From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Aug 30 10:43:20 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA25612; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:43:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:43:20 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199608301443.KAA25612@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #451 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 Aug 96 10:43:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 451 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 360 Communications to Offer Residential Long Distance Service (Nigel Allen) 281 NXX List Details (John Cropper) 972 NXX List Details (John Cropper) Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA (Michael J. Wengler) Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud (Shalom Wertsberger) Re: Alaska Has Moved! And a New Way to Call Cruise Ships (Keith W. Brown) Re: Alaska Has Moved! And a New Way to Call Cruise Ships (Steve Bagdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 23:12:43 EDT From: Nigel Allen Subject: 360 Communications to Offer Residential Long Distance Service Here is a press release from 360 Communications Company, a cellular company that used to be a division of Sprint. I found the press release on the PR Newswire web site at http://www.prnewswire.com/, and thought that it might be of interest to readers of this Digest. Has anyone here had experience with this company's residential long distance service? 360 Communications To Offer Residential Long Distance Service CHICAGO, Aug. 8 /PRNewswire/ -- 360 Communications Company (NYSE: XO) today announced it will begin offering residential long distance service this month in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. Within the next few months, 360 will expand its residential long distance offering to customers in Alabama, Florida, New Mexico and South Carolina. 360 Communications will offer residential long distance service through 360 Long Distance, a wholly owned subsidiary, and plans to leverage its strong local market presence, distribution channels and customer relationships to compete with other major long distance providers. "360 has a distinct advantage over other long distance carriers and resellers because we have local retail stores, brand loyalty and outstanding customer service. We recently completed two market trials in Norfolk, Va., and in Mansfield, Ohio, and we experienced strong consumer endorsement for 360 Long Distance service," said Dennis Foster, president and chief executive officer of 360 Communications. "Our cross-sell opportunities are markedly significant and support our strategy of offering bundled services to our customers. We've been providing cellular long distance service to our customers for years, and now we're offering the added convenience of having one company with a strong local presence serve their cellular and residential long distance needs. "By providing bundled cellular and residential long distance service to existing 360 customers, we're positioned to gain a portion of the nearly $6 billion long distance business in the markets where we operate. This strategy also will attract new cellular customers and retain existing customers," Foster added. Initially, 360 will market its residential long distance service to existing cellular customers. 360 customers who sign up for residential long distance service will receive 360 free minutes of either local cellular or domestic long distance minutes -- 60 free minutes per month in the first, second and third month of service and another 60 free minutes per month in the 13th, 14th and 15th month of consecutive long distance service. 360 also will credit customers $5 on their first long distance bill to cover any charges they may incur from their local telephone carrier for changing long distance service. Customers may pay their long distance bills wherever 360 currently accepts bill payments, including participating Radio Shack, Wal-Mart and SAM's stores. Chicago-based 360 Communications provides wireless voice and data services to more than 1.75 million customers in nearly 100 markets in 14 states. In addition to the New York Stock Exchange, 360 Communications' stock is traded on the Chicago Stock Exchange and the Pacific Stock Exchange in San Francisco under the symbol XO. forwarded by Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen/ CV available on request ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: 281 NXX List Details Date: 29 Aug 1996 22:01:10 GMT Organization: Pipeline SUBURBAN HOUSTON AREA CODE CHANGE INFORMATION EXCHANGE PREFIXES MOVING FROM AREA CODE 713 TO 281 ON NOVEMBER 2, 1996 212 213 218 230 232 233 239 240 242 243 244 251 255 256 257 259 261 262 263 264 265 269 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 282 283 286 287 288 289 291 292 293 294 298 315 316 319 320 323 324 326 328 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 350 351 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 366 367 368 369 370 371 373 374 375 376 378 379 383 385 388 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 405 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 437 438 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 452 454 456 457 458 459 463 469 470 471 474 476 