) began to introduce ISDN and Data services on non-TWX central office NNX codes of the 610 NPA thru-out the 1980's. By 1993, when Bellcore needed to use 610 for telephone purposes, Canada and Bellcore agreed to 'splash-cut' all remaining TWX machines and new data services on 610 over to the new 600 special areacode. According to ITU-T (CCITT), the 'international telex country code' for Canadian TWX has been discontinued since Stentor Canada discontinued TWX altogather in 1984. The Data services on 600 have their own ITU-T (CCITT) Data network country codes, tho'. And, the 600-NXX codes used in Canada are being assigned to 'carriers' similar to the way 900-NXX & 500-NXX codes are being assigned today, and the way 800-NXX codes were assigned before 'portability' (1985-1993 timeframe). Western Union began its EasyLink email type of service in the early to mid 1980's using its own numbering scheme. By 1990, AT&T purchased all of TWX (WU began calling it 'Telex-II), Telex-I, and EasyLink from WUTC. I have the AT&T directory from 1991 and was told last year (1994) that it is the most recent directory available. AT&T continued to have 'EasyLink' numbers and network, Telex-I, and Telex-II (known again as TWX), and ALL using the numbering schemes still used by WUTC. TWX still used N10's (510, 710, 810, 910), but there was no geography to the N10's, nor to the 'central office' code portions, now NNX, NXX, 0XX and 1XX, but AT&T had this as a PRIVATE NETWORK SERVICE, not an *integral* part of the AT&T *telephone* long-distance network as it had back in the 60's, and even 70's. I don't know how thin an AT&T message services directory would be if one were printed today. With email, Internet, Fax machines, and other dedicated data networks, traditional/nostalgic TWX & Telex in the US and Canada have continued to shrink. AND, I have been TRYING to compile a numerical listing and assignments of the OLD TWX N10-NNX codes- If ANYONE has an old listing (with assignments to cities & states/provinces) down to the central office NNX code level of the OLD (circa 1960's/70's) TWX 510, 610, 710, 810, 910, I would appreciate it VERY much if you could email, mail, or fax me a copy. Thanks in advance! AND THANK YOU PAT! MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My goodness; you are the one to be thanked today for a great bit of history and some good weekend reading. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jeffb@audiolab.uwaterloo.ca (Jeff Bamford) Subject: Re: Smartcard Phone Spotted in Oshawa Ontario! Organization: Audio Research Group, University of Waterloo Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 10:27:22 -0400 In article , Scott Robert Dawson wrote: > Last week I was in Oshawa visiting friends and we stopped at a food > store. The pay phones in the lobby were the standard Nortel 'Millennium' > model, but the top housing above the screen was bright blue with the > new Bell logo, and the card reader housing was bright yellow. Both of > these were changed from the previous grey-blue. The graphic by the > card slot showed two cards, one with a stripe and one with a small > square. I've actually had one of these cards for a couple of months now. I participated in Bell's contest at their web site (http://www.bell.ca) and they sent me one with $10 on it. It seems to mimic using cash. That is, local calls are $0.25 and long distance calls are direct-dialled rates plus the operator-surcharge of around $2 (the same as if you used cash). The long distance surcharge goes against what the pamphlet said, the surcharge was only supposed to be $1. That might be because they're really not in use here yet. The card looks like a regular phone-card except that it has no numbers on it (i.e. card number), and a nice picture of "Chute aux Rats, Mont-Tremblant" (a water fall). [Questions deleted] > All this hints at a vast behind-the-scenes transaction network > rivaling the banks'. Well from what I gathered they contain a small microchip in them that stores how much money you have in them. I doubt that they could be used in a bank machine as they don't rely on a magnetic strip. That's why Bell are changing over the Millennium pay-phones to the yellow readers. However, they should be reusable but I don't really know. The value of the card is printed in the upper-right hand corner. This might indicate that it is not reusable, or at least can only hold $10. The prime locations for these new phones seems to be Colleges and Universities. I've also seen the occasional one popping up in other locations, but they seem to be concentrating their initial targets at students. They're very convenient for local calls but the high-surcharge for long distance would make me want to swipe my calling-card instead. If they brought the surcharge down to the same level as the calling-card ($0.75) it would be a pretty good deal. However, with the new card the phone tells you exactly how much the call will cost (initial charge and additional minute for long distance or 25 cents for local). I find this very convenient, it also gives you a timed countdown (minutes & seconds) of how much longer you have on the card for the current long distance call. I find it very nice to know *exactly* how much the call is going to cost when I make it! Jeff Bamford Email - jeffb@uwaterloo.ca -- NeXT Mail welcome Office/Lab: +1 519 885 1211 x3814 Fax: +1 519 746 8115 WEB Page: A.R.G. Home Page ------------------------------ From: fgoldstein@bbn.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 12:33:14 ELT Organization: BBN Planet Corp. My own comments: As I noted before with regard to overlays vs. splits, Americans believe that once they've learned something, then it must ALWAYS be true. This also applies to the meaning of 1+ and the meaning of "toll". The reason 1+ means "toll" in SOME places is historical: With step-by-step switches, dialing 1 immediately cut through to a toll trunk, and a toll switch ate the rest of the digits directly. The 1 was literally an access code for a different switch, one which had call detail billing. Local calls never had detail billing, and never hit the toll switch. In areas that used mostly crossbar and/or panel (which did NOT cleanly interwork with step, so panel and step were geographically isolated), the crossbar ate the first 3 digits, and routed the call accordingly. So there was no need for 1+. These areas generally did not use 1+ for toll. New Jersey, New York, and San Francisco were examples. I grew up in New Jersey where 1+ meant "your finger slipped on the hookswitch, but the CO knows better than to interrupt dial tone because of it". 7-digit dialing between area codes requires one of two solutions. One is to make intra-NPA toll REQUIRE dialing 1+10d. But it's counterintuitive to get a different NPA by omitting your own. So even where NYNEX (in MA) was ordered by the state to use 1+10d for intra-NPA toll, they don't allow 7d inter-NPA. Besides, this fails if the same prefix is local in both NPAs. For 617, where 90% of prefices are "local" to each other, this couldn't work for calls to 508. Thus it's 1+10d. The other solution is "code protection", where near-border NXX codes aren't assigned in both NPAs. This wastes codes, and can no longer be afforded in most NPAs. (Still okay in a few, but bad form.) That was the original way in some places, especially places like NJ where there was never 1+ dialing. Of course in some cases, "local" costs less than "toll" (Boston local zone 2, 9-16 miels, during weekends costs 5.5c/min, vs. 3.6c for the longest intra-LATA toll call), so the 1+ rule is less useful than it sounds. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein@bbn.com Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc., Cambridge MA USA +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu (Randy Finder) Subject: Re: Future of 809 D.A.? Date: 25 Aug 95 11:45:42 -0400 Organization: Carnegie Mellon Computer Club In article , lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) writes: > Under the current system, directory assistance for all of 809 is > centralized (I think somewhere in Florida) -- you reach the same > operator for Bermuda, Puerto Rico, or Jamaica. However, if each of > those has its own area code, they could decide independently whether > to continue contracting with the folks in Florida (or wherever) or to > set up their own operation. Conceivably they could even try to set > different charges for access to their directory assistance. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think 809-555-1212 is physically located > in South Carolina. PAT] I called, I asked. They are in Miami. And as opposed to every other directory assistance location, I've called, they don't say: "What City, Please?", they say: "What Island, Please" Randy Finder Leadership, Friendship and Service - Alpha Phi Omega ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market Date: 25 Aug 1995 00:41:51 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University NEERAJ VORA writes: > There are reports that AT&T is all set to enter the local call arena > and provide some fierce competition. According to Newsbytes reports > they are ready to take a beating at first to gain ground in the > market. AT&T Bought Cross Country Cable last month. Come January 1,1996 they will be able to offer dial tone to all of these subscribers and bypass the LEC. Right now this company offers toll bypass for large companies. The above are my ideas and have nothing to do with whoever my employer is. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909) 359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II.slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Whenever we reach the point that a company is actually able to supply its own dial tone over its own wires and have no need to rely on the traditional local telco, that will be the day that local competition begins. The reports coming to me are that AT&T plans to come crashing onto the scene in a big way beginning in January. No more negotiating with the local telcos; none of that stuff. They are just going to move right in and start doing business. It is really exciting! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Determining Your Telephone Number Date: 25 Aug 1995 16:36:52 GMT Organization: Tulane University perezju@fiu.edu (Julio J. Perez) wrote: > I tried 1-800-MY-ANI-IS when dialing outside the building I'm calling from, > only to get a telephone number that does not have even the remotest > resemblance to the number i'm actually calling from. Please remember that 1-800-692-6447 (MY ANI IS) will quote back the telephone number of your line OR TRUNK-line that the call is being placed out on. Most PBX and Cellular systems do NOT pass out the seven/ten digit number of the actual PBX extension or Cellular unit. The particular outgoing trunk-line IS identified and that is what is being quoted back on 800-MY-ANI-IS or a local telco C/O ANAC-out code. Most PBX and Cellular systems I have run across also don't pass out the actual extension or cellphone number to a Caller-ID box. Our PBX here at work will have the outgoing trunklines' numbers show up on a caller-ID box on outgoing local calls (or quoted out on the 800 'ANI' number). BellSouth Mobility calls show up as 'Out-Of-Area' at the called party's Caller-ID box. 800-MY-ANI-IS will quote back the 'same' trunkline number of BSM New Orleans (I don't remember exactly what it is right now, but it is always the same 504-45x-xxxx). My actual cellular number is 504-460-xxxx, New Orleans ratecenter, for BSMobility Cellular, and MOST 46X's in 504 are not New Orleans, but the Kenner LA (suburb of New Orleans) rate center. (BTW, 504-460 is 'new', comming on line in April '95; MOST one-armed bandit slot-machine damnable COCOT private payphone pieces of CRAP here don't have 460 programmed in as a local NNX code- they either claim invalid number or 'default' it to a NPA 504 TOLL nnx code, requesting something like $3.00 a minute!!!!!) When I go to Mississippi Gulf Coast (Cellular South) or points just south of New Orleans such as Houma, Thibadeaux, Plaq.Parish, Lafitte, etc. (MobilTel), I get an entirely DIFFERENT number when I 800-MY-ANI-IS, which is the trunkline being used by that cellular service. If I roam to Baton Rouge LA (another BellSouth Mobility cellular service area), I would get a Baton Rouge area number if I'd 800-MY-ANI-IS, the outgoing trunkline for that area. As for determining the actual number of a PBX extension, I would guess that each PBX manufacturer has some time of ANAC code for the PBX ext's. Maybe you could call the PBX operator or administration for assistance in that matter. Many PBX systems do have internal PBX Caller-ID, so call up another extension you know has a displayphone or box, or maybe dial the PBX '0' Operator! There ARE some PBX to Public Telco interfaces which DO identify the number of the extension, but I haven't run across any myself. Centrex systems for the most part DO give the actual telephone number, however, since Centrex is USUALLY a TELCO public central office switch based large-business system instead of a PBX on a customer's premesis. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: snake Subject: Re: War on Payphones Organization: MOTOROLA Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 15:47:58 GMT dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) wrote: > Pat writes: >> ...even the County Jail, where the payphones are among the worst >> ripoff phones to be found anywhere. PAT] > Even the telephone companies know a `captive market' when they see > one, no? Don't forget the payphones installed in Las Vegas casinos, which are rigged to keep your quarter even if your call doesn't go through. At least the slot machines give you a chance at a payout. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Twenty-five cents just for the right to touch the phone, pick it up and try to get someone, eh? Actually if you ask Mark Cuccia (see the message before this one) about it, he would probably tell you that the people who manufacture slot machines and other gambling devices are the same people who make COCOTS, and probably using a lot of the same circuit boards at that! Grin. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #361 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26055; 29 Aug 95 20:11 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA10481 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 13:21:54 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA10472; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 13:21:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 13:21:44 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508291821.NAA10472@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #362 TELECOM Digest Tue, 29 Aug 95 13:21:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 362 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Fritz Whittington) Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Clive D.W. Feather) Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Tony Harminc) San Francisco Area Codes (Peter Mansfield) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (Dave Levenson) Re: IntegreTel/VRS Billing-Bulk Block Procedure (Randal L. Schwartz) Re: Snakes In The Net - Adult Services Auto-Block Numbers (Michael Fumich) Re: Wideband SATCOM Nets to Support WWW (Tom Hicks) Re: V&H Questions (Les Reeves) Re: V&H Questions (John N. Dreystadt) Re: V&H Questions (Stu Jeffery) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 18:28:42 CDT From: fritz@mirage.hc.ti.com (Fritz Whittington) Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint In comp.dcom.telecom rbarry@iol.ie (Richard Barry) writes: > fritz@mirage.hc.ti.com (Fritz Whittington) wrote: >> There is an extremely interesting document available at: >> http://www.open.gov.uk/oftel/oftelwww/oftcons.htm >> which explains how the UK intends to handle the area-code and number >> shortage problems, in a very flexible and user-friendly way. > I wouldn't suggest that anyone looking for an ideal numbering strategy > look at the UK model (except on a what not to do basis!) The reason > the authorities there are entering a pretent public consultation > process is because they have done so much damage and screwed up so > badly up to now. Agreed, but they now *seem* to be trying to correct for that. OFTEL took over the numbering plan only last year, from BT. A large part of the problem seems to have been inherited from the fact that a country so relatively small was divided into so many 'area' codes: "The present geographic scheme - now using 01 numbers - was designed by the Post Office in the 1950s and is based around 638 areas, each of which has a code. With the exception of London and some other major cities, all these areas are of similar size." This gives the potential of 800 000 numbers for some small towns of a few hundred people. > There is no long term numbering strategy in the UK - it changes > virtually every year, which is great for the printing industry! Since > "PhONEday", the UK has enough numbering space for about 8 billion > phone lines, which means that phone numbers are much longer than they > need be, under any population / user terminal growth scenario. "NOBODY will *ever* need more than 64K of memory." --Eubanks, ca. 1976 "NOBODY will *ever* need more than 640K of memory." --Gates, ca. 1981 > You can't tell which part of the country an area code is located from the > first digit or two, as one can in virtually every other European > country -- (eg area code 01232 is Belfast, Northern Ireland while 01233 > is in Kent in the South East of England). ... > Mobile phone numbers, paging, and premium rate numbers are found all > over the numbering space. The article is very critical of this, and suggests that an "02" series of *much larger* area codes be overlaid on the current "01" series, with only 020-029 used. Presumably, these would be few enough for people to remember their geographical relationship. *BOTH* the 01 and the 02 area codes could be used permissively. Also, "numbers beginning 04 can in future be used for mobile services; 07 for Personal Numbering services; and 08 for special services such as freephone, services charging national calls at local rate and some information services." While I respect your views and agree with many of your observations (mostly the ones I deleted without comment), I suspect that you haven't really read the article thoroughly. Fritz Whittington Texas Instruments, P.O. Box 655474, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75265 Shipping address: 13510 North Central Expressway, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75243 fritz@ti.com Office: +1 214 995 0397 FAX: +1 214 995 6194 Since I am not an official TI spokesperson, these opinions contain no spokes. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 11:16:59 +0100 (BST) From: Clive D.W. Feather In 15.359.5 Richard Barry wrote: > I wouldn't suggest that anyone looking for an ideal numbering strategy > look at the UK model (except on a what not to do basis!) By coincidence, I'd just received the following in email from Nick Leverton, and forward it with his permission: > I liked "Pulp Video"'s sketch last week ... Scene, the National > Lottery draw. The balls drop down one by one, the number > flashes up on the screen, a breathless announcer gasps "1 34 8 > 12 26 38 ... that, ladies and gentlemen, is the new dialing > code for Manchester!". > I think that about sums up Oftel's present credibility problem concerning > lack of planning :-( Clive D.W. Feather | Work: clive@demon.net | Gateway House Senior Manager | Home: clive@stdc.demon.co.uk | 322 Regents Park Road Demon Internet Ltd. | Tel: +44 181 371 1000 | Finchley | Fax: +44 181 371 1281 | London N3 2QQ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 13:33:20 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint rbarry@iol.ie (Richard Barry) wrote: [UK numbering scheme not recommended as a model] > You can't tell which part of the country an area code is located > from the first digit or two, as one can in virtually every other > European country -- (eg area code 01232 is Belfast, Northern Ireland > while 01233 is in Kent in the South East of England). This is not different from North America. And unlike the NANP, where area codes were assigned pretty much at random, the UK codes started out as alphabetics related to the place name. So 01232 (then 0232) was originally 0BE2 - BE for Belfast, while 0234 was 0BE4 for Bedford, 0484 was GUildford, and so on. This broke down after a while, and there was never any way of guessing what the 4th digit would be, but it is the basis for those numbers. > Most European numbering plans have the following characteristics: > *Hierarchical area code structure* (like the US Zip code. While one > mightn't know where Zip 90234 is precisely, even a non-American can > guess that it is on the West coast and probably in California. > Someone who knows California can probably guess it is in the LA area, > etc.) This structure follows on to some extent from the country code > layout (eg all country codes beginning with 3 are in Europe). The French system is nothing like this. The Departement numbers are scattered randomly around the country, so you can't tell where a number is unless you have memorized the list. > *Variable number length* so that cities that outgrow 7 digits can have > 8 digit local numbers. No multiple area code confusion. Small > towns can have even shorter local numbers, if desirable. This is terrible idea, for the one simple reason that telephones don't have Enter keys. So the switch has to decide when you've finished dialing by some means, usually a timeout. Or if the switch is smart enough it may be able to avoid timeouts on certain calls, but the result is inconsistent behaviour. > *Distinctive non-geographic codes* so that anyone can tell a mobile > number or a pager or a premium rate number from a regular phone number > easily. The NANP has this for 900 and such, though there are some local variations (976 and the like are not universal). There is no need to know that yo are calling a mobile number if the mobile user is paying, Indeed many people would consider it a privacy violation for the phone company to tell all their callers what kind of service they have by assigning special numbers to mobiles. Tony Harminc [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, telephones do have 'enter' keys or 'carriage return' keys. It is the '#' key located underneath the '9'. Sometimes known as the Octothorpe, the signal from this key is generally understood to mean the end of the dialing string has occurred. For example, try dialing just 0 for the operator, then 0# for the operator and note how much faster the latter connects, since no time-out is needed. Likewise try calling the number to which your calling card is assigned (which allows entry of just the calling card pin rather than the whole number) and after entering the four digit pin then do nothing ... it will time out eventually and process your call. Do it again adding # after the four digit pin and note the difference. If some specified number of digits are expected and required, then the use of # will not affect the timing one way or the other. For example punching in the seven digits of a local call followed by # has no affect whatsoever. A non-working two or three digit combination followed by # will have no affect whatsoever; that is the network will continue waiting patiently for more input from you. But if some two digit combination (for example 72 ro call forward or 67 to suspend transmission of caller ID) is presented and these can also serve as the first two digits of some longer combination, then adding # will make a difference, and the network will go right to work on what (two digits or other less than 7/11 combination) you have entered. So why don't we have telephone numbers of any length with the understanding that when the subscriber has finished giving the instructions, a # is used to indicate conclusion. The network would then process what had been given in the proper context. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Peter_Mansfield@australia.notes.pw.com Date: Mon, 28 Aug 95 08:22:23 +1000 Subject: San Francisco Area Codes Reading Mark Cuccia's interesting and informative history of the Mexican hacks and TWX, this reminded me of something I read in Carl Moore's history.of.area.splits in the Telecom Archives a while back dealing with the introduction of area code 318 in 1951, which I'm interested in finding out more about. Carl writes: > 415/318 California, 1951 > 318 was used for San Francisco only, during the Englewood (N.J.) > Customer DDD Trials; Oakland remained in 415. Sometime before 1957, > 318 was reclaimed for future use, and San Francisco returned to 415. > 504/318 Louisiana, 1957 > 318, used earlier for San Francisco, had been reclaimed by this time. Furthermore, in 1959, according to Carl Moore's file, 415 did a *three-way split* with West Central California moving to 408 and North West California moving to 707, with the San Francisco Area retaining 415 (which, as we know, later split again to form 415/510). So, do any historians out there know anything more about these DDD trials, specifically why a new NPA was allocated, and then reclaimed several years later. Also, was it a full cutover, or simply some kind of optional 'overlay' where either 318 or 415 could be used to reach San Francisco? If San Francisco was still in 318 for some time after 1951, why then did it return to 415, which was obviously nearing capacity, as it split three ways a few years later? Finally, are there any other known cases such as this, where an area code is split and is later reclaimed, or changed back to the former code or somehow reshuffled (apart from another split or overlay)? Incidentally, the above three-way split of 415 in 1959 seems to indicate that the current three-way split planned for Chicago cannot claim to be the first, especially since the Chicago split/reorganization is being implemented over about two years, and not all at once. (I don't think anyone actually claimed that it *was* the first, just that that it was the only one that anybody could think of!) Peter Mansfield Sydney, Australia Tel: +61 2 256 7940 Fax: + 61 2 256 7777 Email: Peter_Mansfield@australia.notes.pw.com ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 15:56:43 GMT Eric Bennett (bennett@hpel.umd.edu) writes: > It seems to me unfair to have a product the cost of which cannot be > determined until the purchase is made. I think a mechanism should > exist for dynamically charging calls. Imagine how long the teleslime > would last if that $5/min popped up on a display before the call was > connected. 