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 514 517 530 531 532 533 534 537 538 539 540 544 545 548 550 554 556 558 559 560 561 563 564 565 566 568 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 595 596 597 614 632 634 637 647 689 775 807 812 820 821 835 837 838 839 842 843 847 852 855 856 859 860 870 872 873 874 875 876 878 879 884 890 893 894 897 922 927 929 930 931 933 934 955 970 980 983 985 986 987 992 996 997 998 999 ALL OTHER FORMER 713 EXCHANGE PREFIXES REMAIN IN THE 713 AREA CODE. Permissive dialing period begins November 2, 1996. Permissive dialing period ends May 3, 1997. NXX 430 will move back to 713 in April 1997. Test number: (281) 792-8378 gives recording if successfully dialed. Source: SouthWest Bell area code hotline. Accuracy of sources not guaranteed. John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: 972 NXX List Details Date: 29 Aug 1996 22:01:48 GMT Organization: Pipeline SUBURBAN DALLAS AREA CODE CHANGE INFORMATION EXCHANGE PREFIXES MOVING FROM AREA CODE 214 TO 972 ON SEPTEMBER 14, 1996 203 204 205 206 207 208 216 217 218 219 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 233 234 235 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 245 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 266 269 270 271 272 273 274 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 303 304 305 306 307 308 313 315 316 317 318 322 323 326 329 334 335 336 338 345 346 347 355 365 366 370 377 378 379 380 382 383 385 386 387 389 390 392 393 394 395 396 397 399 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 409 412 413 414 416 417 418 419 420 422 423 424 425 427 429 431 432 434 435 436 437 438 441 442 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 461 462 463 466 468 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 479 480 481 483 484 485 486 487 488 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 501 504 506 509 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 524 525 527 529 530 531 539 540 541 542 544 545 547 548 550 551 552 554 556 557 558 561 562 563 564 566 568 569 570 571 572 574 575 576 578 579 580 584 585 586 591 592 593 594 596 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 633 635 636 641 642 644 646 647 650 659 660 661 662 663 664 666 667 669 676 680 681 682 684 685 686 687 690 694 699 701 702 705 708 709 710 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 721 722 723 724 726 727 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 738 751 752 753 756 758 766 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 778 779 780 782 783 784 788 789 790 791 795 798 799 805 809 814 830 831 837 838 840 842 843 845 846 851 853 864 866 867 868 869 872 873 875 876 878 881 882 883 884 886 887 888 889 893 901 907 909 915 916 917 918 919 921 923 924 927 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 937 938 952 960 962 964 966 968 975 980 982 985 986 988 991 994 995 997 ALL OTHER FORMER 214 EXCHANGE PREFIXES REMAIN IN THE 214 AREA CODE. Permissive dialing period begins September 14, 1996. Permissive dialing period ends March 14, 1997. Test number: (972) 792-8378 gives recording if successfully dialed. Source: SouthWest Bell area code hotline. Accuracy of sources not guaranteed. John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: Michael J. Wengler Subject: Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 08:59:17 -0700 Organization: QUALCOMM, Incorporated; San Diego, CA, USA Reply-To: mwengler@qualcomm.com Tad Cook wrote: > The last two calls, which have 809 area codes, might look like regular > long-distance numbers within the United States. But they're really > phone calls to the Dominican Republic. And thus get charged pretty large charges. Interestingly, to make a scam like this work requires the cooperation of the phone company itself in Dominican Republic. Some of revenue from the international call is passed by the US long distance carrier to the phone company which carries the call once its inside the the Dominican Republic. That charge has to be very large in order to even have the possibility of a scam like this, because the D.R. phone company has to pass a portion of that large charge on to the scam ad placers in order to make the whole thing work! So don't let anybody think that the culpable party is difficult to find! We have hard-wired connection to the guilty: the D. R. phone company receiving the revenue from these calls! And don't think those charges are hard to recover. Those fraudulently induced calls can just be "charged back" to the D. R. phone company against later revenues for legitimate calls made from US to D. R. I think it should be a trivial matter for the FCC or the Congress to make a law REQUIRING the domestic US companies that carry these fraudulent calls to, when they are identified do the following: 1) use their records to reimburse defrauded customers for charges to these scam numbers and 2) chargeback these calls PLUS a 100% processing fee to the foreign phone companies who are participating in the scams. The foreign phone company could plead innocence or breach of contract, but the American company could simply say "we must follow US law, sorry." The foreign phone company could plead that they thought this was a "valid business" on the part of the scammers, and the US company could say "as you see it wasn't, so examine your deals and determine for yourselves whether the fraud chargebacks are small enough so that you should continue in this line or not. But US law now states that fraudulently induced revenue to you will be charged back. Take it up with the scammers you paid off." Another reform that could be considered: a set of standards for remining in the NANP (North American Numbering Plan, the people you reach by dialing 1+AreaCode+NXX-XXXX). Most people don't even realize there are "international" calls within the US+CANADA international dialing code of 1+. With long distance to Canada costing from 10 to 25 cents/minute, there is no opportunity for scamming off long distance charges. Essentially, calling Canada is in the range of cost you expect when dialing a 1+AreaCode call. Perhaps places like the D. R. want to stay in the NANP. Then they should be required to: 1) Have charges to companies delivering them calls which are in the same range as what US-Canada companies must have. This will result in D.R. area code calls costing in the expected "1+AreaCode range." 2) Meet and agree to various fraud protection chargeback stuff that US and Canadian callers take for granted. OTHERWISE, it should be a very simple matter to reprogram North American switches to see a "011+" before the "1809" which could serve as the D.R.'s international code, without requiring much change outside of North America. Then the scammer's going to have to get you to dial the international access code to perpetrate their scam. The last plausible reform is a required voice message which announces to US and Canadian callers when they dial the "expensive" area codes that are actually international "The area code you have dialed will be charged at international rates. If you have dialed in error, hang up now." ------------------ EDITORIAL COMMENT: The US and Canada users have a right to expect all "1+" calls to be in a certain range of charge, associated with domesticity. The cost to require by law the US and Candian companies to guarantee this is minimal with current technology. The D.R. or any other "1+" location that costs more than the most expensive Canada to US call as one benchmark should have their inclusion in "1+" dialing revoked, or at least the US+Canada customer making the call should get an info message while waiting for call to complete. NANP applies in general to an extraordinarily high-quality telephone network in terms of technology, service, and business practices. The very small part of NANP which inclues excessive charges and/or business practices like arranging kickbacks of international revenues to scam artists should simply be kicked out! Mikey ------------------------------ From: Shalom Wertsberger Subject: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:19:08 -0400 Hello Pat, Sprint advertised on TV in January/February their "Friday Free" program. The promise was that if I switch service over to them and spend at least $50 /month I will be entitled to one full year of free calls, every Friday, anywhere in the world, up to $1000/month. I joined in. However, in April they sent me a letter (signed by a Robin Loyed) stating that as of April 18 nine countries (including Israel, Equador, Mainmar and others) are off the Friday Free. Instead they offered me the great discount of paying 75% REGULAR RATE ($1.10 / minute after discount, more than anyone else ...) for calls they promised I will have free ... I called and faxed but got no meaningful response. The claim is that due to high volume they got high rates of incomplete calls. This explanation sounds bogus to me. I am certain that the bandwidth is there but they would not lease it. I also offered them the option: if they meet technical difficulties, I will accept monetary compensation instead. (After all a business have to respect its commitments). They off course told me to get lost (in so many words.) I approached the AG of Maine, and they sent letters as well. Sprint responded saying that making me pay for what they promised for free is a "fair and reasonable" act. And they said they could not offer me any other solution. I also sent an "informal" complaint to the FCC on June 7, but so far did not even get an acknowledgment from them. I sued in District Court. Their lawyer appeared and claimed that the court had no jurisdiction, only the FCC. The judge dismissed the call. I checked some of the references cited by the lawyer. One, Wegoland vs. Nynex (27 F.3d 17, 2d Cir. 1994) simply stated that even if the carrier committed provable fraud the matter is out of the jurisdiction of the courts due to "filed tariff doctrine". Since the FCC is not responding and you can not collect damages for such fraud, and due to limited funds, I decided to drop the issue for now. If however there is a class action suite going on, I would love to join in on it. Any data will be appreciated. Also any publicity you can give this letter is welcome. I hope more people will learn about the fraud Sprint commits and avoid them. Thanks, Shalom Wertsberger [TELECOM Digest Editior's Note: Quite a routine, isn't it? "Even though we commit a crime (in this case, fraud) the court cannot touch us because we have tariffs ...". And I can tell you right now if you ever think you are going to get in touch with Robin