900 information providers are required, under current law, to voice a `disclaimer announcement' during the initial 24 seconds after answering. This announcement must state the name of the information provider, and the price of the call (stated as a per-call amount, or a per-minute amount, as appropriate). The announcement must then state that the caller may disconnect NOW to avoid charges. This announcement normally ends with a beep signifying the beginning of the chargeable call. If the caller disconnects before the beep, no charge is made. The information provider generally pays the long distance carrier for these calls. > What other option is there? 500s are a billing lottery unless you > trust who/what ever you are calling. Folks who can't get through to > 500s being used as intended will come to my attention much sooner than > people who are "only making a long distance call" to some landmine > 500. For telecom resellers, PBX administrators, COCOT-owners and such, there is generally no other option than to completely block calls to 900, 976, and now, 500 numbers. If credit-card billing is accepted to these numbers, then 0+ calls to such numbers may be allowed if billed-number screening is also effective. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) Subject: Re: IntegreTel/VRS Billing-Bulk Block Procedure Date: 29 Aug 1995 09:25:11 -0700 Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA Reply-To: merlyn@stonehenge.com >>>>> "Randal" == Randal L Schwartz writes: > Do they read the ANI to you? If they do, we now have another way > of getting ANI. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, they read the ANI back but only after > you have indicated you want the line blocked. I guess you could use them > to find out the number on lines which are unidentified as long as you or > the owner of the line don't object to being blocked from Integratel charges. > The way they phrase it is cute: "As a courtesy, your local telephone company > forwarded your number to us at the time they connected your call. The > number we are blocking is xxx-xxx-xxxx." No, you can get ANI without taking any action. Here's the sequence: 1-800-4BLOCKME wait through first message (cannot be interrupted) as soon as the menu starts: 3 2 (you can do these fast together) "As a courtesy, your local... xxx-xxx-xxxx" *if you press "1" here, you get blocked, "2" you don't. Just hang up. Thank you, Integretel, for giving us ANI from an 800 call, even if it takes a minute and we have to hear your name four times. :-) Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 Keywords: Perl training, UNIX[tm] consulting, video production, skiing, flying Email: Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger merlyn@ora.com) Web: My Home Page! Quote: "I'm telling you, if I could have five lines in my .sig, I would!" -- me ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 95 13:22 EST From: Michael Fumich <0003311835@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Snakes In The Net - Adult Services Auto-Block #'s It was mentioned in a previous article that Integretel (a misnomer if you ask me), has 800-425-6256 (800-4BLOCKME) available to block any adult services calls that may be billed by them. American Telnet, another company of this type also has one. That number is 800-204-2569. This number must also be dialed from the number that you wish blocked. Their Customer Service number is 800-460-0307. I don't know if these numbers will block 500 calls however. I will post more as they become available. Michael L. Fumich / E-Mail: <3311835@mcimail.com> / V-Mail: 708-461-5770 ------------------------------ From: thicks@hns.com (Tom Hicks) Subject: Re: Wideband SATCOM Nets to Support WWW Date: 28 Aug 1995 20:07:03 GMT Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc. Kramer <102564.2255@CompuServe.COM> writes: > Is there a market to support the wideband download of data (imagery, > video, bulk files, etc.) from www sites based on narrow band requests? > Considering developing asymetrical net using DBS satellites (similar > to Spaceways concept) to provide 23MBS downlink to 20cm antennas and > embedded terminals with 14.4 teresstial and/or satcom uplinks for > request channel. Price targets $1/2k per terminal. $3/4 per 15 > second @ 23MBS. What do you think? Hughes Network Systems has such a beast for sale, called DirectPC. It provides up to 400Kbps commited rate, but I think it can burst up to 3 Mbps. 14.4K POTS link is available for outgoing traffic. I'm not sure if there are plans to add more user data bandwidth. I think price is between $1/2K per terminal. I think they sell the Internet connectivity package under the title of "Turbo Internet". So it is technically feasible. Not sure about the market. Tom Hicks thicks@hns.com ------------------------------ From: lreeves@crl.com (Les Reeves) Subject: Re: V&H Questions Date: 29 Aug 1995 10:51:02 -0700 Organization: CR Labs Douglas Frank (dougf@startel.com) wrote: > Can anyone tell me where V&H coordinates came from, and how they > actually represent distances in the U.S.? > Does anyone know how to translate V&H coordinates (such as those found > in Bellcore's LERG data) into standard lattitude and longitude? I am > creating a real-time network map, and need this translation. The > answer in any form would be appreciated, though programming code or > algorithm form would be best. This question (albeit a good one) appears often enough that it might deserve it's own place in the FAQ {hint, hint}. I can provide the equation used to compute miles, given two V&H numbers. It is in most IXC and/or intra-lata tariffs, mine is circa 1984. I realize this is not what you want, unless you happen to have the exact longitude and latitude of one end. Even with that you only get a distance, but no vector. And let's don't even consider whether or not the equation covers the Earth's curvature. There is a program, called NPA, which will do what you want. To get all the goodies, you must register it. The unregistered version is not exactly crippled, but it *will not* give you what you want. Here is the info on the latest version: NPA for WINDOWS <04Jul95> - Comprehensive area code (NPA), prefix (NXX), and city name locator. Contains 90,000,000 ZipCode to NXX mappings ranked by frequency of occurrence, county name, estimated county population, lat/long for each NXX for inter-city or inter-NXX mileage calculation, NXX use type (landline/cellular), city time zone, and more for over 20,000 cities in the USA & Canada. Nearly 60,000 NPA/NXXs in all! All fields except lat/long & county population are key searchable! Tie US ZipCodes & Canadian Postal Codes to NPA/NXXs. Print, file output, and Optional Data Export. Most complete area code program you've ever seen! I tried to find an contact number for the author, but this is a WINDOZE program, and everything but the file description is in the form of a Windows .hlp file. He also has a DOS version. The author goes by the name of PC Consultant, and is located in Houston. This is an excellent program. I have been using the DOS version for a couple of years. E-Mail me if you need contact info, although I think Pat may have it at hand). ------------------------------ From: johnd@falcon.ic.net (John N. Dreystadt) Subject: Re: V&H Questions Date: 29 Aug 1995 02:51:56 GMT Organization: ICNET... Your Link To The Internet... +1.313.998.0090 Reply-To: johnd@falcon.ic.net In article , dougf@startel.com says: > Can anyone tell me where V&H coordinates came from, and how they > actually represent distances in the U.S.? > Does anyone know how to translate V&H coordinates (such as those found > in Bellcore's LERG data) into standard lattitude and longitude? The V&H system was invented by Bellcore (O.K. Bell Labs at the time but the current organization is Bellcore. This is an attempt to turn the U.S which is a curved area on a sphere into a flat plane with the least amount of overall error when doing distance calculations. Works reasonably well. Each V or H represents .1 miles so distance = sqrt((V.Orig - V.Dest) ^ 2 + (H.Orig - H.Dest) ^ 2 ) / 10 Some locales have special rules if the result is a small number but 99% of the time, the above formula gets the right answer. Serious errors crop up when using this for locations at the fringe, (i.e. AK to HI). The code to convert V&H to K&L (Latitude/Longitude) is interesting (I did this for a company I used to work for). If you are willing to buy the code, call Lynn-Arthur Associates in Ann Arbor and see what the license fee is. Sorry but I did that work for them and cannot share the results. To reproduce it, you would need access to the original formulas from Bellcore for converting K&L into V&H and be good at writing algorithms backwards. Be warned, I had to do some iterative loops to approximate the answer and this is harder than it looks as you are doing things in two dimensions. Have fun. John Dreystadt ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 00:16:38 -0800 From: stu@shell.portal.com (Stu Jeffery) Subject: Re: V&H Questions Attached is a C program that will do what you want. I don't know anything more than what is here. I think it was posted in a news group, so use at your own legal risk. I have compiled it and it works fine. Going the other way is a bit more complicated. Probably the simplest way is by successive approximation. Good Luck. ----------------------------------------- /* * ll_to_vh.c -- computes Bellcore/AT&T V & H (vertical and horizontal) * coordinates from latitude and longitude. Used primarily by * local exchange carriers (LEC's) to compute the V & H coordinates * for wire centers. * * To compile: cc -o ll_to_vh ll_to_vh.c -lm * * This is an implementation of the Donald Elliptical Projection, * a Two-Point Equidistant projection developed by Jay K. Donald * of AT&T in 1956 to establish long-distance telephone rates. * (ref: "V-H Coordinate Rediscovered", Eric K. Grimmelmann, Bell * Labs Tech. Memo, 9/80. (References Jay Donald notes of Jan 17, 1957.)) * Ashok Ingle of Bellcore also wrote an internal memo on the subject. * * The projection is specially modified for the ellipsoid and * is confined to the United States and southern Canada. * * Derived from a program obtained from an anonymous author * within Bellcore by way of the National Exchange Carrier * Association. Cleaned up and improved a bit by * Tom Libert (tom@comsol.com, libert@citi.umich.edu). * * CASH REWARD for copies of the reference papers, or for an * efficient (non-iterative) inverse for this program! (i.e. * a program to compute lat & long from V & H). */ #include #include #define D_TO_R(d) (.0174532925199433*(d)) /* Degrees to radians */ /* Polynomial constants */ #define K1 .99435487 #define K2 .00336523 #define K3 -.00065596 #define K4 .00005606 #define K5 -.00000188 /* PI in various forms */ #define M_PI 3.1415926535898 #define M_PI_2 1.57079632679489661923 /* EX^2 + EY^2 + EZ^2 = 1 */ #define EX .40426992 #define EY .68210848 #define EZ .60933887 /* WX^2 + WY^2 + WZ^2 = 1 */ #define WX .65517646 #define WY .37733790 #define WZ .65449210 /* PX^2 + PY^2 + PZ^2 = 1 */ #define PX -.5559778217300487 #define PY -.3457284881610899 #define PZ .7558839026055240 /* COS77 is actually cos(76.597497064) */ #define COS77 .231790398 #define SIN77 .972765753 #define K6 6363.235 #define K7 2250.700 #define K8 12481.103 #define K9 (K8*COS77) #define K10 (K8*SIN77) #define EVER ;; ll_to_vh(lat, lon, iv, ih) double lat, lon; int *iv, *ih; { double lon1, lat1, latsq, x, y, z; double e, w, vt, ht, v, h, cos_lat1; /* Translate east by 52 degrees */ lon1 = lon + D_TO_R(52.); latsq = lat*lat; /* Use Horner's Rule for efficiency (standard trick for computing polynomials) */ lat1 = lat*(K1 + (K2 + (K3 + (K4 + K5*latsq)*latsq)*latsq)*latsq); cos_lat1 = cos(lat1); x = cos_lat1*sin(-lon1); y = cos_lat1*cos(-lon1); z = sin(lat1); e = EX*x + EY*y + EZ*z; w = WX*x + WY*y + WZ*z; e = e > 1.0 ? 1.0 : e; w = w > 1.0 ? 1.0 : w; e = M_PI_2 - atan(e/sqrt(1 - e*e)); w = M_PI_2 - atan(w/sqrt(1 - w*w)); ht = (e*e - w*w + .16)/.8; vt = sqrt(fabs(e*e - ht*ht)); vt = (PX*x + PY*y + PZ*z) < 0 ? -vt : vt; v = K6 + K9*ht - K10*vt; h = K7 + K10*ht + K9*vt; #ifdef DEBUG printf("v = %17.16f, h = %17.16f\n", v, h); #endif /* DEBUG */ *iv = v + .5; *ih = h + .5; } /* * Converts lat/long in ddmmssXdddmmsssY format * to separate latitude and longitude in radians. */ int dms_to_lat_lon(char *dms, double *lat, double *lon) { int deg1, min1, sec1, deg2, min2, sec2; char dir1, dir2; int num; fflush(stdout); num = sscanf(dms, "%02d%02d%02d%c%03d%02d%02d%c", °1, &min1, &sec1, &dir1, °2, &min2, &sec2, &dir2); if (num != 8) { fprintf(stderr, "\"%s\": illegal format\n", dms); return(1); } *lat = M_PI*(60.*(60.*deg1 + min1) + sec1)/(180.*3600.); if (dir1 == 'S') *lat = -(*lat); *lon = M_PI*(60.*(60.*deg2 + min2) + sec2)/(180.*3600.); if (dir2 == 'W') *lon = -(*lon); return(0); } main() { long lat_d, lat_m, lat_s; long lon_d, lon_m, lon_s; double lat, lon; int v, h; char loc[256]; printf("Computes V&H (vertical and horizontal) coordinates\n"); printf("given latitude and longitude.\n\n"); printf("Example (Ann Arbor, MI):\n\nEnter location: 421700N0834445W\n"); printf("v = 5602, h = 2919\n\n"); for (EVER) { printf("Enter location: "); gets(loc); if (feof(stdin)) break; dms_to_lat_lon(loc, &lat, &lon); #ifdef DEBUG printf("lat = %17.16f, lon = %17.16f\n", lat, lon); #endif /* DEBUG */ ll_to_vh(lat, lon, &v, &h); printf("v = %d, h = %d\n", v, h); } } -------------------------------------------------------- Stu Jeffery Internet: stu@shell.portal.com 1072 Seena Ave. voice: 415-966-8199 Los Altos, CA. 94024 fax: 415-966-8456 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #362 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26384; 29 Aug 95 20:21 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA11498 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:07:31 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA11488; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:07:27 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:07:27 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508291907.OAA11488@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #363 TELECOM Digest Tue, 29 Aug 95 14:07:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 363 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "OS/2 Warp Internet Connection" by Morrison (Rob Slade) Enterprise Management Summit '95 - Keynotes (summit@ix.netcom.com) Free Fax Testing Service (Mike Rehmus) GSM Operators - Updated List (Robert Lindh) Usenet Like CB? No (Mike Wengler) Working Around Capacity Problems (Doug McIntyre) Nynex Blows it Again! (Tony Pelliccio) Employment Opportunity: Buffalo, NY DSP, Modem, C (jobs@vocal.com) Early Dialing Into 1-888-555-1212, 1-888-888-8888 (Rich Szabo) How to Distinquish Local From Long Distance Numbers (Thomas Chen) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 22:02:34 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "OS/2 Warp Internet Connection" by Morrison BKOS2WIC.RVW 950615 "OS/2 Warp Internet Connection", Deborah Morrison, 1995, 1-56884-465-4, U$24.99/C$34.99/UK#23.99 %A Deborah Morrison %C 155 Bovet Road, Suite 310, San Mateo, CA 94402 %D 1995 %G 1-56884-465-4 %I IDG Books Worldwide %O U$24.99/C$34.99/UK#23.99 415-312-0650 fax: 415-286-2740 kaday@aol.com %P 233 %T "OS/2 Warp Internet Connection" For a product-specific book, this is not bad at all. Basic Internet concepts are covered without going overboard. Many books mention RFCs (Request For Comment documents), but few present information on how to get them (and which ones to get) in as simple and useful a form. The definition of client/server isn't accurate (it doesn't work for X, for example), but is good enough to be getting on with. IBM wants, of course, to promote its own Internet Connection Service as the Internet provider of choice, and the setup to ICS is the simpler of the two. They may, however, have taken simplicity a bit too far. If the book is correct, there is no provision for a modem initialization string. The directions for the use of other access providers is quite clear, but it states that the IP address assigned to the user is "required." This would create difficulty for providers that use dynamic allocation. The script language for automated calling is not described, although sample scripts appear to be provided in Appendix B. The description of the various applications (Gopher, World Wide Web, email, news, telnet, and ftp) is basically limited to explanations of the interface, although organized in a functional style. Ironically, one of the few exceptions to the "just the interface" tutorial recommends the use of "block files" (apparently directly analogous to the more common kill files) as providing censorship for those with children. There is no indication of any means to prevent said children from removing this "protection." copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 BKOS2WIC.RVW 950615. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | "It says 'Hit any Institute for Robert_Slade@sfu.ca | key to continue.' Research into rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | I can't find the User Rob_Slade@mindlink.bc.ca | 'Any' key on my Security Canada V7K 2G6 | keyboard." ------------------------------ From: summit@ix.netcom.com Subject: Enterprise Management Summit '95 - Keynotes Date: 28 Aug 1995 19:36:55 GMT Organization: Netcom Keynote speakers and events have been finalized for the Enterprise Management Summit to be held this October 23-27 at the Dallas InfoMart. ** Managing Information In The Next Millennium ** Monday, October 23, 1:00PM Don Haile, General Manager, IBM Networking Software Division, will take the wraps off IBM's networking strategy for the rest of the 90s and beyond. Mr. Haile will discuss practical networking and software solutions as enterprises work to improve their bottom line by exploiting new technologies. He will cover the impact of the Internet, and the debate over true interoperability in the distributed client/server environment. He will also discuss the growing role of systems management tools and services to help enterprises obtain and manage the information they want, when they want it, from wherever it resides. Mr. Haile is responsible for the development of programming and support of all IBM communications platforms. The Networking Software Division contributes over $2.5 Billion in revenue annually. Mr. Haile has been with IBM for 31 years, holding a number of management positions in software development, telecommunications, systems management, and operating systems. He was named by IBM Chairman, Louis Gerstner, to IBMs Worldwide Management Council in 1994, and was appointed to the Board of Directors of Siemens-Rolm Corporation in 1995. ** Microsoft's Back Office Strategy ** Tuesday, October 24, 1:00PM Jonathan Roberts, Director of Windows NT Marketing for Microsoft Corporation, sets the direction for Microsoft's entire networking and enterprise management strategy including Back Office, a key component of Microsoft's product direction as it expands beyond the desktop. In one of the most important keynotes of 1995, Mr. Roberts will answer the question that everyone has been asking, Is Microsoft going to be a player in the management arena or not? He will cover Microsoft's strategy for Windows 95 and NT Advanced Server, as well as it's position with regard to developing management platforms and a comprehensive set of products that work across multiple systems, networks, and applications. Before his present postion, Mr. Roberts was in charge of rolling out Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1, and Windows for Workgroups.Products under his control include Windows NT, Windows NT Advanced Server, Daytona, Cairo, Hermes, and SNA Server. ** Making Enterprise Management Work - A Real World Perspective ** Wednesday, October 25, 10:15AM Join the Chief Information Officers from five business sectors for a discussion of the state of enterprise management today. These top CIO's will include a look at the state of enterprise management in their organizations and the benefits which they are realizing. They will also take a look into the future, examine what areas represent the greatest need to them, and outline which enteprise management technologies hold the most promise. This keynote session is sponsored by {Network Computing Magazine}. Moderator: Patricia Schnaidt, Editor-in-Chief, {Network Computing Magazine}. The Enterprise Management Summit '95 will be held this October 23-27 at the Dallas InfoMart. Conference discounts and free exhibit passes are available through our Systems Integrator sponsors (Booz-Allen and Hamilton, Ernst and Young, SSDS, and LAN Systems). For more information (and phone numbers for conference discounts), visit the Summit Web site at http://www.summit.micromuse.com, or contact the Summit. Phone: 800-340-2111, 415-512-0801. Email: amotive@mcimail.com. ------------------------------ From: Mike Rehmus Subject: Free Fax Testing Service Date: 28 Aug 1995 17:49:41 GMT Organization: Portal Communications (service) We've upgraded our free TestBack fax testing service and you are once again invited to try it. Send a one page fax with data (data also gets tested and folks who send blank pages are not getting all the information they could). It would be nice, but not necessary, if you put your name and e-mail address on the page so we can contact you if you have questions. It is so hard to sort blank pages to find yours! You will receive a short report with major errors, if any, pointed out. To try this: Fax a page to: (510) 828-5617. Wait 10 seconds (overseas no wait necessary) Poll (510) 828-5617. If you don't get the correct report, E-mail mrehmus@grayfax.com and we'll try to find your report. Blank pages excepted. The way this works is that we receive the call, then analyze it after the call is completed and make it available for the next Polling call. This can have problems but we cannot think of another way to accomplish this automatically without the possibility of other errors creeping in or without greatly increasing the expense and engineering time consumption. Best regards, Mike Rehmus Gray Associates ------------------------------ From: etxlndh@eos.ericsson.se (Robert Lindh) Subject: GSM Operators - Updated List Date: 28 Aug 1995 13:24:08 GMT Organization: Ericsson (Changes in the list marked by "*") Date 1995-08-23. Country Operator name Network code Tel to customer service ------ ------------- ------------ ----------------------- Andorra STA Argentina Australia Optus 505 02 Int + 61 2 978 5678 Telecom/Telstra 505 01 Int + 61 18 01 8287 Vodafone 505 03 Int + 61 2 415 7236 Austria PTV Austria 232 01 Bahrain Batelco Belgium Belgacom 206 01 Int + 32 2205 4000 Brunei Cameroon China Croatia Cyprus CYTA 280 01 Denmark Sonofon 238 02 Int + 45 80 20 21 00 Tele Danmark Mobil 238 01 Int + 45 80 20 20 20 Egypt Estonia EMT 248 01 Int + 372 2639 7130 Int + 372 2524 7000 Radiolinja Estonia 248 02 Fiji Finland Radiolinja Finland 244 05 Int + 358 800 95050 Telecom 244 91 Int + 358 800 7000 France France Telecom 208 01 Int + 33 1 44 62 14 81 SFR 208 10 Int + 33 1 44 16 20 16 Germany D1, DeTeMobil 262 01 Int + 49 511 288 0171 D2, Mannesmann 262 02 Int + 49 172 1212 Gibraltar GibTel 266 01 G Britain Cellnet 234 10 Int + 44 1753 50 45 48 Vodafone 234 15 Int + 44 1836 1100 Greece Panafon 202 05 Int + 30 944 00 122 STET 202 10 Int + 30 93 333 333 Guernsey * Guernsey Telecom Hong Kong HK HTCLGSM 454 04 SmarTone 454 06 Int + 852 2880 2688 Telecom CSL 454 00 Int + 852 2803 8450 Hungary Pannon GSM 216 01 Int + 36 1 270 4120 Westel 900 216 30 Int + 36 30 303 100 Iceland Post & Simi 274 01 Int + 354 96 330 India PT SATELINDO Indonesia TELKOMSEL 510 10 Iran T.C.I. Ireland Telecom Eireann 272 01 Int + 353 42 31999 Israel Cellcom Israel Ltd Italy Omnitel 222 10 SIP 222 01 Int + 39 6615 20309 Japan Jersey Jersey Telecom 234 50 Int + 44 1534 88 28 82 Kuwait MTC Laos Latvia LMT 247 01 Int + 371 2256 7764 Int + 371 2256 9183 Int + 371 2934 0000 Lebanon Libancell Liechtenstein 228 01 Lithuania Mobilios Telekom Luxembourg Telekom 270 01 Int + 352 4088 7088 Macao Malaysia Malta Advanced Marocco Monaco France Telecom 208 01 SFR 208 10 Namibia MTC Netherlands PTT Netherlands 204 08 Int + 31 50 688 699 New Zealand Bell South 530 01 Nigeria Norway NetCom 242 02 Int + 47 92 00 01 68 TeleNor Mobil 242 01 Int + 47 22 03 03 01 Oman Pakistan Phillipines Portugal Telecel 268 01 Int + 351 931 1212 TMN 268 06 Int + 351 1 793 91 78 Qatar Qatarnet 427 01 Rumania Russia Mobile Tele... Moscow Int + 7 271 00 60 NW GSM, St. Petersburg SaudiArabia Singapore Singapore Telecom 525 01 Slovenia South Africa MTN 655 10 Int + 27 11 445 6000 Vodacom 655 01 Int + 27 82 111 Sri Lanka MTN Networks Pvt Ltd Spain Airtel Telefonica Spain 214 07 Sweden Comviq 240 07 Int + 46 586 686 10 Europolitan 240 08 Int + 46 708 22 22 22 Telia 240 01 Int + 46 771 91 03 50 Switzerland PTT Switzerland 228 01 Int + 41 46 05 64 64 Syria SYR-01 223 01 SYR MOBILE SYR 263 09 Taiwan Thailand TH AIS GSM 520 01 Int + 66 2 299 6440 Turkey Telsim 286 02 Turkcell 286 01 Int + 90 800 211 0211 UAE UAE ETISALAT-G1 424 01 UAE ETISALAT-G2 424 02 Uganda Vietnam ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 06:14:10 -0500 From: wengler@ee.rochester.edu (Mike Wengler) Subject: Usenet Like CB? No. PAT discoursed on how the USENET had become like CB at its worst. The USENET and the Internet both are fascinating things themselves, but are also meta-fascinating as various pundits analyze them as though they were something else already known. Is it a telephone network? A mail system? A newspaper? A library? PAT suggests USENET is like radio spectrum in his last effort, and recently like CB radio in the seventies. However, the important differences are overwhelming. 1) you can always start a new newsgroup ... there are around 5,000 available to most people now. Compared to 40 (?) CB channels with no new ones in sight. And the USENET channels are very different from each other, based on name/subject matter. Many of us are happy with the groups we read ... alt.dcom.telecom and alt.cellular.technology in my case are fine. Very little SPAM or noise, no forged cancels, etc. 2) USENET can be changed. That cancels are so easily forgeable is just the way the news protocols have been defined. Almost without doubt, these protocols will be enhanced and USENET will survive. "Death of the USENET predicted, news at 11" is one of the quintessential self-referential cliches of the USENET which give it its unique charm. "Secure News" or SNEWS is the buzzword for the next generation. With CB, there wasn't much chance of changing broadcast or reception protocols to protect against the "Spam" PAT described, so it was CB itself which died. Of course, PAT must not be faulted for his attempt at "The USENET is a phone group. No, the USENET is a magazine. No, the USENET is a soapbox. No, the USENET is CB Radio." The USENET is new, and we don't have a consensus on how or even whether it should be regulated. The USENET has problems. We are being assaulted by the psychotic/commercial interests of scientology, and the "for your own good with a gun" interests of congress. We BETTER start comparing USENET to something, hopefully something which is protected from interference, so we can buffalo the g-men into protecting it for us, from themselves and others. (Is g-man for government-man or gun-man?) But really, cancel forgeries need to get fixed in the software, not in terms of getting people to behave differently. And the new software is being debated and developed, even as we continue to exist in our warm fantasy of free, non-commercial speech. IMHO of course, as always. Mike Wengler Save $1 on every Travel Card call, info and application at http://www.he.net/~wengler/VoiceNet/ Phone/Fax: 716 244-0238 Cell: 716 748-1930 ------------------------------ From: merlyn@icicle.winternet.com (Doug McIntyre) Subject: Working Around Capacity Problems Date: 28 Aug 95 14:24:14 GMT Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc What do people do to get large numbers of phone lines, especially when, say US West, won't plan ahead for capacity? Right now we have about 240 phone lines coming in, but can't get any more until US West decides where to drop a pair gaining switch into our premises. Up until this point they were content with dropping us copper, (in fact, that was their only solution, they don't mux out T-1's anymore, or anything), but now that all distribution pairs in the street are used up, they don't know what to do. We've been pushing on them for us needed a large number of phone lines since last year when we moved into this building, and we've been putting in large orders scheduled out two or three months in advance, and then cutting them back the day before they are scheduled to what we needed at that point, but until they ran out of wires in the street, they did nothing to plan out. The pair gain switch is scaring me, since all lines are data lines, and I've seen other installations where you can't get full speed out of 28.8 v.34 modems going through an SLC. Typically getting 24k or 26.4k connections max. I've been waiting now for two months on my last line order with still no lines in sight for them to drop. (Also having problems getting DDS lines as well, I have no idea where they think they are going to be getting T-1's to pair gain off of). What are my options? (I am already considered buying a channel bank, but that seems to be extreme, just to work around US West's problems) to get US West to deliver on lines? The tarrif states that they have to get us lines, but doesn't specify a time frame. Doug McIntyre merlyn@winternet.com Write to info@winternet.com for more information about Winternet's Internet services and dialups. ------------------------------ From: tonypo1@delphi.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Nynex Blows it Again! Date: 29 Aug 1995 05:58:39 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation Just thought I'd relate how technically backward the folks at Nynex are. Caller-ID was recently made available to most of Rhode Island but here are some problems with it: a) It's calling number and date/time delivery only. Duh - I don't need time/date but the name would be nice. Good going Nynex! b) A call from an associate in MA shows as OUT OF AREA. I called my long distance provider (who is also the friend's LD provider) and they've verified that their network will indeed pass Caller-ID information along. I call Nynex and ask them what the deal is. Turns out, according to some droid that Nynex "Doesn't have the technology to do that.". I wish Mary Alice Williams would stop talking about "Nynex Now!" and start talking about the real problems with what I propose is the worst telephone company around other than GTE. Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR tonypo1@delphi.com ------------------------------ From: jobs@vocal.com (Human Resources) Subject: Employment Opportunity: Buffalo, NY DSP, Modem, C, Assembler Date: 29 Aug 1995 17:06:54 GMT Organization: VoCAL Technologies, Ltd. VoCAL Technologies, Ltd., Amherst, New York VoCAL Technologies, a communications software technology firm is seeking highly motivated engineers and programmers to fill positions made available due to expansion of the company. Highly competitive salary and incentive program for top-notch employees. -------------------------------------------- Electrical Engineer - Full time BSEE or MSEE C and Assembler programmer. Experience in embedded systems and DSP's a plus. Must be very comfortable with assembly language programming. Electrical Engineer - Full time BSEE or MSEE Digital Signal Processing. 1 year minimum DSP experience required. Background course work in speech processing, image processing, or communications is preferable. Programmer - Full time. C programming for the PC. Must have Windows application development and low level hardware I/O software experience. ------------------------------------------------------- Interested applicants should email or mail their resume in confidence to: jobs@vocal.com Human Resources VoCAL Technologies, Ltd. 1576 Sweet Home Road Amherst, NY 14228 ------------------------------ From: Rich Szabo Subject: Early Dialing Into 1-888-555-1212, 1-888-888-8888 Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 18:31:45 EDT Organization: APK - Internet Provider for Ohio. When I tried calling the above-mentioned numbers, I received the following: 1. Bo-doo-weep tones 2. Harsh noise for about ten seconds 3. click then silence Curiously, the "SPKR" LED on my ATT Speakerphone then sort of FADED away slowly, but the "LINE IN USE" LED stayed on. Normally, when I get the CPC reverse polarity after a hangup on the speaker phone, the "SPKR" LED goes out followed by the "LINE IN USE" LED. Rich Szabo [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here in northern Illinois, Ameritech is not yet programmed to recognize 888 as an area code. When I tried your experiments here, dialing 1+888, etc, it went to the message saying 'When calling a number inside your area code dial only the seven digits. When calling a number outside your area code dial 1 plus the area code and the seven digits.' Interestingly though, throughout the entire intercept message (and even for a couple seconds before it started) there was a constant 'clicking' noise, or perhaps 'ticking' noise at about two second intervals. The 'when calling a number' intercept message is very common; it always plays out when a one is entered before a non-working area code; but for whatever reason when 888 is selected you get that tick/click sound along with it which is not part of the recording. It sounds in a way like someone taking a phone on and off hook repeatedly at about two second intervals. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 11:29:22 -0400 From: Thomas Chen Subject: How to Distinquish Local From Long Distance Numbers How can one determine whether certain numbers are within the calling area and certain numbers are not? For instance, I am in 301.294.xxxx and if i call 301.762.xxxx its a local call. If I call 202.xxx.xxxx, its also a local call, but if I call 301.428.xxxx, its a toll call. Is there any information online about how the calling areas are divided? Can one from the first six digits (npa) figure out which calling area he belongs to? Is there any logic to those numbers (sequential??? correlate to zip code?) tom [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your best bet is to ask the local telco what is and is not part of your calling area. This gets very messy and could (and has) consumed much time and space here as we go round and round on the variances from one community to the next. If you ask, your local teleco will supply you with a list of all the exchanges which are considered part of your local calling area; you may assume exchanges not listed are toll calls. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #363 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01897; 30 Aug 95 7:45 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA20933 for telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 22:22:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA20925; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 22:22:05 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 22:22:05 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508300322.WAA20925@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #364 TELECOM Digest Tue, 29 Aug 95 22:21:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 364 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CPUC Proposal (David Gershwin) Job Posting - Telecom Applications Engineer Wanted (Don Whitney) Unabomber in the News, Again (TELECOM Digest Editor) Enrollment Form - EXPLORING THE INTERNET (register@pacificnet.net) Anyone Else Been Lied to by AT&T? (Earl Vickers) Keeping Smart on Mobile Technology (jankwig@panix.com) 1-800-555-xxxx (David B. Horvath) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 14:51:38 PDT From: David Gershwin Subject: CPUC Proposal I'm actually going to be attending the meeting in L.A. on 9/20. While I may not know what the implications of this mean in reality, I'd probably like to see PacBell get some competition -- or at the very least, offer improved service for the kinda crap I seem to get now. Here are some of my beefs -- if anyone has any ideas on which ones would work, other points, etc., they would be welcome. E-mail me before the meeting ... (1) PacBell offers priority ring -- will it work with someone calling outside of PacBell's local calling area? Say, someone five miles away in GTE turf? Nope. Sorry, dude. (2) I'd like busy number redial -- won't work outside of my PacBell local calling area -- and that would include GTE turf as well. (3) I'd also like to see some competition with respect to rates for Zone Unit/local long-distance calls -- PacBell and the biggies pulled a big one when they convinced Gov. Wilson's PUC appointees that it's a "good idea" to have the default billing for local long-distance calls to be with one's local service provider, unless one enters a five-digit prefix before dialing -- then you still don't know what kind of prices you'll be getting. Just don't pick Oncor, that's for sure. I'd like to see *declared* prices for toll calls -- sort of like when you go to the supermarket, you can see the price tags, when you go to a gas station ... (4) I'd also like to see local phone companies stop deceptive practices like charging someone a dollar a month for an unlisted nubmer when someone can just pick a different name to be listed under, i.e. Joey Ramone; like not really explaining to people how much of a profit center/equivalent of extended warranty service contract rip-off "inside wire maintenance" contracts are, with anything wrong usually involving a three dollar piece of hardware. (5) My local phone company should provide me with *any* phone book in my local metropolitan area free of charge. Right now, PacBell wants me to fork over twenty clams for the privilege of using what should be public information, and for what would conceivably be "good" for PacBell directory advertisers ... End of rant, In vino veritas. David Gershwin gershwin@cinenet.net WWW Pages: http://www.cinenet.net/users/gershwin ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 11:44:39 -0700 (PDT) From: mvd@cpuc.ca.gov To: David Gershwin Subject: Re: CPUC proposal fact sheet request California Public Utilities Commission San Francisco, California August 1995 PHONE SERVICE FOR EVERYONE THE FACTS ABOUT UNIVERSAL SERVICE WHAT IS UNIVERSAL SERVICE? Universal Service means providing virtually everyone in the state with a basic level of telecommunications services at reasonable rates. It ensures that low-income customers and customers in areas that are expensive to serve (like mountain communities or less populated areas) receive the same access to services as other customers. Universal service is not a new idea. As described later, universal service programs have been in effect for some time. This fact sheet provides a summary of the issues and proposed rules contained in the CPUC proposal which would govern all telecommunications carriers in California that provide basic telephone service. THE LOCAL COMPETITION SITUATION Currently, there is only one company providing local phone service in your area. However, in 1994, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 3606, allowing other companies to offer local phone service by January 1, 1997. Local telephone competition will allow you to choose a local telephone company the same way most people now choose their long-distance company. Rules recently issued by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) will allow long-distance service providers, cable television companies and other companies to become competitive local telephone companies as early as January 1, 1996. These companies will be able to offer local telephone services in addition to their current service offerings. Local telephone competition is expected to lower costs for you, the consumer, while giving you the choice of newer, high quality services, in addition to basic telephone service. This competitive marketplace will foster economic growth and lead to an improved telecommunications infrastructure for California. What the CPUC is doing for you: Principles guiding the Commission: Ensuring that high-quality basic telecommunications services remain available and affordable to all Californians regardless of geographic, linguistic, cultural, ethnic, physical, or income considerations; Providing consumers with the ability to choose among competing telephone companies; Providing for the addition of new services to the basic service package as these new services become more widely used, in order to avoid some people having inferior access to information compared to others; Ensuring that customers have access to sufficient information to make informed choices about basic service and universal lifeline telephone service; and Ensuring that telephone companies follow reliability, privacy and security guidelines. THE CPUC UNIVERSAL SERVICE PROPOSAL Background: The prospect of local telephone competition has raised some concerns about a telephone company's "universal service" responsibilities in a competitive environment. In 1994, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 3643, which requires the California Public Utilities Commission, the state agency which regulates telephone companies, to develop universal service policies in a competitive environment. The CPUC recently issued proposed rules for public comment which outline its plan for maintaining affordable, high quality service within a competitive environment. The Commission released proposed rules on July 17, 1995, (Decision 95-07-050) for public comment. The document outlines the definition of minimum basic service, methods for subsidizing high cost service areas, discounts for low-income consumers, and the need for consumer information. A final set of rules will be developed following public hearings, filing of comments regarding the proposed rules, and following any evidentiary hearings and/or legislative changes, if necessary. What is Basic Service? Basic service is the set of features and capabilities consumers expect when they order telephone service. Basic service is not static, but changes over time. In the proposed universal service rules, the Commission proposes a definition of what basic service is now, and how it may change over time to include new services. The Commission proposes that basic service should include what Californians have come to expect when they order telephone service. This includes a connection to the telephone network (the ability to place and receive calls); access to the larger telephone network, such as access to long distance carriers and information services; free access to 911 emergency services; touch tone dialing; and billing options, such as choice of flat and measured service. As technology advances, new services will be offered. Over time these services may become so commonly used that they may be considered essential. Touch tone was once considered a premium service. Over time it became widely used and essential for many activities. Touch Tone is now included as part of basic service. The Commission expects that other, more advanced services may also become essential. For this reason, the universal service rules propose reviewing the definition of basic service every three years. During these reviews the Commission will consider the following factors: (1) Is the service essential for participation in society? (2) Do a majority of residential customers subscribe to the service? (3) Will the benefits of adding the service to the basic service exceed the costs? What About Service To Less Populated Areas? Universal service also ensures that customers in areas that are expensive to serve (like rural and mountain communities) receive the same access to services as other customers. In areas that are expensive to serve, rates have been kept low in two ways. First, the California High Cost Fund (CHCF) reduces rates for customers of small telephone companies. All telephone customers currently contribute to the CHCF through a small charge on their monthly phone bill. Second, by requiring large telephone companies to charge the same rate for basic service within their territory, rates are kept at reasonable levels in their high cost areas. By introducing local competition, the Commission must consider new ways to keep rates at reasonable levels. Under the proposed universal service rules, if you live in a designated high cost area, you will be able to get a credit, or voucher, on your bill so your rates remain affordable. If there is more than one local telephone company serving your high cost area, you can receive a similar credit regardless of which telephone company you choose. The purpose of this credit is to ensure that rates remain affordable in areas where the costs of serving that community are high. The credit represents the difference between the cost of providing service in an area and the rate the Commission considers affordable. In order to receive this credit for the customers it serves, a company must be willing to accept an obligation to serve all customers in an area. To fund this universal service voucher program, the Commission proposes a charge based on telephone company revenues. Unlike the current high cost fund, no direct charge would appear on your bill. What About Low-Income Consumers? Another aspect of universal service is providing lower rates for low income customers. The current Universal Lifeline Telephone Service (ULTS) program for low income consumers will remain unchanged, with the exception that it will be expanded to offer the choice of ULTS providers. Eligible low income customers will continue to pay either $5.62 for residential flat rate service, or $3.00 for residential measured service throughout the state. This program is funded by a small charge on all telephone bills. What Information Do Customers Need? The CPUC is concerned about what information consumers need to make informed choices about competing local telephone companies. It proposes that all local phone companies must provide customers basic service information in a standard format. Consumers will then be able to make easy comparisons between basic service rates of different local phone companies can be easily compared. This is similar to the way credit card companies present their rates. CONSUMER PROTECTIONS The CPUC recently established consumer protection rules governing new local telephone companies in a related, ongoing CPUC proceeding. These are interim rules, and will become effective January 1, 1996. Consumer protection rules govern rate increase notice requirements, disclosure of information to consumers when signing customers for service, required procedures for handling billing complaints, requirements for printing on bills information on how to receive help, customer deposit return requirements, rules to provide for easy credit establishment, privacy protection rules, and free blocking of 900 and 976 information service requirements. HOW YOU CAN GET INVOLVED The CPUC wants your comments on its proposed universal service rules. To provide an opportunity for comment, we will be holding public hearings throughout California in September and October (as listed below). The meetings will consist of a 15 minute presentation by Commission staff, followed by an open public comment period. Comments can be oral or written and CPUC staff will be available to respond to your questions. September 20, 1995 7:00 p.m., Los Angeles State Office Building, 107 South Broadway Auditorium September 26, 1995 7:00 p.m., San Bernardino City Hall , 300 North "D" Street Council Chambers September 27, 1995 7:00 p.m., Barstow City Hall, 220 E. Mountain View Street Council Chambers September 29, 1995 7:00 p.m., San Francisco State Office Building, 505 Van Ness Avenue Auditorium October 2, 1995 7:00 p.m., San Diego County Board of Supervisors, 1600 Pacific Highway Board Room, Room 310 October 5, 1995 7:00 p.m., Fresno State Office Building, 2550 Mariposa Mall Auditorium October 11, 1995 7:00 p.m., Roseville Maidu Community Center, 1550 Maidu Drive October 12, 1995 7:00 p.m., San Jose City Council, 801 North First Street Council Chambers October 12, 1995 7:00 p.m., Volcano Armory Hall, #2 Consolation Street October 19, 1995 7:00 p.m., Redding City Council, 1313 California Street Council Chambers October 24, 1995 7:00 p.m., Eureka County Courthouse, 825 Fifth Street Board of Supervisors Chambers HOW TO CONTACT US If you cannot attend one of the hearings, but would like to submit written comments, please write to: The Public Advisor California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Ave., Room 5303 San Francisco, CA 94102 or send electronic mail to: public.advisor@cpuc.ca.gov Mention that you are writing about "Universal Service Rules" (D.95-07-050). Indicate if you wish a written response, otherwise no reply will be sent. Your letter will be forwarded to the Commissioners and will become part of the formal correspondence file for this proceeding. ------------------------------ From: dkw@mlb.semi.harris.com (Don Whitney) Subject: Job Posting - Telecom Applications Engineer Wanted Date: 29 Aug 1995 21:54:11 GMT Organization: Harris Semiconductor, Melbourne, FL Reply-To: dkw@mlb.semi.harris.com Hello, Harris Semiconductor is looking for an Applications Engineer for its Telecom IC products. Wanted: Knowledgeable and experienced engineer in the following areas: Subscriber Line cards, SLICs (Subscriber Line Interface Circuits), CODEC, and Lightning protection devices. Experience with semiconductor design and/or manufacturing is a plus. Good oral and writing skills necessary since part of job function includes publication of papers and app notes. BSEE or higher required. Harris Semiconductor is a manufacturer of solid state Subscriber Line Interface Circuits (SLICs), CODECs and lightning protection devices. It is located in Melbourne, Florida about 60 miles east of Orlando on the Alantic coast. Please reply to: David Ridgley (HR) email: dridgley@harris.com Fax: 407-729-4140 Phone: 407-729-5421 Donald Whitney (Design Engineer) email: dkw@semi.harris.