Loyed, you can forget it. He does not accept phone calls, in fact he dodges them. His main purpose at Sprint apparently is to function as a buffer to keep customers from getting through to anyone in any real decision-making capacity. If you call Sprint and ask to speak with him, now they laugh at you. The only advice I can give you is that if you -- and other users of Sprint -- do not have a *total, complete freeze* on all accounts payable the company alleges are due to them, then you should have. Do not pay them any money, for any reason, at any time. All I can suggest is that to the extent possible, you 'take it out in trade' with them; use their service to the extent you have credit coming on 'Free Friday' calls and when they demand payment for it, tell them they are going to have to sue you. Tell them payment of their account will be considered when you have actually spoken about the matter with Robin Loyed himself on the phone and gotten their contract violations cleared up. Now if you have no complaints with Sprint; have never had them stiff you on a contract or for calls you did not make, etc then the above does *not* apply; you should pay your bills which are legitimate. But for those folks who were fooled into signing up for Free Fridays only to have the company cancel the plan once they signed you up, the *only* way you are going to get the company's attention is by withholding their payments. Don't worry, they'll ask what for eventually. Then your answer is you want to talk to Robin Loyed and you want Sprint to honor its contracts, or they can sue which gives you a great opportunity to countersue. At least you ran up their legal bill a little for them; their attorney had to appear to respond to you, and he did not do it out of the goodness of his heart. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Keith W. Brown Subject: Re: Alaska Has Moved! And a New Way to Call Cruise Ships Date: 29 Aug 1996 23:28:42 GMT Organization: CallCom International David Whiteman wrote in article : > My parents are once again going on another cruise. Some of you may > have recall my previous problems in calling them through Imarsat. > This time I received an advertisement from Princess Cruises about a > new way to call a cruise ship by calling a 900# (1-900-CALL-SHIP). I > do not know whether this new method works for all cruise ships or just > Princess Cruises, whether the call signal is better or worse, or > anything else. I have not used this new service. The ad does mention > the price is $8.95 per minute, and you do not need the vessel ID > number or any ocean region code. Inmarsat rates have dropped! AtlW: $6.97 per minute Ind: $6.97 per minute Pac: $6.97 per minute AtlE: $6.97 per minute Keith W. Brown International Long Distance URL: http://www.callcom.com E-mail: newsinfo@callcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 02:25:51 GMT From: bagdon@rust.net (S and K Bagdon) Subject: Re: Alaska Has Moved! And a New Way to Call Cruise Ships dbw@autopsy.com (David Whiteman) said: > My parents are once again going on another cruise. Some of you may > have recall my previous problems in calling them through Imarsat. > This time I received an advertisement from Princess Cruises about a > new way to call a cruise ship by calling a 900# (1-900-CALL-SHIP). I > do not know whether this new method works for all cruise ships or just > Princess Cruises, whether the call signal is better or worse, or > anything else. I have not used this new service. The ad does mention > the price is $8.95 per minute, and you do not need the vessel ID > number or any ocean region code. Sounds as if Princess Cruises has purchased bulk time from InMarSat, and is reselling this time to the public. > Also readers may remember in previous postings the problems I had in > trying to reach my parents by fax. (The advertisement only mentions > calling by voice, not fax) As before my parents are on a cruise ship > in the Alaska area. I tried using both the Imarsat ocean code for the > Pacific Ocean which did not go through, nor did the ocean code for the > Indian Ocean work, which was the code that worked last time. This > time the code for Atlantic Ocean-East worked, so Alaska magically > moved from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. Of course in > fairness I must mention that on this trip my parents are on a > different cruise ship, belonging to a different company, and probably > a different position in Alaska. Going into the technical reasons for how an earth station chooses an InMarSat satellite again would not be very productive, but let's leave it at that the earth station can choose a particular satellite (whether or not it's the strongest), or the strongest satellite (whether or not it's the closest). It all depends on how the earth station is configured. > For those not recalling the previous articles there are a class of > telephones which are called Marisat or Inmarsat. Each phone has a > seven digit number, and can use one of four satellites numbered 871, > 872, 873, or 874. In theory you reach a phone by dialing 011 (or the > international dialing code for your country), then dialing the > satellite ocean code for the particular ocean your caller is in, then > the id number. However sometimes because of overlapping satellite > coverage, a different satellite provides better reception. That is > how such funny occurrances occur like Alaska moving from the Indian > Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. The comment I refrained from making the last time will have to be stated now. What's the big deal! It similar to cellular -- if the number doesn't go through, try the other one. You have four ORs (Ocean Regions). If one doesn't work, go onto the next one -- but I'd be *darned* suprised if the boat could reach AOWR (Atlantic Ocean West Region)! Granted, cruise lines should have a toll or toll-free number that you could call to find out which OR the boat is in. But since (the last time I checked) you don't get charged for an imcomplete call, just keep trying ORs until you find the right one (or at least a busy signal). Steve B. bagdon@rust.net (h) USFMDDKT@ibmmail.com (w) http://www.rust.net/~bagdon Katharine aNd Steve (KNS) ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #451 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Aug 30 11:20:32 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA29602; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:20:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:20:32 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199608301520.LAA29602@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #452 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 Aug 96 11:20:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 452 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud (Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud (Jim Hurley) BellSouth to Appeal FCC Interconnection Order (Mike King) Re: Telegraph and Cable In Europe? (Andreas Pavlik) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Yigal Arens) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (grendel6@ix.netcom.com) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (John R. Levine) Re: Privatizing The Big Lie (Dave Penkler) Re: Spammer of the Day For Your Consideration (Will Roberts) Need Help With Digital Muxes (Robert McMillin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 96 10:40 EDT From: joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > Sprint advertised on TV in January/February their "Friday Free" > I joined in. However, in April they sent me a letter (signed by a > [reneging on parts of the promise] > I called and faxed but got no meaningful response. The claim is that > due to high volume they got high rates of incomplete calls. This > I also sent an "informal" complaint to the FCC on June 7, but so far did > not even get an acknowledgment from them. I have also sent an "informal" complaint, but have not heard back from the FCC. Just before I wrote this, I tried to call them, but all I can get is a recording. I, like you, agreed to accept monetary compensation for Sprint's breech of contract, but (not surprisingly) Sprint declined. > I sued in District Court. Their lawyer appeared and claimed that the > court had no jurisdiction, only the FCC. The judge dismissed the call. There's another approach to take. Sprint told me that they have the right to change their "contract" with me at any time, simply by filing a revised tariff. If so, Sprint violated truth in advertising laws by not making that clear in their advertisements. I think the approach to take is this: either (1) Sprint does not have the right to change the terms of our agreement, in which case Sprint is in breech of contract, or (2) Sprint DOES have the right, in which case they violate truth in advertising laws, and, more importantly, EVERY FUTURE ADVERTISEMENT MUST CARRY A DISCALIMER. Who has jurisdiction over truth in advertising? > If however there is a class action suite going on, I would love to > join in on it. Any data will be appreciated. Also any publicity you > can give this letter is welcome. I hope more people will learn about > the fraud Sprint commits and avoid them. I'm in the same situation. I don't have the resources to sue Sprint. If there's a class action suit, I'd also like to know about it. For that matter, if a laywer wants to represent me (us) against Sprint, I'd be happy to offer the usual 30% commission. I would sue for $12,000 (the maximum amount of the contract) in compensatory dammages, and as much as possible in punative, for willful breech of contract. In my case, Sprint also cut off my calling card the last day free calls to Israel were still offered. One of Sprint's employees freely admitted that my card was cut off "becuase of my calling pattern." (This is not the fraud-detection unit.) > The only advice I can give you is that if you -- and other users of > Sprint -- do not have a *total, complete freeze* on all accounts payable > the company alleges are due to them, then you should have. Do not pay I tried this, but my Sprint bills are billed through my local telco, and my telco sent me a disconnect notice. I can't afford to have my business number disconnected. Joel (joel@exc.