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 21:18:05 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Unabomber in the News, Again So ... now they have decided -- as I did sometime back -- that the mystery person known as Unabomber had his roots here in the northern Illinois area. A few weeks ago, I expressed my belief, based on conversations with some net people, that Unabomber is a fellow whose initials are P.M.G. The 'M' stands for Michael ... and the 'P' ... ummm ... oh what the heck, it stands for Patrick. Well we had an interesting event right here in our little village of Skokie yesterday. It seems the FBI came to visit the school teachers in a large group meeting to discuss with them the case and ask them -- at least the ones who have been around as teachers for thirty years or so -- to rack their brains and try to identify who this former pupil of theirs might have been. Back in the era involved -- the 1960's -- we only had one high school in Niles Township (the sub-division of Cook County, Illinois in which Skokie is located) and it was known in those days as 'Nilehi' for short. Then came a second school and they called it Niles West with the original Nilehi becoming Niles East. Then came Niles North (a couple blocks from my house) in the middle 1970's and then later the closing of Niles East entirely as enrollment dropped. But hey! What the heck are they looking *over here* for? My message on the subject told them this fellow grew up in the Park Ridge and Des Plaines area: that's the next township west, called Maine Township. So now the FBI people are going to go over and question all the old-time school teachers over there at the Maine Township high schools, and see what they know about it. What the FBI needs to be doing is looking at the 'G' family when they were living at 1030 Horne Street in Des Plaines, phone VAnderbilt 7-6895, back in the late 1960's and see if that direction gets them anywhere. It is my belief that PMG's father was a fellow named GG at that address who also operated for many years a company in Park Ridge called G(xxxxxx) Builders and Development Company at 709 Devon in Park Ridge, phone TALcott 5-6654. They built homes, you know, like carpenters ... the children would have gone to the Maine Township schools, not the schools over here in Skokie for chrissakes! I wonder if they have looked at the connection I gave them for GG out in San Fransisco, where the GG stands for the same name as the one here in those days and the fellow who answers the phone seems figity and nervous and lies through his teeth and admitted he used to live here in the area back in the 1970's, 'but only as a way to dodge the draft'. Nah, they probably have not had time to do all that ... after all, there is a rumor going around on the Internet that some fellow in Alaska logged in on the Internet one day and thinks he might possibly have seen a message about kiddie porn somewhere; all available agents have been sent up there to kick in his door, seize all his computer equipment, inspect the encrypted files on his disk drive bit by bit, interogate all his family members as material witnesses, etc. No time left to be getting all involved looking for Patrick Michael G ... priorities, you know. I would apply for the million dollar reward they offered for information leading to his arrest, but it is likely they would weasel out of that also. You know how much dislike they have for this hotbed of perversion and anarchy known as Internet, and they surely could never bring themselves to admit that the people on this net helped solve their mystery. We are supposed to be causing them all their grief, not helping resolve it, and don't you forget that. So as exciting as it would be to find out that Unabomber grew up as a child right here in our own little village of Skokie, I'm afraid the FBI guys are looking a little too far to the east. They need to take the advice of the author who said 'go west, young man ...' Like maybe about ten miles west out to Park Ridge/Des Plaines. ----------------------------------- In other Unabomber news, I got mail from James Bellaire and a few other people who took me to task for claiming that the email I got from the FBI on subject was fraudulent and forged. The folks who wrote me about my 'stupid letter of the day' commentary enclosed evidence that indeed, fbi.gov gets their feed from the service provider mentioned. So, I guess that letter from the 'unabom task force' was for real. You who read it here will recall they thanked me for my input and said that if further information was required they would be in contact. Then what do they do but show up here in Niles Township to talk to the teachers ... hey guys, for the last time, try Maine Township, okay? Check the school records over there, and check with the old, probably retired employees of the Builder and Development Company. If I have to discuss this topic here again -- and personally I find it repugnant -- I may just name him completely and forget to use initials. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 18:50:51 -0700 From: Register@Pacificnet.Net Subject: Enrollment Form - EXPLORING THE INTERNET [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I believe very strongly in the work being done by SPECTRUM Virtual University and suggest that readers of this Digest may be interested in learning more about SPECTRUM by signing up for the free workshop -- a virtual workshop -- that they are offering. Everything will be conducted via email, and this will be an excellent opportunity for newcomers to the net -- and even some experienced old- timers who have not kept up as well as they should -- to learn what is going on. Particularly, those of you who participate via the non-traditional sites, i.e. Compuserve, AOL and other commercial services for whom Internet connectivity has only recently become available will benefit from this course. It is free, and as easy to join as filling out the form which appears below. PAT] ------------------------------ SPECTRUM Virtual University Spectrum@PacificNet.Net Priority Correspondence FAX (818) 834-8221 "The World Meets Here -- The Future Begins Here." Welcome to our Fall/Winter 1995 workshop, "EXPLORING THE INTERNET." This *free* workshop is sponsored by Spectrum Virtual University to raise public awareness and provide greater access to the information- rich highways of cyberspace. To complete your enrollment, just follow the instructions below. This form may be freely copied and distributed. If you wish to enroll a group of people in your school or office, simply send us their e-mail addresses and we will send a form to each person. Please use "Subject" header "GROUP REQUEST 811" to expedite handling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO ENROLL BY E-MAIL: Type your answers below. If you cannot type on this form, retype the headings and your answers in a new message. E-mail completed form to register@pacificnet.net TO ENROLL BY FAX: Print form and fax to (818) 834-8221. Please fax only the form! It is not necessary to fax back these instructions. TO ENROLL BY TOUCHTONE PHONE: Call our 24-hour Fast Touch registration line at (818) 899-7888. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = cut here = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ENROLLMENT FORM SPECTRUM Virtual University Fall, 1995 Program Name : Exploring The Internet #811 Your Student ID : ####### Your Full Name : E-Mail Address : Organization : Title : Street Address : City/Province : Postal ZipCode : Country: : Where did you hear about this workshop? (Type answer in space below) : What do you hope to learn from this workshop? (Please be specific!) : [end of form] ------------------------------ From: earl@netcom.com (Earl Vickers) Subject: Anyone Else Been Lied to by AT&T? Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 21:39:30 GMT In early July, AT&T (or their representatives) called me up and offered me $50 to switch to AT&T. In a couple weeks, I got a check for $10, and a $10 Preferred Customer Voucher. I called to complain and was told that it takes four to six weeks to get the $50 check. So I waited. Today I called and complained again. They apologized and offered to send me a check to make up the difference of what they had promised. So, to get my $50, I have to stay on hold for 20 minutes, talk to three or four different people, mail in a coupon that isn't good until late September, and cash two checks if indeed I get the second one. This is not what I was promised, and if I hadn't persisted with them I wouldn't have gotten that much. This is classic bait and switch. Maybe it's AT&T lying to me, maybe it's their contractors trying to pull a fast one, or maybe it was an honest error, I don't know. Regardless, I'm filing a complaint with: The California Public Utilities Commission Consumer Affairs Branch 505 Van Ness Ave., Room 2003 San Francisco, CA 94102, and the Federal Communications Commission Common Carrier Bureau 1919 M. St., NW, Washington, DC 20554 And maybe if this has happened to enough of us, a class action lawsuit might be in order. Where's Crackers the Corporate Crime-fighting Chicken when you need him? Earl Vickers earl@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 20:45:11 EDT From: jankwig Subject: Keeping Smart on Mobile Technology Hello. Last week, I submitted a request for some adhoc responses to a very informal survey I was conducting on how mobile technology users (individuals, consumers, etc.) get smart and stay informed or educated on the technology *that they use for themselves*. This last emphasis was apparently not clear: the focus is on individual private use of any type of mobile technology. If you'd allow me to, I would like to request recipients of this mailing to consider responding to this survey again, considering the focus on mobile technology of any kind (cellular, laptop, printers, PDAs, etc.) *which you use for yourselves*. Hence, please respond back concerning the methods you utilize other than books or magazines, such as attending trade shows, speaking to dealers, speaking to colleagues or friends, using online discussion groups, etc. A single, quick email response listing the manner in which you stay up to date on mobile technology would suffice. Thank you again for your assistance. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 21:07:10 EDT From: David B. Horvath, CDP Subject: 1-800-555-xxxx It looks like the 1-800-555 number space is available for "normal" toll free phone numbers. I got a call from a Contract-programmer broker in Texas (they wanted to know if I was interested in a job down there), when I mentioned that I wasn't interested but might be able to pass the lead on to a friend who was interested in moving to TX, I was given a 1-800-555- number. I confirmed the number to make sure I heard it correctly. Now what are the movies going to use to show someone dialing a toll free number? David B. Horvath, CCP dhorvath@goldey.gbc.edu Consultant, Adjunct Professor, International Lecturer [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know what they will do now. Maybe the YANG! principle should be applied. YANG = Yet Another Noise Group. Should I put up a message in news.groups calling for a discussion on what to name the new group which will discuss how Hollywood should handle the use of telephone numbers when telco no longer has the luxury of providing them with numbers that won't disturb the real people? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #364 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29499; 1 Sep 95 1:27 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA11399 for telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 19:09:02 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA11393; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 19:09:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 19:09:00 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199509010009.TAA11393@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #365 TELECOM Digest Tue, 29 Aug 95 23:05:30 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 365 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: San Francisco Area Codes (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: AT&T 1-500 Number - Any Advice? (Glenn Foote) Re: V&H Questions (James E. Bellaire) Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market (David Breneman) Re: Telex History (pjk@ssax.com) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Codes Date: 29 Aug 1995 19:27:14 GMT Organization: Tulane University Peter_Mansfield@australia.notes.pw.com wrote: > Reading Mark Cuccia's interesting and informative history of the > Mexican hacks and TWX, this reminded me of something I read in Carl > Moore's history.of.area.splits in the Telecom Archives a while back > dealing with the introduction of area code 318 in 1951, which I'm > interested in finding out more about. Carl writes: >> 415/318 California, 1951 >> 318 was used for San Francisco only, during the Englewood (N.J.) >> Customer DDD Trials; Oakland remained in 415. Sometime before 1957, >> 318 was reclaimed for future use, and San Francisco returned to 415. >> 504/318 Louisiana, 1957 >> 318, used earlier for San Francisco, had been reclaimed by this time. > Furthermore, in 1959, according to Carl Moore's file, 415 did a > *three-way split* with West Central California moving to 408 and North > West California moving to 707, with the San Francisco Area retaining > 415 (which, as we know, later split again to form 415/510). I was the one who faxed Carl Moore a few months back with this info, to help him fill in the gaps in his Area Code history. It was photocopies of NPA maps from various time periods in the late 1940's and throughout the 1950's, from articles on Long-Distance, numbering and dialing, switching, etc. from Bell Telephone Magazine, Bell Laboratories Record magazine, Bell System Technical Journal, and from AT&T's Notes on the Network (1955 edition which was then titled "Notes on Nationwide Dialing"), and from a historical list of NPA assignments that my contact at Bellcore faxed me last year. > So, do any historians out there know anything more about these DDD > trials, specifically why a new NPA was allocated, and then reclaimed > several years later. Also, was it a full cutover, or simply some kind > of optional 'overlay' where either 318 or 415 could be used to reach > San Francisco? If San Francisco was still in 318 for some time after > 1951, why then did it return to 415, which was obviously nearing > capacity, as it split three ways a few years later? All press-releases in newspapers (microfilm back issues of the {New York Times}) or back issues of {Time, Life, Newsweek}, etc. had a brief blurb of an article in late 1951 stating that the Mayor of Englewood NJ called the mayors of San Francisco and nearby towns. Calls to points east of San Francisco Bay (Oakland) were dialed 415 + NNX-XXXX (there was NO 1+; just straight ten digits). The call from the Englewood NJ mayor to the San Francisco mayor was dialed 318 + NNX-XXXX. The call from Englewood to towns north of the Golden Gate were also dialed 318 + NNX-XXXX. AT&T's publication entitled Events In Telecommunications History also refers to the Englewood NJ trials. Incidently, it was not known at that time as DDD (Direct Distance Dialing) but something like Customer Toll Dialing or Nationwide Customer Dialing (something like what the UK used to call STD-Subscriber Trunk Dialing). There were also articles on this in magazines such as {Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, and Popular Electronics}. 318 was also mentioned. BTW, the 'official' maps in Bell's magazines in the early 1950's did *not* include 318! WHY was there this *special* code I don't know for sure. I can only guess that maybe there were some Central Office code/naming/letter conflicts within the SF Bay area? or maybe it was a routing determination? Incidently, when Englewood NJ was able to dial long-distance in 1951, it was *only* to specified towns/cities, such as Northern NJ area, NY City Metro area, Boston, Washington DC, SF Bay area, Chicago, Philadelphia, etc. These larger metro areas were predominantly Panel and Crossbar (#1 and #5) switching regions, with little or no Step-by-Step, although there were still some operator/ manual local central offices in these cities. Automated Toll Switching was handled on a #4XB switch. Maybe since only specific *cities* were identified by the dialable areacode, it *could* be that AT&T wanted to identify Oakland as 415 and San Francisco as 318, until customers were more familiar with nationwide toll dialing. It could be that AT&T wanted to eliminate accidental wrong numbers (which would have been billed a MUCH higher toll charge than we know today; unless you are using Integratel or other AOSlime! ). If a NJ customer intended to dial 318 (San Francisco), but followed with the seven dial pulls which was actually an Oakland number (in error), then they *might* have gone to an intercept recording/operator. I don't know how long 318 was actually used to dial San Francisco -- I have nothing in print showing when it was 'put-back-into' 415 or whatever, other than I do know that when Louisiana's 'single' NPA, 504, was split in 1957, with 504 remaining for southeast Louisiana (New Orleans, Baton Rouge, etc), and 318 covering western/northern Louisiana (Lafayette, New Iberia, Shreveport, Monroe, Alexandria, Lake Charles, etc). In an early 1950's issue of {Bell Telephone Magazine}, there was mention of a Customer instruction booklets for Long-Distance dialing, for those areas which *could* dial LD. There was a small photo of the cover of a booklet and also some of the inside. However the resolution of the photo was NOT good, and I could not make out any text of the booklet itself in the magazine photo. It seems that the booklet gave Area Codes for those points which were customer direct dialable from that particular point at that time, and the Exchange Names and cities within the area code that could be dialed. Even tho' today I can get all of the current NPA-NXX info I want from Bellcore, I'd give 'anything' -- well not really for a copy of one of those 40+ year old booklets. > Finally, are there any other known cases such as this, where an area > code is split and is later reclaimed, or changed back to the former > code or somehow reshuffled (apart from another split or overlay)? I wouldn't actually call the use of 318 for San Francisco a split -- but that is the only case I know of this. Other than the fact that 903 had been used for the *extreme* border of northwest Mexico but reclaimed in 1980 when 70-6 was used (when AT&T and Telefonos de Mexico placed these border towns more specifically in +52-6XX..), and then 70-6 and 90-5 being reclaimed; and lets not forget the TWX special Areacodes (N10's) were 'reclaimed' when TWX was 'removed' from the Bell System's DDD switching network. All of these codes (318, 903, 706, 905, 510, 610, 710, 810, 910) have uses today which were NOT there original use. And, BTW, from Events in Telecommunications History (AT&T): on 15 June 1966, it is mentioned that Lowell Wingert of AT&T Long Lines placed a call from Philadelphia to Geneva Switzerland by dialing 200-233-1011. Of course this was some kind of special 'patch' code, since I had read in issues of Bell's magazines dated prior to 1966 that 011+ was going to be the IDDD access prefix, and that there were plans for Country Codes as we know them today. There is NO use of 41 for Switzerland in this demonstration international call. > Incidentally, the above three-way split of 415 in 1959 seems to indicate > that the current three-way split planned for Chicago cannot claim to > be the first, especially since the Chicago split/reorganization is > being implemented over about two years, and not all at once. (I don't > think anyone actually claimed that it *was* the first, just that that > it was the only one that anybody could think of!) And, while I don't have exact dates (month, date) only the year of introduction of Area Codes back in the 1940's, 50's, early 60's, I don't think that 415 was split three-ways overnight into 408, 707, and a smaller 415. Also, I don't think that areacodes reaching 'capacity' meant the same that it does today. Back then, the electromechanical switches diddn't handle the capacity of lines and trunks, unlike the ESS and Digital switches of today. Even #4XB and #5XB had special routing considerations when assigning Central Office codes. Back then there was also a lot more 'protection' of C/O codes when a 'community of interest' straddled an areacode boundary. These days there will be less and less of code protection in the North American numbering plan, and rather more mandatory ten-digit dialing, both across an NPA boundary, and even within NPA's. John Higdon is from the San Jose / San Francisco area. Maybe he might have some info to enlighten us on 318's use for calling into SF from outside of CA, or maybe some Bay area Exchange Name history -- (and SF was probably the only area of the country that used 55X numbers before All Number Calling -- KLondike-x (55X) WAS used in San Francisco, while most areas of the country never seemed to use the 55X range prior to the 1960s). MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: glnfoote@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Glenn Foote) Subject: Re: AT&T 1-500 Number - Any Advice? Date: 29 Aug 1995 16:02:07 -0400 Organization: The Greater Columbus FreeNet In response to a query on misc.consumers I recently responded to the above request. I am posting the reply here too in an effort to continue the discussion regarding 500 numbers, their problems, and the impact that their failure has on the providors and users. Comments are always welcome. [Hi Pat, is _your_ 500 number working yet ??] To: Gina Waterman From: Glenn "Elephant" Foote Date: Tuesday August 29, 1995 at 15:33 Re: AT&T 500 numbers = Bad News ... > From: Gina Waterman > Newsgroups: misc.consumers > Subject: 1-500#--Any advice? > Date: 28 Aug 1995 20:53:35 GMT > Has anyone used AT&T's 1-500 Easy Reach Service? > I would appreciate any advice as I am looking into using it for > business purposes. > Please email. Thanks--Gina Gina, Let me start off by explaining that I am a semi-retired independent telecommunications consultant (voice systems and networks) with over 25 years experience in the industry. I have had the 500 service since that day after it was announced. My experience is that is just doesn't work! The reasons are many, but the result is the same from many places. Even in the US, access to 500 numbers is restricted and not just from pay phones (where it is really needed), and privately owned systems (PBX's), but also from homes and business accounts as well. This is true even when the long distance carrier for that number is AT&T. The concept is fine, just walk up to a phone, dial 1+500+xxx-xxxx and be connected. (0+500 is also an option, more on that later) The reality is that in over 25 _personal attempts_ to do this from various sites around the country, the call is denied UNLESS I first dial 10+ATT or 1-800-CALL-ATT. For the astute business person, or someone who is really determined to use the number (like myself) this _sometimes_ works. For others who are not so sophisticated the process is a disaster. _AT&T_ operators have told _me_ the following: "Those are porn numbers ... they can't be dialed from a pay phone." (I wonder how many of my clients heard that one!) "There is no such thing as a 500 number ... you must mean an 800 number ... please try your call again ... thank you for using AT&T ... ... buzzz ..." (nice try ... time to use another service) "We can't connect you to that number, it must be dialed directly." (AT&T states that when calling from outside the US, to contact them to complete the call.) "My equipment won't accept that number as a valid number." (Maybe not, but your billing equipment does.) There _are_ many more, but I can't remember all of them, fortunately. In my _considered signed personal opinion_ (which I normally charge good money for) the 500 service from AT&T _should not be considered_ as a viable option at this time. When I see AT&T making a serious attempt to correct the myriad of problems that plague this service I _may_ reconsider that opinion. Until then, and because of the broken promises in relation to this service, which I consider symptomatic of a growing problem with the quality of service and serious lack of integrity at AT&T, I am doing the following: I have started reviewing _all_ of my past recommendations to clients regarding the selection of a long distance carrier. My professional decision factors involving recommendations for service have always taken into account more than price. The real issue is this: When a company no longer can be counted on to deliver what it promises in quality or quantity it is time to re-evaluate it's role as a supplier. Over the course of my consulting career I made recommendations totaling much more than $19 million dollars (per year) in long distance usage. I expect current use has increased that figure. After my most recent discussion with an AT&T customer service supervisor regarding a significant failure of an AT&T operators refusal to accept my 500 number (plus pin) as a credit card number (from a restricted, dial disabled, pay phone in North Carolina), which you are _supposed_ to be able to do, and the total failure of AT&T to address the myriad of problems surrounding this 500 (and other) issues, I have decided to go back to those clients and (for free) perform another analysis of their long distance costs. The point is this: If we take the supposed business integrity of AT&T (or any other company) out of the picture, there is little to nothing to separate them other than price. If that is the case, and I believe that THEY have made it so, then I expect that many of the new analysis will show AT&T in a less than favorable light. This is doubly sad because it is within their power to address and fix these issues. For some reason, they choose not to do so. And, if they choose not to be a responsible organization, I choose take that irresponsibility into account when determining recommendations for any clients; future, present or past. So, Gina, all that aside; my recommendations for your problems: Get a _very_good_ 24 hour telephone seven days per week answering service. Communicate with them frequently. Let them know where you are at all times. Pay whatever it cost. If you _need_ the service, the cost will be well worth it. Glenn "Elephant" Foote ...... glnfoote@freenet.columbus.oh.us [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually my experience has, in general been the opposite of yours. I have never seen a payphone which rejected 500 calls (other than the bug in the system a month ago reported here which was fixed fairly promptly). I have never had to dial 10288 to get through on 500, and furthermore, dialing 10288 would not make a whit of difference anyway; we all know that the local telco examines all the data given first and *then, provided they find it in their routing tables* hand it off to the requested carrier. I can see a situation where the local telco might examine the 500 prefix and hand it to the carrier who is assigned that prefix or number, as is done with 800 calls now, but in that case your use of 10xxx would not matter either, just as 10xxx means nothing when dialing an 800 number. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 21:33:03 -0500 From: bellaire@tk.com (James E. Bellaire) Subject: Re: V&H Questions Note: The original question was regarding converting VH to lat/long to global mileage. In TD362 lreeves@crl.com (Les Reeves) wrote: > There is a program, called NPA, which will do what you want. > Here is the info on the latest version: > NPA for WINDOWS <04Jul95> - Comprehensive area code (NPA), prefix > (NXX), and city name locator. [SNIP] > I tried to find an contact number for the author, but this is a > WINDOZE program, and everything but the file description is in the > form of a Windows .hlp file. > The author goes by the name of PC Consultant, and is located in Houston. He also goes by the name Robert Ricketts. Last I knew (April '95) his email was . He also is 73670.1164@compuserve.com. His snail address: PO Box 42086 Houston, TX 77242-2086. His contact number is (713) 826-2629, V-MAIL ONLY, but he does call back quickly most of the time (especially if you want to register!). The contact information is on the 'setup tab' in the program. Press (MORE) from the main program screen to read it. > This is an excellent program. I have been using the DOS version for a > couple of years. I second that. Mr. Ricketts keeps up with all the new NPA's too. The new version adds multiple ZIPs per NXX as well as labeling NXXs based on type (USA only, Cellular or Landline). Although there are a few errors in which NXXs are assigned to cellular, probably carried from his source. BTW: The new version is available via CompuServe (GO TELECOM). It hasn't appeared elsewhere on the net yet. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com ------------------------------ From: david.breneman@mccaw.com (David Breneman) Subject: Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market Date: 29 Aug 1995 22:11:38 GMT Organization: McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc. In article -TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, I don't think they could buy up those > companies. I think all those former AT&T companies have to be left alone > where AT&T is concerned. That is what I meant by saying 'several monopolies'. > Today, a hundred years after the government-ordered breakup of the Standard > Oil Trust owned by John Rockefeller, any of the various parts of the former > oil monopoly (Exxon, Amoco, Chevron, etc) are by themselves larger than the > original monopoly. Competition, eh? So let's open a gasoline refinery and > oil producing business and see how far it gets us ... Hey, my girlfriend's father did just that! He quit his job at Chevron and opened his own refinery. While it didn't make him another Rockefeller, she did grow up in a "two boat family". He passed away several years ago, but the company he founded, Associated Petroleum, is a major local (Puget Sound area) provider of petroleum products. "Only in America..." I know thia doesn't have anything to do with telecom issues, but it shows what's possible. :-) David Breneman Unix System Administrator Mail: david.breneman@mccaw.com IS - Operations (Beginning September 11th: ~@attws.com) McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc. Phone: +1-206-803-7362 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are right of course. It can happen here, but sadly a lot less often than it used to many years ago. Remind me sometime to tell the story of a fellow nicknamed 'Cappy' who worked for Illinois Bell back in the 1950-60 era. One day he got fed up, and with a fellow worker they withdrew all their profit sharing/pension plan money and moved to some little town in Arizona where they bought the local telephone cooperative which was on the verge of bankruptcy. They found wires strung along cattle ranchers fences through the countryside, susbcriber equipment dating back to the 1930's, etc ... a horrible mess. But by golly they cleaned it up over a period of a few years and later sold it for a huge profit. Indeed, it can be done. And what about that fellow in (I think) Utah with the tiny little telco with a grand total of eight subscribers? Is he still around? You are right ... only in America. PAT] ------------------------------ From: The Big Guy Subject: Re: Telex History Date: Tue, 29 Aug 95 10:51:15 CDT Organization: R&D, Advanced Products - 16th Floor The discussion of telex machines brings back memories of an interesting story ... In 1986 I was hired to automate a travel agency which did African Tours. This being before FAX machines were widespread, most of the correspondence to Africa was done via Telex. The agency was rapidly growing, had purchased a computer, and was seeking to automate operations wherever possible. Easylink (store and forward telex via E-mail) from WUTCO had become available, so with a few hacks to sendmail (UNIX mail program) I was able to gateway mail into the telex network. Before then, the company had a full time telex operator, and telexes were frequently delayed, went out with the usual mis-spellings due to bad transcription, etc. Now people could type their own telexes at their desk, and send them immediately. So, was everybody happy? Of course not. As the case with most travel agencies, annual turnover was close to 100%, so every month, I would get a call from the new person, asking "Where's the telex machine?". I would explain that you prepared telexes with the word processor, and then e-mailed them to the telex network. "Ok, how to I punch the tape, then?" ... After a few rounds of this, I dug a telex machine out of the dump, cleaned it up, hooked it to the computer using the current loop interface, and wrote some shell scripts to simulate connecting to the telex network. This worked great for a while. Then, while I was in Africa, on a tour, I started getting *telegrams* from the agency, that the telex machine was broken, and that WUTCO refused to fix it. The office was in a total uproar, and they couldn't do business. In the meantime, they messengered telexes to the local WUTCO office to carry on. When I got back, I looked at the computer to troubleshoot the problem. There was no dial tone at the modem. I saw a shiny new FAX machine in the office and noticed its phone line was plugged into ... THE MODEM LINE!!!!!! I placed a call to WUTCO, had them install a hard-wired line to the the telex network, and everybody was happy ever after ... until WUTCO got out of the telex business. But, by then, the African travel boom was over and FAX was king. Moral of the story: User Interface is everything! Cheers, etc., PJK ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #365 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26348; 31 Aug 95 19:49 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA01122 for telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 12:03:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA01114; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 12:03:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 12:03:04 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508311703.MAA01114@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #366 TELECOM Digest Thu, 31 Aug 95 12:03:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 366 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: 1-800-555-xxxx (William Brownlow) Re: 1-800-555-xxxx (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: 1-800-555-xxxx (Brig C. McCoy) Re: 1-800-555-xxxx (Carl Moore) Re: 1-800-555-xxxx (Bob Keller) Re: San Francisco Area Codes (Roger Fajman) Re: San Francisco Area Codes (John David Galt) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (John E. Briggs) Re: How to Distinquish Local From Long Distance Numbers (Jim Donaldson) Re: How to Distinquish Local From Long Distance Numbers (Barry Margolin) Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Sergio Gelato) Other "Special" Areacodes (Mark J. Cuccia) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wbrownlo@csc.com (William Brownlow) Subject: Re: 1-800-555-xxxx Date: 30 Aug 1995 09:21:37 -0400 Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation DavidB.Horvath wrote: > It looks like the 1-800-555 number space is available for "normal" > toll free phone numbers. > I got a call from a Contract-programmer broker in Texas (they wanted > to know if I was interested in a job down there), when I mentioned > that I wasn't interested but might be able to pass the lead on to a > friend who was interested in moving to TX, I was given a 1-800-555- > number. I confirmed the number to make sure I heard it correctly. > Now what are the movies going to use to show someone dialing a toll > free number? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know what they will do now. Maybe > the YANG! principle should be applied. YANG = Yet Another Noise Group. > Should I put up a message in news.groups calling for a discussion on what > to name the new group which will discuss how Hollywood should handle the > use of telephone numbers when telco no longer has the luxury of providing > them with numbers that won't disturb the real people? PAT] I remember reading a blurb in {The Washington Post} about using 555 numbers. It stated that Bellcore had agreed with the movie studios certain combinations would not be issued. These combinations could and would continue to be used in movies and television programs. Thus, as an example, 555-1234 would not be issued and would be available for use by the entertainment and advertising industries. A few years ago a Charles Bronson movie, Telephon, was released. The distributor, Universal(?) set up an 800 number for some purpose which was reached by dialing 1.800.TELEPHO(n). I wonder who has 1.800.835.3746 now? ------------------------------ From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: 1-800-555-xxxx Date: 30 Aug 1995 13:23:11 GMT Organization: Tulane University David B. Horvath, CDP wrote: > It looks like the 1-800-555 number space is available for "normal" > toll free phone numbers. (snip) > I was given a 1-800-555- number. I confirmed the number to make sure I > heard it correctly. > Now what are the movies going to use to show someone dialing a toll > free number? (snip) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know what they will do now.,,,, Yes, 800-555 was made available to "regular" numbers sometime last year, I think in December. Maybe Judith Oppenheimer has some more details on this. I remember seeing it in Bellcore TRA's INPG fiche (Industry Numbering Plan Guide) and LERG when I last ordered them in December 1994. I also remember that one of my free mailings from Bellcore NANPA last year stated that 800-555 was going into the "general" portability pool. Some of my Bellcore free mailings from NANPA, the ICCF, and the INC have talked about *other* NPA's using the 555 exchange code for services *other* than regular Directory Assistance or other telco services. Bellcore NANPA is working with 555-XXXX line number assignments, and it *seems* that this will be yet *another* 976-type of code! :-( There are plans for single NPA assignments of particular 555-XXXX numbers, regional or multiple-NPA assignments of a particular 555 number to a particular subscriber, and national/NANP-wide/most-NPA's assignments of a specific 555-XXXX number. MANY 555 numbers, it seems, are now in *conflict* according to one of my mailings from Bellcore/ICCF/INC. There were *simultaneous* requests for the same groups of XXXX line-numbers, such as 6397 (NEWS), 8255 (TALK), 5683 (LOVE), etc. The mailings I got listed the line numbers which are in *conflict*, along with the multiple *simultaneous* requesting companies, but not the "letter" mnuemonics. There were even some numericals which would even spell out profanities, but as I said, the mailing only listed XXXX numbers- NOT letters/names. BTW, Cap.Cities/ABC (Radio & TV News, etc) requested some of the form 7777, and I think that CBS-The Columbia Broadcasting System had requested some 2222 or the like. ABC-TV owns several TV stations in the US on Channel 7, while CBS has many Channel 2's. Or even if they don't *own* the station, many affiliates are on those channels. For motion-picture/TV/Radio/dramatic fiction, etc, the 0100 to 0199 block of line numbers are NOT going to be assigned to working numbers within the NPA-555-XXXX service. I don't know how this is going to apply to 800-555-XXXX, tho'. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: brigc@world.std.com (Brig C McCoy) Subject: Re: 1-800-555-xxxx Organization: Southeast Kansas Library System, Iola, KS Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 13:34:31 GMT DavidB.Horvath wrote: > It looks like the 1-800-555 number space is available for "normal" > toll free phone numbers. Noticed the same thing with 1-900-555 yesterday, as the Priority support number for Artisoft is 1 900 555-8324, used it in resolving a LANtastic problem, so I know it wasn't a typo. :) Brig C. McCoy | Automation Consultant Southeast Kansas Library System | Internet: brigc@world.std.com 218 East Madison | Voice: 316 365-5136 Iola, KS 66749 | Fax: 316 365-5137 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 10:47:12 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: 1-800-555-xxxx Speaking of Hollywood (and its use of 555-xxxx, not just in area 800, in movies etc.): I Love Lucy had telephone numbers in it from time to time. They changed from time to time, too; the phone company supplied them to ensure there would be no answer if fans tried calling them. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 14:15:35 -0400 From: Bob Keller Subject: Re: 1-800-555-xxxx In TELECOM Digest V15 #364, David B. Horvath, CDP queried: > Now what are the movies going to use to show someone dialing a toll > free number? Here's a thought. Perhaps the movies should get rid of the 555 thing altogether and instead use real live 1-900 numbers. Then, if anyone is curious enough to dial the number heard in the movie, the studio could collect revenue at the rate $X.XX per minute. Hey, that might offset at least some of the cost of Waterworld! [Note to any Hollywood type reading this list: In consideration of my valuable intellectual property rights in the above concept, I do, of course, excep royalties on all calls received should you decide to implement this scheme. ] Bob Keller (KY3R) mailto:rjk@telcomlaw.com Law Office of Robert J. Keller, P.C. http://www.his.com/~rjk Federal Telecommunications Law Telephone 202.416.1670 ------------------------------ From: Roger Fajman Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 18:27:11 EDT Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Codes > John Higdon is from the San Jose / San Francisco area. Maybe he might > have some info to enlighten us on 318's use for calling into SF from > outside of CA, or maybe some Bay area Exchange Name history -- (and SF > was probably the only area of the country that used 55X numbers before > All Number Calling -- KLondike-x (55X) WAS used in San Francisco, while > most areas of the country never seemed to use the 55X range prior to > the 1960s). So am I, born in Oakland and raised in the East Bay. I don't remember the 318 area code at all, but I was only 6 in 1951, so that's not surprising. We had the very neat Hayward phone number of LUcerne 2-3456. But sometime, probably the late fifties, many people's phone numbers were changed and ours became BRowning 6-xxxx. I don't know the reason. Maybe a new CO was built. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I meant to comment on this the other day but forgot to do so. Although John Higdon is from the San Jose and San Fransisco area *now*, I don't believe he lived around that area in 1950-60 period. I believe he moved out there only in the latter part of the 1970's. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John_David_Galt@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Codes Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 22:33:19 PDT Seven-digit dialing between 415 and the Bay Area portion of 408 existed until some time in 1983, and the prefix list in the front of the phone book did not distinguish the area codes either. (In the few cases where duplicate prefixes existed, usually in 415/707 or 408/707, they inserted an asterisk with the note, "Some prefixes serve more than one community.") To my knowledge, there was never seven-digit dialing between 415 and 707 (or 408 and 707, which are not adjacent). However, the split was before I moved here. John David Galt ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 12:24:57 -0700 From: John E. Briggs Subject: Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) wrote: > For telecom resellers, PBX administrators, COCOT-owners and such, > there is generally no other option than to completely block calls to > 900, 976, and now, 500 numbers. If credit-card billing is accepted to > these numbers, then 0+ calls to such numbers may be allowed if > billed-number screening is also effective. I gather that there are some tech support services offered via 900 numbers, as well as some fax-on-demand services that also use a 900 number. Since these may be "legitimate" business services I was wondering if call blocking is (generally) sophisticated enough to permit blocking of, say, all 900 numbers except an approved list of legit numbers. Are most people stuck with all or nothing blocking? Was MCI's directory assistance 900 service badly damaged by call blocking by businesses? Also, while on the general topic of, uhh, entertainment services via telephone, I am aware that some such service providers have resorted to deals with foreign country telephone companies to avoid 900/976 style blocking. I am curious about why we have, as far as I know, thus far been spared a 10-XXX (appropiate, yes?) phone service? Does the FCC sufficiently regulate long distance companies to prohibit "dial 10-HOT-SEX-TALK" or have other mechanisms been easier to implement for the 900 industry? John Briggs (jebriggs@indirect.com AZ, USA) ------------------------------ From: Jim Donaldson Subject: Re: How to Distinquish Local From Long Distance Numbers Date: 30 Aug 1995 16:51:02 GMT Organization: InternetMCI Thomas Chen wrote: > How can one determine whether certain numbers are within the calling > area and certain numbers are not? Tom, A phone number is comprised of NPA-NXX-EXTN. Your local telco will have a list of the NPA-NXX's that are local. All other NPA-NXX's are toll and will be charged at different rates. Your phone book may have the list but usually not. By the way, I suggest dialling your long distance carrier's code prior to making those calls that are not considered local by your telco. This will save you big bucks. Just dial 10XXX before dialing your number where: XXX is 222 for MCI, 333 for Sprint, and 288 for AT&T. Hope this helps, Jim ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: How to Distinquish Local From Long Distance Numbers Date: 31 Aug 1995 08:30:35 -0400 Organization: BBN Planet Corp., Cambridge, MA In article Thomas Chen writes: > How can one determine whether certain numbers are within the calling > area and certain numbers are not? In Massachusetts, the list depends on the calling plan you've signed up for. There are also two local calling areas, called Zone 1 and Zone 2; the definition of these zones depends on the calling exchange, and anything not in one of the zones is long distance. Zone 1 is also divided into Local and Other. The service levels in the Boston Metropolitan area include: * Measured: all calls are toll calls, with the rate depending on the zone; * Unlimited: unlimited, untimed calls to Local Zone 1, otherwise like Measured; * Measured Circle: Measured or Unlimited, plus 2 hours/month of calls to exchanges outside Local Zone 1 but within 25 miles; * Circle: Unlimited calls within 20 miles; * Suburban: unlimited calls within your own exchange and to Metropolitan Boston exchanges *except* for Boston Central exchanges (I can't imagine why anyone would get this -- who *doesn't* call Boston?); * Metropolitan: unlimited calls to Metropolitan Boston and selected exchanges depending on where you're calling from; * Bay State East: unlimited calls to Metropolitan Boston plus 2 hours/month of calls to other exchanges in Eastern Massachusetts *except* 9AM-Noon weekdays. All the relevant exchanges and rates are listed in the local phone books. Barry Margolin BBN PlaNET Corporation, Cambridge, MA barmar@bbnplanet.com Phone (617) 873-3126 - Fax (617) 873-5124 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 13:05:41 +0200 From: Sergio Gelato Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint Tony Harminc (>) commented on Richard Barry's (>>) words: >> Most European numbering plans have the following characteristics: >> *Hierarchical area code structure* (like the US Zip code. While one >> mightn't know where Zip 90234 is precisely, even a non-American can >> guess that it is on the West coast and probably in California. >> Someone who knows California can probably guess it is in the LA area, >> etc.) This structure follows on to some extent from the country code >> layout (eg all country codes beginning with 3 are in Europe). > The French system is nothing like this. The Departement numbers > are scattered randomly around the country, so you can't tell where > a number is unless you have memorized the list. The department numbers (which were originally assigned alphabetically; since then additions and renamings have spoiled the regularity) have also never had anything to do with telephone area codes. The 1985 reorganisation was prompted to a large extent by the fact that all possible area codes had been assigned at that point. Strange situations resulted, with (7) for the city of Lyon but (76) for Grenoble (which meant that Lyon numbers could and did have 7 digits, but that they could not begin with 6). Tony Harminc's remark is pertinent to French postal codes (which are based on the departement numbers), but that is not very relevant to telecom. [About variable length numbers] > This is terrible idea, for the one simple reason that telephones don't > have Enter keys. So the switch has to decide when you've finished > dialing by some means, usually a timeout. Or if the switch is smart > enough it may be able to avoid timeouts on certain calls, but the > result is inconsistent behaviour. Here in Italy, where variable-length numbers are the norm, the system is constructed so that it is always possible in principle to determine from the digits dialled so far whether the number is complete or not. That is, 2345 67 and 2345 678 cannot both be valid numbers, but you can have 2345 67 and 2345 680, 2345 681, etc. In theory, this means that timeouts are never absolutely necessary. Of course for long distance calls it will not be practical for the originating exchange to store the detailed number length tables for every possible remote exchange, but the information can be requested from the destination exchange during call setup. I don't know whether this is actually being done: I'm not obsessed with having the shortest possible call setup time myself. (Even a timeout would be much shorter than the time spent waiting for the person at the other end to pick up the phone.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, telephones do have 'enter' keys > or 'carriage return' keys. It is the '#' key located underneath the '9'. Irrelevant to the discussion of variable length numbers in Europe: my switch doesn't interpret the # key that way, and attempts to use it are treated as misdialed numbers. But I know it works in the USA. > So why don't we have telephone numbers of any length with the understanding > that when the subscriber has finished giving the instructions, a # is used > to indicate conclusion. The network would then process what had been given > in the proper context. PAT] I suspect that the cost of reprogramming all that data entry software that expects NXX-NXX-XXXX for phone numbers is the real reason the USA are trying to stick to 3+7 for as long as possible. As you note, there is no intrinsic reason from the point of view of the network itself. (Related question: why are the USA still using only nine digits for Social Security Numbers, despite all the obvious shortcomings?) ------------------------------ From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Other "Special" Areacodes Date: 30 Aug 1995 13:43:45 GMT Organization: Tulane University Since I have made recent posts on Mexico, TWX, and the use of 318 for San Francisco, and since I mentioned (in "809 in Jeopardy") the 'replace' code for "Caller-Pays-800" including the 'self-assigned' use of 300 & 400 by Caribbean countries/islands for "caller-pays-800", I wanted to mention some *other* special NPA codes. I had mentioned about 880 being planned as a *standard* replace-type of code if the caller wants to pay for an 800 number not available from his calling area (at least from International/Overseas). At the time I posted this to TD, I stated that I didn't know what was going to be used for the 'replace' code for the new toll-free 888 code. Recently, one of my free mailings from Bellcore stated that 881 is being planned for 'replace' for Caller-Pays-888. NOW, I do NOT know how this will 'interwork' with the 'mark-sense' codes for billing- identification purposes for remote manual operator-connect-only 'Ring-Down' points. 880 is NOT used for ring-down points, but 881-XXX IS! Also, 888-XXX is used as well! We have had 800 for Toll Free since circa 1966/67. 900 was reserved for 'mass-calling' as a 'choke' code in 1970, but its use as a nationwide or continentwide PAY-PAY-PAY-per-call special areacode didn't come into use until around 1981 or 82. There were the TWX codes, 510, 610, 710, 810, 910. 610 remained the Canadian TWX (and later Data services) until it was splash cut to 600 in 1993. 510, 710, 810, 910 (while probably still used on the now-again AT&T 'non-telco' TWX/Telex-II) were 'removed' from the DDD Telephone Switching Network by 1982 or so and along with 610 have been re-assigned as regular telephone NPA's. Specifically, 710 was reassigned circa 1983 to the US Federal Government, but it was about 10 years before many of us saw any other reference to it (for the GETS-Government Emergency Telephone Service/System), and that is *still* somewhat unspecified. We have *also* known about 700 since around 1983/84, being reserved for 'carrier-services' sometime around divestiture. I understand that Canada is now using 700 numbers, similar to the way we use them here. And, of course, there is the 500 special areacode. There is yet *another* special areacode, and its details/assignments are still somewhat cloudy. Back in 1993, Bellcore reserved the 456 (new format) areacode for "International Inbound" purposes. There IS a NANPA IL (Information Letter) explaining it, as well as mailings from ICCF/INC. It will be assigned to carriers, *similar* to the way 500-NXX, 600-NXX, 900-NXX are being assigned now, and (prior to portability), 800-NXX; HOWEVER, due to some foreign telco or International Carrier code translations, a carrier requesting 456-NXX codes will be assigned a *block-of-ten* NXX codes- the carrier will have ALL TEN codes within a particular 456-NX. I haven't purchased a Bellcore TRA LERG or INPG (or other product) in almost a year, but there was NO listing of any 456-NX(X) assignments when I purchased them last December. Incidently, there were also no assignment listings of any 555-XXXX (for ANY NPA) in them neither. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I first made mention of '710' here as the code for 'Special Government Services' or 'Government Special Services' I had someone write me to say they had contacted a friend or relative working at the Pentagon to ask for more details about it, possibly to report in an article in the Digest. My correspondent said his contact at the Pentagon almost choked when he found out that 'other people' knew about it. Supposedly it is a highly classified secret matter. Despite various requests and hints that more information for readers here would be very much appreciated, no one yet has ever responded in a definitive way to explain the workings of 710; how it is (to be) used, etc. I wish someone who actually knew something about it would write an article. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #366 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29705; 1 Sep 95 1:34 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA11074 for telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 18:43:22 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA11066; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 18:43:19 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 18:43:19 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199508312343.SAA11066@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #367 TELECOM Digest Thu, 31 Aug 95 18:43:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 367 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Wireless Modem and Data Compression Equipment For Pictures (Liu Young) PacBell Presents ISDN Seminar, Sept 26 (Cherie Shore) Unblockable Called-ID (Ken Levitt) Phone-Mail Woes (RISKS Digest via Monty Solomon) Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (David Hough) Correction to Bell Atlantic Article (Paul Robinson) About Errors in Articles Posted (Paul Robinson) Ringing Signal and Service Tones (Ang Swee Koon) AT&T Telemarketing Not Same as Service! (Mike Wengler) New NPA in CT (jlbene@aol.com) Caller ID Status in CA? (Don McLaughlin) Tone Decoders (Richard T. Mills) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Liu Young Subject: Wireless Modem and Data Compression Equipement For Pictures Date: 31 Aug 1995 19:05:54 GMT Organization: LinkAGE Online Ltd Trade opportunities from China. Wireless modems and equipements of data compression for moving pictures wanted. We're now developing a real-time wireless image transmission system, used in fire reporting, traffic reporting, public security, emergency treatment, etc. This system mainly consists of two parts. The first part is data compression equipments for moving pictures, either color or BW. The second part is wireless modems. Good stability and large covering area (40km in radius) are required. We're now searching for the suppliers of this equipement. Fax or air mail reply are prefered. Thanks. Fax: +86 755 2243055 Tel: +86 755 2240079 Mail: Liu Young Shenzhen Information Center 1 Tongxin road, Shenzhen, P. R. of China E-mail: lauyung@hk.linkage.net ------------------------------ From: cashore@PacBell.COM (Cherie Shore) Subject: PacBell Presents ISDN Seminar, Sept 26 Date: 31 Aug 1995 01:14:46 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Pacific Bell is proud to announce another in our very popular series of ISDN seminars. The seminar will include an overview of ISDN, how it can be used, where it is available and Pacific Bell's ISDN rates. Our guest vendor will be Digi International, one of the leaders in ISDN remote LAN access equipment market, who will provide an overview of their product line and a live demonstration of ISDN Internet access. This seminar will be held on: September 26, at 9:30am at: 1010 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles. Parking is provided in our parking structure on St Paul St, 1/2 block North of the building. To reserve your seat, contact Kay at 818-578-4353. Cherie Shore cashore@pacbell.com ISDN Technology Manager, PacBell ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 17:30:52 EDT From: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) Subject: Unblockable Called-ID In TELECOM Digest V 15 # 363 Tony Pelliccio writes: Subject: Nynex Blows it Again! > A call from an associate in MA shows as OUT OF AREA. I called my > long distance provider (who is also the friend's LD provider) and > they've verified that their network will indeed pass Caller-ID > information along. I call Nynex and ask them what the deal is. Turns > out, according to some droid that Nynex "Doesn't have the technology > to do that.". I have the opposite problem. I have Caller-ID sent on long distance calls with no way to block it. This may be happening to other people without their knowledge. My local exchange does not have SS7 and does not have Caller-ID. The blocking code for Caller-ID produces an error message. When I call from MA (508) to CT (203) my number appears on the ID box in CT. Nynex confirmed that they are not generating any Caller-ID information and are only passing the billing information the the LD carrier. My LD carrier (Corporate Telemanagement Group) at first insisted that what I was saying was impossible. I went through several people and finally ended up with their technical person who also insisted it was impossible. After I insisted several times the it WAS happening, he finally admitted that they subcontract their New England traffic to another carrier (WIL-TEL) who may be doing something strange. They promised to check it out and get back to me. If any interesting information comes back, I'll send it along. Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390 UUCP: zorro9!levitt INTERNET: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org or levitt%zorro9.uucp@talcott.harvard.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 10:11:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Phone-Mail Woes Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM FYI. Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 17.30. Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 17:14 -0400 From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Phone-mail woes In anticipating traveling internationally, I decided to get CO-based phone mail since I thought it would be more reliable to connect to than my analog answering machine. Because I've got two lines, I decided that I'd put the service on the second line and then forward the first to the second when I need to. I tried testing the forwarding and found that when I called the first number, instead of just giving me voice mail, it asked me to key in a number, presumably the number I was calling -- the first number. So I obliged, and got a message from someone saying he was in Central America and couldn't answer the calls. * The request to key in the number is clearly a bug since the caller doesn't know that I've forwarded the call nor the number to which I forwarded the call. * Since my ownership of both number predates the installation of the switch, it seemed that the caller gets directed into hyperspace. * When asking for the service, I was told that they were planning to drop the stutter dialtone since it didn't work reliably! * I did not test the interactions with distinctive ringing numbers. I feared the worst but didn't have the time. In speaking to the service people about this, the basic response is that this is a problem with the DMS-100 (Northern Telecom) switch and not necessarily the ATT ESS switches. This is the same DMS that, on my ISDN line, requires two numbers for a 2B call whereas the ESS needs only one. I don't know what profound lessons there are to learn except that I'm amazed out the presence of such a gross bug in an expensive production CO. It would never be tolerated in a $29.99 software package. This is a feature interaction but unlike the problems with ad-hoc interaction between separately produced features, this should be testable. Note, though, that voice mail is often provided by a third party, such as Octel, and the bug could be due to version interactions between two disparate systems. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something is wrong here with his account of what happened (is happening) ... generally the reason it asks for the caller to enter the number he is calling is because somehow the network did not deliver ANI properly to voicemail. Had voicemail known who was being called, the proper greeting would have played out rather than the generic 'please enter the number' message. Anyone can forward their line to whatever number is used in their community for voicemail, however if the incoming call is not from someone calling a recognized voicemail subscriber, the voicemail system is going ask them in effect what they are doing there and what they want. I imagine voicemail must have seen the number of his first line (which as I understand is not subscribed to voicemail) and was in effect asking 'how did you get here?', not realizing that an actual subscriber (his second line) was transferring the call there. It would be interesting also to find out if he conducted his tests using *the same phone lines involved* or if he went to some third-location where the response might be different. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Hough Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 08:43:04 GMT Organization: Chaotic In article rbarry@iol.ie (Richard Barry) writes: > There is no long term numbering strategy in the UK - it changes > virtually every year, which is great for the printing industry! Not quite that bad - and a lot of it comes from needing overlap periods between old and new. Previous to the recent '01', the last major change in the UK scheme was shifting London numbers from 01-xxx-yyyy to 081- and 071-. By doing this, it freed up the whole of the 01 number space which allowed the most recent change to occur. Other minor changes have been steadily taking place, which often mean the changing of numbers to have the same number of digits and reducing the number of area codes in use. > The UK has several codes for toll-free and similar numbers including > 0800, 0500, 0345 and 0645. In surveys, about 20% of the population > don't know that 0800 is toll free and nearly half the population don't > know that 0500 is toll-free. > Mobile phone numbers, paging, and premium rate numbers are found all > over the numbering space. The eventual plan, according to the consultative document, is for all mobile prefixes to be grouped together, all toll-free numbers to be grouped together etc. Obviously this couldn't happen until after the 01 change on geograpic numbers because until then you couldn't prefix all mobile codes with 03 (which I believe i suggested for mobiles). Now the numbering space has been freed up, it may be that 0336, 0860 etc will change to 03336, 03860 etc, thus showing them to be mobile numbers. There is method in the madness somewhere -- you just have to look hard for it! > *Distinctive non-geographic codes* so that anyone can tell a mobile > number or a pager or a premium rate number from a regular phone number > easily. > *A single code for a single function* - all toll-free numbers should > begin with the same code to assist public recognition. So if you run > out of numbering space in the 800 range, add an extra digit to the > bit that follows 800 - (ie 800 nnnn nnnn). This goes back to > variable number length flexibility. As mentioned, this principle was in the original plan. From memory, the suggestions were: 01 and 02 for geographic codes, 03 for mobiles, 07 for portable numbers, 08 for toll-free and 09 for premium rate. Whether it actually happens like that remains to be seen ... Dave djh@sectel.com Tel +44 1285 655 766 Fax +44 1285 655 595 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 06:31:24 EDT From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company/TDR, Inc. Silver Spring, MD USA Subject: Correction to Bell Atlantic Article In a prior article which I realize had no correction, dealing with the practice of the back-office contractor staff taking unprocessed telephone service orders and throwing them into the wastebasket undone, I reported that Bell Atlantic, the local telephone company for DC, MD, VA, PA, WV and NJ (and perhaps other states) was headquartered in Richmond, VA. According to an anonymous Bell Atlantic employee who called me to tell me something about the story I wrote, and by a reader of the Digest, The actual headquarters of Bell Atlantic Corporation is in Philadelphia, PA. Paul Robinson General Manager Tansin A. Darcos & Company/TDR, Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 06:34:55 EDT From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company/TDR, Inc. Silver Spring, MD USA Subject: About Errors in Articles Posted Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company/TDR,Inc. Silver Spring, MD USA I'd like to add a followup item to a recent correction of an article I submitted here. Let me note that in any kind of publication - a digest such as this, regular Usenet Newsgroup Articles, and especially in the daily papers and weekly magazines - there are going to be errors, mistatements, and misquotations of material. This point was brought home to me by the cablecast yesterday of the tv series "Lou Grant," in which the same reporter had exclusive stories on two days in a row, and both stories were wrong. In the case involved, the reporter had the facts correct, but what he read from those facts gave him a conclusion -- which, given what had happened, a reasonable person of intelligence, without biases, would have made the identical one -- and his conclusion was wrong. In other cases, facts are in error, or are misunderstood, or in some cases are intentionally reported wrong, either to prevent someone from becoming subject to blame or sanctions, or to allow someone to determine if blame or sanctions should be placed on someone else, and/or to preserve the ability to investigate or punish some wrongdoing. And sometimes it's done to cover up for someone or to make some scapegoat take the fall for someone else. One example being when I wrote up some of my comments regarding the Oklahoma City Bombing and the effect on telephone service there as well as changes here in the Washington, DC. Area. Almost every story that came out required changing because as more information became known, the facts became more substantial, and could be better substantiated (or those who were hiding things had more time to practice their lies). I do not remember hearing any serious criticism of this constant requirement to change erroneous or misreported facts, and I believe the reason is simple: people who watch TV or read newspapers can understand that not all the evidence is available right away, and in some cases what is reported is discovered to be incorrect or was incomplete. We have to accept this inaccuracy as part of the "cost of doing business" in order to have very-fast reporting of information. Checking and rechecking details from multiple sources is time consuming. Where the results of the error could be harmful or injurious to others, it should, if reasonably possible, be checked for accuracy. It may still be wrong, but at least rechecking shows that they are acting responsibly. In some cases, if a fact is received from a reasonable source, reporting it as it stands with the realization (whether or not stated) that it may be wrong, is reasonable. For example, in any similar incident involving a disaster, reporting there are 20 dead when there are actually 80, or estimating deaths to be 3,000 when the number was around 300, is not going to be as serious as misreporting a specific person was dead when they were not, especially for the relatives of the victim. So, a small suggestion to people -- when you read something in this Digest or *especially* on Usenet -- if you notice something is wrong, you should report that if you have evidence to suggest otherwise, but you should not be flaming or insulting someone for their errors (you shouldn't be doing that anyway, but that's another issue altogether). None of us is omnipotent, we all make mistakes and errors. The correct stance is to learn to understand that not all incorrect material is the result of intentional bias (although, I'm sure that some is), but can often can be traced back to simple misunderstanding or human error of a minor detail. In short, take it easy, and don't take things you see or read in the media all that seriously. And sometimes consider if what you are reading is true, a lot of people intentionally lie or misstate the facts in order to promote some social goal, and you may or may not support that particular goal. In the end, your best judge of the truth is your own intelligence: does what they say seem reasonable? Is what they are saying is happening true? Is what they want to happen soon, and what does happen now in the world compatible with each other? And most importantly, does their own lifestyle or standard of living capable of being sustained if what they want is proposed? The first tells you if they are truthful. The second tells you if they are demanding the impossible, or want to impose things on the public, even if it means shoving an unwanted standard upon people down their throats whether they want it or not. The third tells you if they are hypocrites. You can't know all the answers to everything; there's not enough time to learn enough to know the correct side of the issue. But you can try to find out why some people support some sides. Or you can listen to some people that you agree with on a large number of points and hear their opinions. But in the end, whatever you choose to believe, is your own responsibility, and if that belief in whatever fact or opinion you accept as valid is wrong, then you have to take the consequences. Paul Robinson General Manager Tansin A. Darcos & Company/TDR, Inc. ------------------------------ From: cwcangsk@leonis.nus.sg (Ang Swee Koon) Subject: Ringing Signal and Service Tones Date: 30 Aug 1995 11:38:31 GMT Organization: National University of Singapore I am trying to find more information on the dial tone, ringing tone and busy tone ie their standard. Is there any different for difference country around the world? Are the frequency and periodicity the same? If anyone has any informations, pls email at the following address. Thanks, Ang Swee Koon cwcangsk@leonis.nus.sg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 06:14:45 -0500 From: wengler@ee.rochester.edu (Mike Wengler) Subject: AT&T Telemarketing Not Same as Service! From: KESHAVAC.SMTMHS@smtmhs.sharpwa.com (Bhaktha Keshavachar) >> A rep called me one night and I wanted time to think about the package >> and compare what I'd pay (and the "rewards") against what I currently >> pay (and the rewards I get) using Sprint. I asked for a number to call >> back once I'd decided, and the rep gave me a number, but cautioned that >> the people at the inbound call center do not have the authority to >> offer the same deals as the reps at the outbound call center. (snip...snip...snip) > Maybe the rep who offered me the deal could have made a entry in > their data bases against my phone number, so that when I called back > whoever received the call would know that. I was under the impression > that AT&T service was better than the others ... AT&T *hires* or *contracts* out their telemarketing! My mother has been solicited with "business opportunities" to telemarket AT&T on contract. Guess what ... if a telemarketer can make money by signing you up, but you want to think about it and call back, they will not make that money. (Plus there's the old thing in sales about "CLOSE THE DEAL!", once you're off the phone you are probabilistically history anyway.) Even if AT&T *service* is or is not any better than the competitors, its *marketing* is constrained by the same pirhanic laws of nature as everybody elses. Benefits of competition and all that. The are *selling* you their reputation for serice. Their reputation. Not the service itself. That would go on the cost side of the balance sheet, not the revenue. > ...now I would think twice before switching to AT&T (with or withour > $100 !) Months of investigation have lead me to conclude you should ALWAYS cash those checks. Then take the next incentive to switch to the next place. With a small residential account, those checks are the ONLY way to cut your long distance "rates" significantly ... that $100 check probably pays three to five months of your LD bill! Mike Wengler Phone/Fax: 716 244-0238 Cell: 716 748-1930 ------------------------------ From: JLBENE@aol.com Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 11:59:04 -0400 Subject: New NPA in CT I am very unhappy about the decision to split the NPA in CT, adding 860 to the current 203, especially because MY phone number has to change. I would rather have an overlay and dial 10D to a local call. (But I also seem to easily remember numbers like my car's VIN, my driver's license number, etc.) Anyway, now that this change is happening, I need to reprogram my cell phone. I could just go to the dealer to have it done, but that's the easy way out. Why can't the manual that came with my phone tell me ALL of the functions? I have a Motorola flip phone -- I know there are various models -- can anyone tell me how to reprogram it, or if there is an ftp site full of data on cell phones? I feel rather useless when I must depend on the technician or salesperson at the phone dealer for such a trivial matter. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The September/October, 1995 issue of Tom Farley's magazine {Private Line} has an article on this very topic written by Damien Thorn entitled "Cellular Test Mode Scanning", and although at first glance one might think the purpose of the article was to help instruct phreaks in ways to defraud cellular phone carriers and invade the privacy of cellular phone users, I suppose a point could be made that the article can also help persons in the same situation as yourself. You can send email to 'privateline@delphi.com' to inquire about subscriptions to the magazine. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dmclaughlin@jpl.nasa.gov (Don McLaughlin) Subject: Caller ID Status in CA? Date: 31 Aug 1995 18:35:32 GMT Organization: JPL Reply-To: host@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov Does anyone know the status of Caller ID for California? I heard a rumor that it would be available in October '95. Don McLaughlin ------------------------------ From: rtmills@iol.ie (Richard T. Mills) Subject: Tone Decoders Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 23:00:19 GMT Organization: Ireland On-Line Does anyone know of a way of decoding telephone dialing codes? Is there any way of doing it by using a soundblaster card? I have the recorded tones on tape. Thanks, Richard ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #367 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01248; 1 Sep 95 4:07 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA12413 for telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 20:38:42 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA12405; Thu, 31 Aug 1995 20:38:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 20:38:40 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199509010138.UAA12405@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #368 TELECOM Digest Thu, 31 Aug 95 20:38:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 368 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market (Richard F. Masoner) CryptoCom Secure Modems (Tyler Proctor) GSM Compatible Cellular Phones (edgewd@aol.com) Need Foreign X.25 Service Providers (Richard Brandt) Re: War on Payphones (Robert Jacobson) Re: War on Payphones (Mark J. Cuccia) Listening in to Cellular (Mike Wengler) 860 Startup Problem (Gerry Belanger) Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Sam Spens Clason) Major MFP Developer Conference 9/28 - 9/29 (Tom Geldner) Re: Seven Digits Across North America (Wes Leatherock) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: richardm@cd.com (Richard F. Masoner) Subject: Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market Date: 31 Aug 1995 21:22:38 GMT Organization: Central Data Corp. David Breneman (david.breneman@mccaw.com) wrote: > [middle-class to riches story] > (Puget Sound area) provider of petroleum products. "Only in America..." > I know thia doesn't have anything to do with telecom issues, but it > shows what's possible. :-) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are right of course. It can happen > here, but sadly a lot less often than it used to many years ago. Remind Just tell that to all the instant millionaires who work for Spyglass or Netscape who all used to work at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications in Urbana, Illinois. Richard ------------------------------ From: Tyler Proctor <75260.710@CompuServe.COM> Subject: CryptoCom Secure Modems Date: 30 Aug 1995 19:13:09 GMT Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736) Jeff Sweitzer of Western Datacom will demonstrate the new line of CryptoCom V.32V.34 pocket modems at Cellucomm 95. CryptoCom utilizes DES encryption and is N.I.S.T approved. The modem boasts a base data rate of 28.8 kbs (V.34) and utilizes MNP levels 2 through 5 for dial up and MNP10EC for cellular connect rates up to 14.4 kbs. The line includes the 528 CryptoCard rackmount unit designed for host communications. The 528 CryptoCard utilizes DES encryption and Caller ID technology to secure both dial up and cellular calls. When used with the Line Guard 6000 Network Management System, the user can manage 960 modems and up to 10,000 users from a central site. Western Datacom will also have it's 800 series "Quadra Press" Network Data Compressors, 528 Synchronous Node cellular modem, and the Line Guard 6000 dial up modem management products. Using compression technology, Western Datacom's products are capable of providing throughput of up to 56kbps over a cellular connection. Cellucomm 95 is the place to see the latest the cellular data industry has to offer. For more information on attending, e-mail 75260.710@ compuserve.com or call 800-594-5102. ------------------------------ From: edgewd@aol.com (EDGEWD) Subject: GSM Compatible Cellular Phones Date: 31 Aug 1995 10:39:04 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: edgewd@aol.com (EDGEWD) Any information on obtaining GSM Cellular phones would be greatly appreciated. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What do you mean by 'any information'? That's a very large topic with many angles and opinions. You might want to check back issues of this Digest in which GSM articles have appeared, and talk directly to the authors of those articles. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rbrandt@redwood.DN.HAC.COM (Richard Brandt) Subject: Need Foreign X.25 Service Providers Date: 31 Aug 1995 19:11:43 GMT Organization: Hughes Aircraft Company I am needing to use X.25 to link several sites in the following locations worldwide. If someone can tell me who to contact about data rates and equipment compatibility I would really appreciate it. Thanks. Countries: England, Hong Kong, Berlin, Mexico, Argentina, Capetown SA, Sidney AU. Richard L. Brandt Hughes Aircraft Company (303) 344-6586 rbrandt@redwood.dn.hac.com ------------------------------ From: cyberoid@u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) Subject: Re: War on Payphones Date: 31 Aug 1995 04:00:18 GMT Organization: University of Washington I served as principal telecommunications policy analyst with the CA legislature as the move toward removing payphones gained full force, in the mid-1980s. Although it's fun and popular to attribute controversial policy decisions, like the removal of payphones, to stupid politicians "battling" drugs, in fact this policy originated with the local telephone companies themselves. I remember in particular a PUC action designating payphones a "competitive" market, which all knew originated with the telcos and had their full support. The telcos' idea was, and remains, to maximize profit by limiting service to high-security, high-spending venues (like airports, upscale shopping malls, and tourist hotels). Private firms take over the marginal phones, charging more through AOS to ensure a profitable ROI even though the cost of maintaining marginal phones may be higher and their use less intense. Payphones that neither the telcos nor the private firms wanted to operate are simply removed. The drug thing was strictly a red herring, though historically fortuitous as a ruse. In CA, a bill requiring a neighborhood hearing before a phone was removed was watered down to simply require a notice to be slapped on a phone before it was yanked. I think the advance notice was 14 days, just enough time to call the PUC and request redress -- but not soon enough to actually interfere with the removal of the payphone. Just wanted to set the story straight. Bob Jacobson Principal Consultant (Analyst) CA State Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee, 1981-1989 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you say may have happened in Calif- ornia, but here at least, Illinois Bell flatly denied for the record on a couple of occassions having anything at all to do with the manipulation of payphone locations and the working characteristics (i.e. no coin after dark, etc) of payphones. They stated it was purely in response to community pressures and law enforcement requests. The reason this came up was because persons who were stuck with the 'no coin after dark' rule went to Bell demanding a rebate on operator surcharges saying that it was not their desire to use the operator to place a call (via calling card), and that they should not be penalized with a surcharge for their inability to 'dial direct'. You will recall that for however long, telcos routinely handled non-dialable calls at the direct dial rate rather than penalize customers. Illinois Bell's response was to speak with the self-proclaimed 'community representatives' who put the pressure on the 7/Eleven stores regards the pay phones in their parking lots, etc. On those payphones located on the public way, i.e. a sidewalk where the 'subscriber' to the telephone was given in records as Illinois Bell itself, their response was that they operated those phones at the pleasure of the City of Chicago and its City Council whose mandates had to be observed, again, i.e., the police want to see the phone set up as one way outbound only, no coins after dark, or removed completely, etc. So, said IBT, talk to the community, not us. It is all in who you know of course, and whether your politician friends and attorney can suck-up better than my politician friends and attorney. Although just as many drug transactions are done each day by the cocaine- snorting people who work at the Chicago Board of Trade and other financial houses on LaSalle Street downtown, you don't presume *their* payphones would ever be removed or modified do you? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: War on Payphones Date: 31 Aug 1995 19:08:10 GMT Organization: Tulane University snake wrote: > Don't forget the payphones installed in Las Vegas casinos, which are > rigged to keep your quarter even if your call doesn't go through. At > least the slot machines give you a chance at a payout. and our Esteemed Moderator noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Twenty-five cents just for the right > to touch the phone, pick it up and try to get someone, eh? Actually > if you ask Mark Cuccia (see the message before this one) about it, > he would probably tell you that the people who manufacture slot machines > and other gambling devices are the same people who make COCOTS, and > probably using a lot of the same circuit boards at that! Grin. PAT] I enjoy gambling (in Louisiana, its legally known as 'GAMING' not gambling). We now have a landbased casino in New Orleans proper and various gambling boats in suburban areas. I haven't yet been to them in New Orleans, but I do enjoy gambling on the boats in Mississippi (601) along the Gulf Coast. I just do NOT enjoy gambling that the payphone (COCOT) will put my call thru at the correct rates, via the carrier *I* want. About a month ago, the New Orleans City Circus -- Council -- no maybe circus was right the first time -- passed an ordinance that bars and liquor stores cannot have an outside payphone, even if it is on private property. This is 'supposed' to help out on the 'war' on drugs and crime. Most of these payphones are not SCBell telco payphones, but -- you guessed it -- COCOTS. AND, could the City be trying to squeeze out payphone competition? About a year and a half ago, City Hall cancelled its contract with South Central Bell (Bell South) for payphones on City-owned property -- whether in City office buildings, or outside on City parks, grassy "Neutral-Grounds" (what we call boulevard medians here), or on the city side of the property line on sidewalks. Over a period of six to eight months, Bell was one by one removing outside payphones on the city contract, and 'GLOBAL' Telslime - I mean Telcoin - came in. These charged overtime for local calls, did not have all local NNX c/o codes programmed in as local (some newer ones like my 460 for my cellular STILL isn't programmed as local), and the usual. Initially, Global's PAY-PAY-PAY-PHONIES would NOT give you a LEC (Bell) operator on a single 0 or on 0+ inTRA-Lata. After a few months and several complaints to the Public Service Commission, they were reprogrammed to route you to Bell operators for 0- and InTRA-LATA 0+. (I CAN get 950-XXXX, 1-800-, and 10-XXX+ access to other carriers okay; I only wish SCBell and ALL Local Exchange Carriers had a 10-XXX/101-XXXX, 950- and 800 number as well) Global (aka Schlumberger Industries) has been in and out of trouble with the PSC before. Global is HIGHLY connected politically with other state and various local political figures. They have also had the 'prison' contract with the state over the past several years. There have been MANY complaints over the past three to five years from families, relatives and friends of prisoners at the State Pen and other low-security prisons from around the state that they have been billed HUGE collect or third party charges on their local telco bill due to the unregulated AOSlime that Global's prison phones use. The PSC is ALWAYS trying to get after Global, but due to the other political connections Global has, it seems to be only a slap on the wrist. Maybe the FCC should step in and pre-empt various states who don't keep Private-Payphones/AOSlime in line. If a state's regulations could be proven to be even tougher than that of the FCC, then that state's regulations would be the law in that state. Theodore Vail must be turning in his grave, probably since 1 Jan 1984! (I'll let Pat explain who Mr. Vail was, for those who don't know.) MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ted Vail was the chairman of American Tele- phone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) at the beginning of the twentieth century. *He* built the Bell System into what it was before Judge Harold Greene came along and wrecked it. Greene, who never attempted to hide his animosity and prejudice where Bell was concerned, let it be known to some cronies in the United States Department of Justice -- and don't get me started on them please! ... those software pirates -- that he would entertain their motions to divest AT&T. Now and then people write to remind me that the Judge did not *order* anything; that AT&T 'voluntarily' signed the consent decree. ... that's like me holding a gun to your head and telling you want I want, and because I don't have to actually shoot you, reach in your pocket and get what I want that I then claim you did it 'voluntarily'. You didn't see any guns in Greene's courtroom? Where the United States government is concerned, there is always the *implied presence of guns*. It rarely gets that far of course because everyone understands the basic rules here. They always start out like gentlemen. If anything here in the Chicago area, the city council favors Illinois Bell over the COCOT people. Maybe its because IBT people pay bigger bribes to the council members to keep the exclusive contract on payphones at Ohare Airport. When that scandal broke here a few years ago, everyone just said 'ho-hum' and went on about their business. But in fairness to the COCOT people, if they were not serving the jails and prisons, no one would be. AT&T said they were more than happy to leave the corrections industry business to 'the others'. The rate of fraud and other inappropriate calls made from correctional center pay phones is astronomical. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 06:14:30 -0500 From: wengler@ee.rochester.edu (Mike Wengler) Subject: Listening in to Cellular Chris.Farrarr@p1.f20.n246.z1.fidonet.org is right: it is not illegal to own or even sell an old cellular capable scanner in the US. It is illegal in the US to listen to cellular phone calls with one, however. Chris.Farrarr@p1.f20.n246.z1.fidonet.org writes> > Here in Canada, your neighbour to the north, listening to cellular > phones (as well as cordless phones and baby monitors) with a scanner > is 100% legal, provided you don't profit from what you hear. I wonder if doing a statistical survey of cellular usage patterns, and then selling it would be profiting from what you hear? It would be about the most accurate information I could imagine on phone usage patterns ... without tapping in on inter-CO trunks. Cellular provides a skewed database, but the opportunity to sample randomly within that database. PAT wrote: >> just are *not interesting*, and furthermore, all you get are just fleeting >> whisps of conversation as the cars drive past. There is no continuity in >> the conversations overheard ... Not true. First, you monitor the base station channels broadcasting 100W, not the mobiles broadcasting max 3W. So you hear the conversation continuously while the "mobile" is in good contact with a particular base station, which has a much better antenna/amplifier than your scanner. Not just while some car is driving past you. And de facto, it seems well less than one in six calls does get handed off. This is based on listening to calls, (although I am not saying it is me that did the listening.) Some real fraction of the calls get made with the mobile standing still. And with good enough reception, you'd be able to scan and find the new frequency of the same conversation at its next base station in a few seconds of scanning. Until digital, you should assume your call is being listened to on cellular. I predict legislation will not accomplish what digitization and encryption will trivialize. Mike Wengler Phone/Fax: 716 244-0238 Cell: 716 748-1930 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Of course not, we understand you are not saying that you did the listening. You are merely reporting what they call 'anecdotal evidence' from unknown third parties. I am not saying this is *you*, but you know, it always amazes me the way phone phreaks -- cellular or landline or both -- and others who think nothing of deliberatly invading the privacy of others through interception of their phone calls, breaking into their computer accounts, etc are often among the biggest whiners when it comes to *their own* 'privacy' being invaded, often in the most malign of ways, i.e. a clerk in Radio Shack asking their name for the printed receipt, or some innocent teenage kid working the courtesy counter at Safeway 'having the audacity' to ask them for a social security number in the process of getting approval to issue a check cashing card, etc. Read some of the newsgroups and see if it isn't true: one day they are telling us how to use technology to stick our nose illegally into someone else's affairs then the next day the same person writes about what an affront it was to them when the five dollar an hour clerk at Sears or wherever made them sign a form or show some ID. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wa1hoz@a3bbak.nai.net (Gerry Belanger) Subject: 860 Startup problem Date: 31 Aug 1995 00:24:05 GMT Organization: North American Internet Company I ran into a couple of 203/860 split problems. Being over-eager, I tried stuff on August 27. I was able to dial my ISP's 860 pop from 203-426 fine. But I could not dial the test number 1-860-203-0950. It was apparently a translation problem in the 2B-ESS serving me. It was fixed by the time I got home today. At work, I tried to call it and got an intercept. Since my employer does not use SNET for long distance, I dialed 00 and got a Sprint operator. I explained the problem. She could not complete to the test number either. So a trouble report was filed. I also tried AT&T, 10288-1-860-203-0950. Intercept. Called AT&T operator. She claimed 860-203 is not a valid exchange. Explained the problem to a supervisor. She transferred me to repair. Explained to her. Apparently SNET chose to put the test number in an NXX that was never used before, and neglected to tell the industry. The moral of this story? Make sure your LD carrier can route before you suspect your PBX. IMHO, SNET's PR people got too fancy in selecting the test number. Gerry Belanger, WA1HOZ wa1hoz@a3bbak.nai.net Newtown, CT g.belanger@ieee.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Telcos are not supposed to turn on new exchanges without letting the other telcos know about it so that all tables can be updated. PAT] ------------------------------ From: d92-sam@dront.nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason) Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint Date: 30 Aug 1995 15:40:45 GMT In Tony Harminc writes: > rbarry@iol.ie (Richard Barry) wrote: > [UK numbering scheme not recommended as a model] > The French system is nothing like this. The Departement > numbers are scattered randomly around the country, so you > can't tell where a number is unless you have memorized the > list. The French are about to split their "0 + 1" area codes in five. Ile de France (greater Paris, code 1) stays the same but the rest of France (which lacks area code) is divided in four quadrants. I haven't read about the details but this is of course a great chance to set anything that mightn't be right right. >> *Variable number length* so that cities that outgrow 7 >> digits can have 8 digit local numbers. No multiple area >> code confusion. Small towns can have even shorter local >> numbers, if desirable. > This is terrible idea, for the one simple reason that > telephones don't have Enter keys. So the switch has to > decide when you've finished dialing by some means, usually a > timeout. Or if the switch is smart enough it may be able to > avoid timeouts on certain calls, but the result is > inconsistent behaviour. What?! In Sweden phone numbers ranges from 0 + 7D to 0 + 9D and I've never experienced any timeout problems. Stockholm numbers (08) can be six, seven or eight digits long. In fact calls between AXE10 stations (~90% of the subscribers) connect immediately after I've entered the last digit regardless of if the called number is in Kiruna (1500 km north of Stockholm) or to my mum four blocks away. I applausd the concept of adding an extra digit when the area code has been outgrown. We've done that here over the last five years and it's an excellent idea. If BT had decided to add an extra digit to the old London numbers (01) instead of splitting in 071 and 081 I guess Londoners would be dancing in the streets right now. A real example is the Swedish island of Gotland. It used to be 0498 (west coast including Visby) and 0497 (the rest. Visby was growing "too much" so either a split of 0498 or longer numbers. I guess in this case 0499 could have been used but this is not always a possibility. Instead a 2 was added before the 0498 numbers and 0497 was merged with 0498. Since then extra digits have been added before some of the old five digit number series to make even more room. Advantage; Gotland became one code, most Gotlanders never call outside their island => shorter dialing on average. No strange area code which didn't fit the "hierarchy" had to be used. And finally: it's so damned flexible! >> *Distinctive non-geographic codes* so that anyone can tell >> a mobile number or a pager or a premium rate number from a >> regular phone number easily. All GSM mobiles are in 070 (Telia Mobitel = 0705, Comviq = 0707, Europolitan = 0708 etc) and all NMT mobiles are in 010. However I did count the different UK mobile prefixes and I found them to be 17, and as someone stated earlier they're scattered all over the numbering space. Denmark, Norway, Finland are equally well organized. Apart from that I don't know except for Germany which I've heard is a great mess because of some 20 million new citizens that came knocking on their door a couple of years ago (former East Germany). I've tried to make a more thorough description on my web pages (soon to be changed to .../~sam). Sam www.nada.kth.se/~d92-sam, sam@nada.kth.se, +46 7 01234567 ------------------------------ From: TGeldner@megaweb.com (Tom Geldner) Subject: Major MFP Developer Conference 9/28 - 9/29 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 11:18:47 Organization: MFPA Are you involved with developing products that print, fax, scan or communicate? Are you interested in standards issues? Protocols? Host-to-device communication? Device-to-device communication? If so, you need to attend this conference. Many of the top companies in the computer industry will be attending and making presentations including IBM, Microsoft, QMS, Xerox, Intel, Motorola, Hewlett-Packard, BIS Strategic Decisions, Novell and Eastman Kodak. Over 21 seminar sessions are offered. Dates: 9/28 - 9/29 Place: Del Mar Hilton, Del Mar, CA (near San Diego) Sponsor: MultiFunction Peripheral Association Cost: $595 members, $695 non-members - discounts available. For more info call 1-800-603-MFPA. Or set your WWW pointer to: http://www.cognisys.com/browse/mfpa Tom Geldner GELDNER ASSOCIATES Marketing, Advertising and Public Relations ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Subject: Re: Seven Digits Across North America Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 01:03:00 GMT Stan Schwartz wrote: [ ... text deleted ... ] > It was also recently mentioned that Atlanta has the > world's largest local calling area. Can someone confirm this? Oklahoma City has the largest local calling area. Atlanta's has more telephones, but is smaller in area. fgoldstein@bbn.com (Fred R. Goldstein) wrote: > The reason 1+ means "toll" in SOME places is historical: With > step-by-step switches, dialing 1 immediately cut through to a toll > trunk, and a toll switch ate the rest of the digits directly. The 1 > was literally an access code for a different switch, one which had > call detail billing. Local calls never had detail billing, and never > hit the toll switch. In Southwestern Bell territory, 1+ was used in crossbar offices long before there was any CAMA (centralized automatic message accounting) which was required for toll dialing with step-by-step switches. In Oklahoma, for historical reasons almost entirely step, when conversions to common control (then #5 XB) offices began, most of them went in with subscriber toll dialing. Except for the first one or two, 1+ was standard on all of them to identify a toll call. The curious result of this was that much of outstate Oklahoma had toll dialing before Oklahoma City and Tulsa (which required CAMA to serve their many step offices) and the usual question by customers in Oklahoma City and Tulsa was not "what is DDD (Direct Distance Dialing) and how does it work?" but "When are we going to get DDD?" One result was that when the CAMAs were turned up in Oklahoma City and Tulsa, customer-dialed calls reached the projected one year (or may be it was two year) percentage after one week. (Usually customer education and promotion was expected to be required over many years to get people to use DDD; in Oklahoma City and Tulsa the percentage of people who knew what DDD was and how to use it was very high, since they already knew from friend, relatives and business contacts in the outstate area. As soon as they knew it was available, they started using it. Has quite an effect on the loads and the facilities required.) Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@oubbs.telecom.uoknor.edu wes.leatherock@f2001.n147.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #368 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10914; 1 Sep 95 18:01 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA20786 for telecomlist-outbound; Fri, 1 Sep 1995 09:25:42 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA20778; Fri, 1 Sep 1995 09:25:39 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 09:25:39 -0500 From: TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson) Message-Id: <199509011425.JAA20778@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #369 TELECOM Digest Fri, 1 Sep 95 09:25:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 369 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson HELP on LD Directory Assistance Billing (Lou Jahn) Email -> Pager Gateway? (Eric De Mund) Hey AT&T, Tell Me How Much Your Services Cost! (Howard G. Page) WATS Extender (Jeff Shaver) T1 Direct to Modem Bank (Gary Secor) Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint (Martin D. Kealey) LEC Blocked From Providing Intralata DA (bkron@netcom.com) Looking For CHEAPER Domestic/International Long Distance (Kevin Lipsitz) AT&T Wireless AKA McCaw Screws up Again (jensoft@blarg.com) Re: Questions: History of AC 905; What's a TWX? (Rich Szabo) Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market (Steven Lichter) Telephone Numbers Used in Entertainment Fiction (Mark J. Cuccia) 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 including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 30 Aug 95 00:04:52 EDT From: Lou Jahn <71233.2444@compuserve.com> Subject: HELP on LD Directory Assistance Billing Can anyone shed some light as to the varies parts of LD Directory Assistance charges? I once asked the question related to the tarrif build-up, now with a credit I find I need to deal with two firms. If I call NPA-555-1212 my IXC carrier charges me $.75. When I was charged for two DA calls where they had no number to release to me, I called to complain. I was offered an immediate "partial" credit but was told I had to call Bell Atlantic for the credit of the remainder of the charge. I was told this was necessary as the IXC had already paid BA for that part of the call. Can anyone help me understand the mechanics of the charging and then billing for Directory Assistance calls. I have previously noted the $.75 charge seems like an over-charge to me. In Pennsyvania a 411 call costs $.25 to from a local phone. If I call 215-555-1212 from NJ I pay the $.75 charge -- now if I was allowed to place a LD call to 215-411, I'd save money. My LD rates is 15.5 cents during the day. Thus my call to 215-411 (if it were allowed) would only cost 40.5 cents. The two part credit I mentioned above drove me to consider why/how the charge got to $.75 and which firms get what part of the money chain. Anybody have any answers? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 555-1212 is treated like an 800 number in the sense that the recipient of the call pays the charges, which would always be some telco somewhere. They have to pay your telco somewhere for handling the call, and they want to make something for their own time and effort as well, thus the various components of the overall (usually) 75 cent charge. I'm amazed they gave you any refund at all. The charge is *not* for providing you with information, it is for *seeking out* the information, if any exists. If none exists, too bad; they still spent their time looking. On local directory assistance (411) that is certainly the case. If you spend their time talking to them, you pay, regardless of results. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ead@netcom.com Date: Fri, 01 Sep 1995 02:06:41 -0600 Subject: Email -> Pager Gateway? Organization: Netcom Is there an email -> pager gateway? I'd like to be able to have clients send email to my MobilComm alpha pager at its 1 (800) number. Thank you, Eric De Mund gopher://netcom.com:79/0ead [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You need to speak with Doug Reuben about the service he and his associates offer. It has been discussed here in the Digest in the past, but not too much recently. Perhaps in response, Doug will send a general update about his service to us. I can't find him on the mailing list right now or I would include his email address here. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 01 Sep 1995 06:25:37 -0700 From: hpage@netcom.com (Howard G. Page) Subject: Hey AT&T, Tell Me How Much Your Services Cost! Several days after receiving my AT&T calling card statement, I started thinking about how much it really cost to to complete a call via my AT&T calling card. I called the "800" number listed on the back of the statement. I requested from the AT&T representative who answered a a list of the various rates for completing a call on the AT&T network with my AT&T calling card. He replied that there is no such list of rates to send me. I asked to speak to a supervisor. The supervisor agreed, there is no list of the type requested, that is, he agreed that I am supposed to use my AT&T caling card to purchase a service from AT&T, but AT&T isn't able to tell how much I'll pay. Hey AT&T, are you listening? Tell me how your services cost! Thanks. Howard G. Page hpage@netcom.com 415-548-1902 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Generally the only difference in rates is for the first minute and the calling card surcharge. The second and subsequent minutes are billed at the same rate as if you had dialed the call yourself from your home phone. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 18:16:41 MDT From: Jeff Shaver Subject: WATS Extender Is there anyone who was able to find an inexpensive WATS extender? I have seen several posts here in the last few months, but heard nothing of the results. Hello Direct was of no help; the two people I spoke with laughed and had no idea what I was talking about. I'm looking for a simple way to make local calls (as in local to the wats extender), utilizing my 800 number, while traveling. I would prefer to have at least some primitive security measures, but extra features aren't high priority. Thanks for any leads or suggestions anyone can give me! Jeff Shaver jshaver@cscu.csc.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those devices used to be a very important part of life for business people who were out of the office all day since they allowed one to dial into the office phone system and the connect with the 'extender' and dial back out on the WATS line. But that was back in the days when WATS (Wide Area Telephone Service) calls were almost as expensive as DDD is now. Prices have gone down so much on long distance in the past decade that devices like WATS extenders and other sorts of customer-owned patch devices to put in the line have become almost obsolete. PAT] ------------------------------ From: glsecor@ix.netcom.com (Gary Secor) Subject: T1 Direct to Modem Bank Date: 31 Aug 1995 11:07:24 GMT Organization: Netcom I have some switched 800 lines now dumping on a centrex hunt group (16 lines). I want to look at a T1 that replaces these switched lines since it should result in lower cost per minute and some better disaster recovery redirection options. What can I connect the T1 to that will allow it to connect to 16 modems? I suspect there may be a card that goes in a pc that can look like 23 or 24 analog lines. What is it called and what might it cost? Who has such an animal? Any other suggestions appreciated. I can use existing modem rack or am willing to look at a new one if it fits the situation. All thoughts appreciated! ------------------------------ From: martin@kurahaupo.kurahaupo.gen.nz (Martin D Kealey) Subject: Re: Area Code Crisis -- A Different Viewpoint Date: Fri, 1 Sep 1995 18:47:49 NZST Richard Barry wrote: > *Variable number length* so that cities that outgrow 7 digits can have > 8 digit local numbers. No multiple area code confusion. Small > towns can have even shorter local numbers, if desirable. Tony Harminc wrote: > This is terrible idea, This is a *wonderful* idea. :-) > for the one simple reason that telephones don't > have Enter keys. So the switch has to decide when you've finished > dialing by some means, usually a timeout. Or if the switch is smart ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > enough it may be able to avoid timeouts on certain calls, but the > result is inconsistent behaviour. ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, telephones do have 'enter' keys > or 'carriage return' keys. It is the '#' key located underneath the '9'. Tony seems to think that we who live in countries where variable length local numbers are the norm (or at least were until recently) spend our time waiting for "timeouts". This is nonsense, and it amazes me that people in the telecom industry can have such a blinkered view of things (but then no wonder the NANP is such a mess)! We *NEVER* have timeouts during dialing, not even for operator, nor do we have to use the octothorpe key, so there is no "inconsistent behaviour" either. If you're in NANP then you already have "local" numbers in three standard lengths (seven, ten and three) and it doesn't take a timeout to distinguish them; consider this: * Is there any timeout when you dial "911" before the switch decides that you aren't going to dial any more digits? (There'd better not be!) * Is there a timeout after you dial a 7-digit number before the switch decides you're not going to dial a 10-digit number? (No?) Well, why should seven and eight digit versions of local numbers be any harder to deal? As long as no short number ever forms a prefix for any longer number, the switch can always tell how many more digits to expect after the first few digits. [I don't know, never having been there, but I would expect that even in Germany where DDI numbers can have a variable length inward dialing suffix, the PBX would know still when to initiate an immediate connection because this no-prefix policy also applies to extension numbers (eg no ordinary extension numbers start with a 0). Can anyone in +49 confirm or deny this?] NANP got this badly wrong when they assigned 0 for operator and also used it as a lead-in code for other functions, so now it needs a timeout (or octothorpe) to distinguish them. > The NANP has this for 900 and such, though there are some local > variations (976 and the like are not universal). There is no need to > know that you are calling a mobile number if the mobile user is paying, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ That would be true if this were the case, but it is not; the reason that mobile services have separate area codes here is exactly so the *caller* can be billed for the call. This is fairly common (although not universal) outside NANP. [For this, we get automatic full national coverage with a flat-rate per minute; no "roaming" charges to the caller.] There is something to be said for having all national numbers of a uniform length to avoid other countries having to maintain digit-length tables, but this doesn't constrain length-variability of local numbers. Another mystery, why in NANP does a calling-card number *follow* the phone number -- surely it's just a specialized version of carrier selection? Imagine having to dial carrier-selection 10XXX after the number ... Pressing octothorpe in the middle of a number here will definitely get a disconnection; the only time I use it is when dialing internationally, as everything else goes through immediately. Martin D Kealey 36.88888S/174.72116E ## Science Fiction Modellers' Club of ## New Zealand voice +64-9-8150460 fax +64-9-8150529 ## all SF catered for; email for info ------------------------------ From: bkron@netcom.com (BUBEYE!) Subject: LEC Blocked From Providing Intralata DA Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 22:20:21 GMT Here's an unexpected twist: With the new 360 area code now implemented in Washington state (carved out of the 206 area code), there are now, of course, two area codes serving the same area as was previously served by one. If you are in Seattle and want to call DA for someone's phone number in Olympia (same LATA), you can't call 1-206-555-1212 anymore. You have to dial 1-360-555-1212. However, according to US West, all traffic to 360 DA from the 206 area code must be routed on IEC lines, meaning no more DA allowance for the calls, and a much higher cost (.95 for AT&T, for example). Interestingly, though, any "regular" toll calls between Seattle and Olympia are automatically PIC'd to US West since it is intralata (unless you override with 10-XXX). ------------------------------ From: krazykev@kjl.COM (Kevin Jay Lipsitz, President) Subject: Looking for CHEAPER Domestic/International Long Distance Date: 31 Aug 1995 22:42:33 -0000 Organization: Krazy Kevin Mag Clu/ Collegetown Magazine Subscription Services If you are a USA long distance re-seller, we would consider your services if you can save us money. Here is what we *don't* want: -to pay a monthly fee of any sort -to be in the long distance business in order to get reduced rates -T-1 -to sign a contract - you will keep us as long as you are cheapest -a salesman who wants to analyze our bill. I have done this myself and know exactly what I am looking for. Here is what we want: -six second minimum on domestic calls -six second billing on domestic calls -no more than 30 second mimimum on international calls. -T-1 rate range without the hassle of the equipment and fees. -low international rates with a flat rate or two rate period plan. But we already get 1/2 off of MCI's best rates for six months, so you will have to be really cheap on international to get our attention. We spend around $10,000.00 per month on all aspects of our telecommunications needs. It is unlikely that you will get all of it, but you may get a lot of it, depending on what you can do for us. If you can meet the conditions we are looking for, we welcome your pitch. Make your pitch via email and if you have a good plan, I will invite you to pitch me personally via phone. Thanks, Sincerely, Kevin Jay Lipsitz, President :-) KRAZY KEVIN MAGAZINE CLUB, THE INTERNET DIVISION OF COLLEGETOWN MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES: "Managing Magazines for Cost-Conscious Busy Professionals, Students, Educators and Regular Consumers Internationally Since 1973." krazykev@kjl.com ------------------------------ From: jensoft@blarg.com (Jensoft) Subject: AT&T Wireless AKA McCaw Screws up Again Date: 31 Aug 1995 21:26:22 -0700 Organization: Blarg! Online Services - 206/784-9681 I got my AT&T Wireless bill today. After AT&T bought McCaw, they were required to implement equal access for long distance usage for their customers. A nice ballot went around with three or four random picks for your LDC: AT&T, Access (in my case), and some other nobody (Sprint, I think). Not wanting to choose AT&T or Sprint, and being unable to select Working Assets, I chose Access. I make no long distance calls, so it's not an issue. I mailed in my ballot. I got a call a few weeks later from AT&T asking for my long distance carrier. I asked for a list; I chose Access, again. She duly made typing noises and thanked me for my call. I got a letter a few weeks later saying that if I didn't choose a long distance company, my LD would be turned off. No loss, so I let it pass. Besides, the nice lady had told me that there was a letter in the mail and to ignore it. Cool. Then I tried to make an LD call. Blocked. I call the 800 directory to get Access's number; I call them. Never heard of me. "AT&T never tells us anything; I don't think they send us our ballots". He does tell me that I can use a code, however, to get around the tomfoolery and make an LD call. It's a secret, though, don't tell anyone (by now, I was drooling). "Just type 102 881 and the phone number you want, sir." WHOA! He gave me *AT&T*'s PIC. That was funny. I asked if they had one, (a PIC); he said he didn't know. He did say to call the same number next week during 8-5 hours and talk to Access. I did. The lady I talked to was very helpful, but she said I would need to perform the switch by calling AT&T and having it done. I did. Today I got my bill. A nice insert telling me CNID delivery will start soon for TDMA customers (Hooray!) and on page 5, under "Airtime and long distance charges", "Your selected long distance company is ACCESS LD." THEY GOT IT RIGHT! But wait. On page 11, it says (for my old phone number) "You have not chosen a long distance company. Please make your selection today." AHHHH the light goes on! I changed my MIN some time ago. My account number stayed stable, but they apparently tacked my LD info onto the new account. Apparently, the switch (or some item in the loop) checks the first account on the MIN for LD access choice. Which, for me, on that number, would be nobody. Uh, can we say, bogus? I tried (just now) to make an LD call. I got an intercept from Access saying I needed to activate my account. Great! ------------------------------ From: Rich Szabo Subject: Re: Questions: History of AC 905; What's a TWX? Date: Fri, 01 Sep 1995 00:33:19 EDT Organization: APK - Internet Provider for Ohio. [much good stuff snipped, then Telecom editor's note:] > They had to call it a different name of course, so they chose TWX, which > is pronounced 'Twix'. ... This brings to mind an story which happened in 1987, when I was trying to figure out a cheap way of dialing into my IBM mainframe from home using a 300-bps async modem and a VT100 emulator. IBM communication front-end processors at the time knew only a few protocols -- the proprietary Bisync and SDLC being the most popular -- and the IBM 3270 terminal was king. When I asked my old-school IBM Systems Engineer if the mainframe could communicate with an async terminal such as the DEC VT100, he responded as if I were referring to some virulent disease. "Oh, you mean yer Twix terminals -- like start/stop." At that time, async terminals could not operate with the mainframe in full-screen video mode -- only in line mode. Async was supported only enough to make somebody's teletypes work in some obscure application. As far as IBM was concerned, "TWX" and "start/stop" were the complete definition of async. Rich Szabo ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: AT&T Moving Into Local Exchange Market Date: 31 Aug 1995 21:53:20 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Whenever we reach the point that a company > is actually able to supply its own dial tone over its own wires and have > no need to rely on the traditional local telco, that will be the day that > local competition begins. The reports coming to me are that AT&T plans > to come crashing onto the scene in a big way beginning in January. No more > negotiating with the local telcos; none of that stuff. They are just going > to move right in and start doing business. It is really exciting! PAT] Cross Country Wireless Cable has 18" dishes on subscribers roofs, they have done a real bang up job of draining the cable companies in this area. The cities don't like it much either since they can't collect franchise fees. There will be no need for wires in this area, at least it sure does not appear like it will. In Palm Springs a company has built a whole new CO and several companies have asked for co-location in our CO's. This really is going to be interesting. If all are equal players then you may wind up getting your phone and cable servce from the phone companies, since many plan on buying the others. slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Telephone Numbers Used in Entertainment Fiction Date: 1 Sep 1995 13:32:34 GMT Organization: Tulane University Carl Moore's recent article in TD about the telephone numbers in I Love Lucy brought to mind some of what my subject line states. AT&T/Bell-System/Western-Electric print/magazine ads back in the later 1940's and most of the 1950's in {Time, Life, National Geographic, etc} frequently showed a picture of a WE #202 or #302 (or later #500) style telephone. The number card *always* stated the number MAin-0-2368. The use of a '0' (zero) was RARELY used in practice as the third digit in locations with '2L-5N' local numbering. [New Orleans had WHitehall-0 only VERY BRIEFLY in 1959/60, assigned not within the other 'WHitehall' region, but adjacent to it in then undeveloped but growing New Orleans East. WHitehall-0 was a small step office in a house trailer, while CHestnut-2's building to house New Orleans' very first #5XB exchange was being constructed. The reason that '0' zero was not recommended in exchange name days was that in the US/Canada, the Letter O is associated with the digit 6-MNO, and there could be customer dialing confusion.] Back in the 1930's and earlier 40's, the Bell ad's telephones had the number CHElsea-2368. Sometime in the very late 1950's or very early 1960's, the telephone number on the 500 series and Princess phones (and keysets, business phones, 'card-dialers', etc) in AT&T print ads was changed to KL5-2368 or "Area Code 311, KL5-2368". Only letters were shown for the Exchange Name. Later on, the number was (311) 555- 2368. 311 has never been an Areacode in North America, but reserved for *local* service code uses. Many locations used N11 codes for ringback, testing, ANAC, etc, as well as 211 for Long Distance Opr, 411 for Information, 611 Repair, 811 Business Office, and later 911 for Emergencies. Letters for 55X are hard to compose a name, other than possibly KLondike (which was used in San Francisco in the old days). There are no vowels on the '5'. Most Bell telcos used 55 or 55X for test numbers, and I remember seeing something in "Notes on Nationwide Dialing" (AT&T, 1955) that 55X, 57X, 95X and 97X were going to be reserved for dialing mobile radiotelephones in the future. Many older Radio, TV and Movie fiction/drama/etc. used actual exchange names of the town/city the play took place in. (I Love Lucy used MUrray-Hill, CIrcle, etc; the CBS Suspense radiodrama 'Sorry Wrong Number' used PLaza, TRafalgar, MUrray-Hill, and for the time-of-day recording, MEridien-x-1212!) If the location itself was fictitious, well then the exchange names were 'generic'. Sometimes, fictitious/generic exchange names were used for real locations. Many times, the Hollywood producers co-operated with telco, but at times they didn't. If they co-operated, the last four digit line numbers quoted in fiction were usually from the 9XXX series, sometimes even 99XX series. The 9-thousands were frequently used for payphones, test numbers, and non-assigned numbers specifically reserved for fictitious purposes. I would guess that today, Hollywood doesn't *always* use the 555. The early 1960's NBC-TV series "HAZEL" had a very amusing telephone episode in its first season (61/62), [the first season was in Black-and- White, while the remainder of its run was in Color]. The Baxters were getting sick and tired of receiving telephone sales calls at all hours of the day or night. [The word telemarketing wasn't used at that time, tho']. They decided to change their listed number to a non-published number. Telco mailed them the number card with the new non-pub number along with a letter stating when their new number would take effect. However, someone accidently lost or discarded the numbercard before anyone had a chance to note it down! The old and new telephone numbers were referred to as "KLondike-5" xxxx. The camera close up on the number card showed KL5-xxxx. The numericals of KL5 are, of course, 555! The episode, "Night Call" from TWILIGHT ZONE in its fifth season, 1963/64 was about an old woman receiving strange calls in the middle of the night during a thunderstorm. She had a WE #202 phone, and the numbercard showed KL5-xxxx. Most TV shows began to use the fictitious KL5 or 555 sometime in the early 1960's, but when areacodes were quoted, they usually used a real one. Sometimes, if a location was a fictitious one, they would use 311 for the areacode, just like Bell's magazine/print ads in the 1960's-on. I was told that San Francisco never had a KLondike-5 (or any name for 555) back in the exchange name days, altho' they did have other KLondike-x exchanges. I also remember seeing late 1950's Bell journals/magazines describing a 'future' way to customers to direct dial to Information (Directory Assistance) outside of your home area. The 555-1212 was referred to as "KLondike-5-1212" in some of those Bell journals! MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@law.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #369 ****************************** From telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Tue Sep 5 11:45:11 1995 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA07030; Tue, 5 Se