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is good news for you. Your local telephone service *can not be disconnected* for failure to pay the long distance portion (when the long distance carrier is another company). That is an FCC regulation going back to earlier this year or maybe last year. It was ruled that was primarily as a way to protect consumers against bogus charges for 900 service, etc. Your phone bill *should* that notice printed on it somewhere. Now they may continue to carry it on the bill until such time as the long distance carrier issues credit, but they cannot disconnect you for it. I recommend you immediatly get in touch with your local telco and your local regulators. Also, inform telco you need to be have your long distance changed from Sprint to something else right away. Let your local telco know you are in litigation with Sprint over this, although you do not need to get into all the details. As for persons who are billed independently by Sprint, if you are paying them anything at the present time, you are paying them too much. I believe the 'false advertising' claim would take precedence over the 'tariff controls' claim, but that is what a court is for, to rule on these things. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jim Hurley Subject: Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud Organization: James Hurley & Associates Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:14:43 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editior's Note: Quite a routine, isn't it? "Even though > we commit a crime (in this case, fraud) the court cannot touch us because > we have tariffs ...". And I can tell you right now if you ever think you > are going to get in touch with Robin Loyed, you can forget it. He does > not accept phone calls, in fact he dodges them. How about calling Whoopi Goldberg? :) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: People have tried to sue famous people for advertising endorsements they made on behalf of companies but those cases always lose. The courts say the famous person was simply being employed to make those claims, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth to Appeal FCC Interconnection Order Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 00:35:59 PDT Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:05:02 -0400 (EDT) From: BellSouth Subject: BellSouth to Appeal FCC Interconnection Order For Information Contact: John Schneidawind (202)463-4183 BACKGROUND: The text of the Federal Communications Commissions August 8 interconnection order was published in the Federal Register today. The FCC's interconnection order sets the terms and conditions for local telephone companies to open their networks to competition. With its publication in the Federal Register, the FCC's order can be appealed. The following statement about the FCC's interconnection order should be attributed to Walter Alford, BellSouth general counsel: "BellSouth has concluded that the FCC has gone far beyond the intent of Congress with this massive order, which displaces private negotiations and usurps the states' authority to bring competition to the local marketplace. "For this reason, BellSouth will appeal the FCC's August interconnection order and will ask the court for an expedited hearing. We do so for the following reasons: -- The states should be in charge of the framework for establishing local telephone competition by overseeing the negotiations of competitors in their communities. But the FCC has imposed an elaborate set of federal rules on the states without any regard to local needs and conditions. The FCC has vastly exceeded its jurisdiction, as well as the intent of Congress, in implementing Section 251 of the Communications Act of 1996. -- The FCC's method of pricing unbundled network elements at incremental cost thwarts another intention of Congress, which was to establish full-fledged competitive networks. The prices at which BellSouth will be required to lease parts of its network are so low that competitors will be discouraged from building new telephone networks and the jobs Congress expected to be created will be lost. BellSouth does not object to giving discounts. We object to giving excessive discounts -- about 40 percent or more - three to four times what Congress intended. The FCC's pricing methodology, in effect, allows a Big Government federal agency to take BellSouth's property without just compensation. "The last thing BellSouth wants to do is hold up competition in the local exchange market because it is the condition for our entry into long-distance. For this reason, BellSouth has pushed to open our markets as fast or faster than any other company. With 19 interconnection agreements signed, our track record proves it. "We want to get into long-distance as soon as possible because BellSouth's customers want a complete package of telecommunications services. On the other hand, AT&T and MCI can be expected to do anything they can to protect their cozy long-distance cartel. "BellSouth seeks an immediate resolution of these issues so that customers can enjoy the benefits of real competition in telecommunications." ---------------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Andreas Pavlik Subject: Re: Telegraph and Cable In Europe? Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:15:58 -0700 Organization: University of Vienna Jeff Shinn wrote: > I understand that in many European countries, telex/cable/telegraph is > often-used for business and personal communications. In these > countries the postal authority offers this service, whereby persons > can send and receive messages at those offices. Similarly, businesses > use this form of communications to a great degree. > So, just how extensive is this type of communication "over there"? Within Europe the use of telegrams for business purposes is virtually non-existent any more and also the use of telex went down since fax is available. Nevertheless a few companies still have cable addresses on their letterhead paper. I cannot imagine that they are ever used. Telegrams are mainly used for personal greetings and congratulation purposes. As far as I know within Austria "telegrams" are now transmitted by fax to the receipient's post office. In larger cities the telegram is then delivered by an "express carrier", in rural areas next day by the mail carrier. The basic fee is about 3 US$, there is no word fee any more, but one "block" of text (about half an A4 page) costs about 1 US$. For an additional fee telegrams are also accepted by phone or fax. As the main purpose are congratulations, the message can come with a greeting card or in an envelope which sounds "happy birthday to you" (or the equivalent German song) when it is opened. The fee for international telegrams is still by the word, to the United States it is about 5 US$ basic fee plus 1.40 US$ per word. Somewhat off-topic: Since May 1st, 1996, the Oesterreichisce Post- und Telegraphenverwaltung (Austrian Post and Telegraph(!) Authority) is no government agency any more, but a company with the name "Post- und Telekom Austria AG" (PTA). The only owner, however, is the Federal Government, but a partial privatization is scheduled for 1998. The cellular phone networks are now run by a subsidiary named "Mobilkom Austria". Andreas Pavlik University of Vienna Vienna, Austria ------------------------------ From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:39:51 -0700 Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute Yigal Arens wrote: > (I'm from LA. When roaming in San Francisco, a local caller needs to call > my LA number, a LD provider transmits the call back up to SF, and I also > pay roaming charges there. Why?) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tell your friend to start dialing into > the number for the roaming port in San Francisco. ... PAT] That's fine with me, but how do I find out that number? I see it on my long distance bills, but that is long after I get back ... Of course, this still doesn't solve the problem of the person who doesn't know that I'm roaming. Yigal Arens USC/ISI arens@isi.edu http://www.isi.edu/sims/arens ------------------------------ From: grendel6@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 01:30:41 GMT Organization: Netcom In response to a question about inter-city roaming charges, PAT said : > Tell your friend to start dialing into the number for the roaming port > in San Francisco. Then he will pay for just a local call and you will > pay only whatever roaming charge applies for roamers making/receiving > local calls in SF. ... but ... I could be wrong, since it's been a while since I last did this, but I think that my cellular company (Comcast/Metrophone - Philadelphia Metro "A" side carrier) charges LD on *any* out of the area roaming call. For example, if I am in Baltimore (where I frequently travel) and I call a Baltimore local number, I pay: .99 / minute roaming charge A N D long distance from Baltimore to Philadelphia WHYZAT ? Bill ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Aug 96 10:42 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > I live in Los Angeles and have a contract with a local cellular service > provider. When I'm in San Francisco and a friend of mine in San > Francisco calls me on my cell phone, charges accumulate as follows: > - My friend pays long distance charges to my cellular number in LA; > - I pay my long distance provider for transmitting the call from LA to > San Francisco; > - I pay the roaming charges for receiving the call in San Francisco on > my cell phone. > Can someone explain the logic behind this (other than that more people > make money off it)? I would think that once the "system" figures out > that I'm in San Francisco, ... There's not one system, there's many. Your cell switch in Los Angeles knows only that the call's coming from Pac Bell, who in turn know only that it's coming from his LD carrier. In general, forwarded calls follow the forwarding path, e.g. if you had regular landline call forwarding and you forwarded your LA number to an SF number, calls from SF will still be charged a southbound toll to the caller and a northbound toll to the forwarder. I suppose that with increasing SS7 connectivity it'd be possible not to set up the two toll calls, but the billing would be tricky. For example, what happens if someone calls you from Santa Monica? Does he pay the message units to LA, an unexpected inter-LATA toll to SF, or what? As Pat noted, if your friend knows that you're in SF, he can call the local roamer number and avoid the toll charges. Some cell carriers even have an option to notify callers of the roamer port number rather than forwarding the call. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - Stanford econ prof ------------------------------ From: dave@hptnoa02.grenoble.hp.com (dave) Subject: Re: Privatizing The Big Lie Date: 30 Aug 1996 16:11:37 +0200 Organization: HP Grenoble In article The Old Bear writes: > A more rational approach would be to restructure the basic local loop > between subscriber premises and the frame at the telco central office > to digital facilities (over existing phyical media) and to grab > digitized data (internet, video, home security, etc) there, at the CO > end of the local loop, BEFORE it enters the switched portion of the > network. Such digital data then would be handled on appropriate > non-switched and routed facilities, while voice telephony, digitized > between the customer premises and the central office, would be delivered > to the telco switch and continue to be handled via the more appropriate > switched network. Instead of adding active equipment to the frame would it not be better to do it on the line units of the switch. Is this not how X.25 coming over the D or B channels is handled on 5ESS ISDN Line units? The packet protocol is terminated on the line card which avoids occupying valuable synchronous switching resources in the connection modules. Does it not make economic sense to do a similar thing with IP PPP/SLIP coming into a line unit on B channels. An IP packet exchange processor could terminate the PPP/SLIP and forward IP packets to an IP router function on suitably dimensioned digital facilities. Would those who know please care to comment. Cheers, Dave PENKLER | E-Mail: Dave_Penkler@grenoble.hp.com Telecom Systems Business Unit| Hewlett-Packard France | Telephone: +33 7662 1446 5 av R. Chanas - Eybens | Fax: +33 7662 5323 38053 Grenoble Cedex 09 | GSM: +33 0715 0256 FRANCE | ------------------------------ From: oldbear@arctos.com (The Old Bear) Subject: Re: Spammer of the Day For Your Consideration Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:31:17 -0400 ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) writes: > The following is an UPDATE and is self-explanatory. >> From: Careerpro1@aol.com >> Message-ID: <960824185151_186930904@emout12.mail.aol.com> >> To: ray.normandeau@factory.com >> Subject: Re: Resume Xpress Now posting to 127+ databases >> My company, OnLine Solutions, Inc., has a service ResumeXPRESS! that >> distributes resumes for job candidates. We accept resumes from >> third parties (on a wholesale basis) who sell the service to their >> clients. >> A third party independent contractor (Marc Morris at CareerNet) hired >> a marketing firm and/or purchased an email list that was supposed to >> contain only names of recipients who had indicated an interest in >> receiving ads. Obviously that was erroneous. We still have not >> figured out why you and many, many others have received multiple >> emails. I have been assured that this has been stopped. >> I truly am sorry and will be diligent in monitoring such options in >> the future. >> Wayne Gonyea >> OnLine Solutions, Inc. I just wanted to put in a word for Mr. Gonyea. He is part of James Gonyea's organization which has been one of the pioneers of bona fide executive search and job counselling on the internet and the author of several books about using the internet as a tool for employment searches. James Gonyea was instrumental in bringing a number of major companies together into a not-for-profit cooperative ("OCC") which sponsored a Gopher server and later a web site via which they could post job opportunities and solicit resumes. At the time, this was one of the first uses of the internet as a conduit of information directly between 'buyer' and 'seller' without going through an intermediate broker like an executive seach firm or head-hunter. This continues as the "Online Career Center" at http://www.occ.com/occ/ The Online Career Center, the Internet's first career center, is a non-profit employer associationsponsored by leading corporations. Corporations sponsor this career center through a one time membership fee of $3,900 and $240 annually after the first year. Currently, there are 16,000 to 18,000 job postings and 14,000 to 16,000 resumes in the database. Over 250 member companies have their web pages linked and 500 colleges and universities. When non-member companies are added to the total, 3,000 companies post to this site. Six million people access this site in a month which averages to 96,000 per day. The Online Career Center has been in existence since 1992 and is based in Indianapolis. Gonyea's current venture is the Internet Career Center which is an outgrowth of his activities with America Online's Career Center, and is now accessible from the broader internet. I believe this enterprise differs from the OCC in that it is a for-profit operation. Here is some background from http://iccweb.com/ : Gonyea & Associates, Inc. is a Florida-based corporation, specializing in the delivery of career, employment, and business development guidance and information electronically (online) to clients worldwide. Gonyea & Associates is owned and managed by James C. Gonyea, a nationally recognized authorand expert with 25+ years of experience in career and employment guidance. In March of 1989, James Gonyea opened the first electronic online career and employment guidance agency. Known as the Career Center, this forum area remains today as the premiere career and employment agency open to the general public and accessible by anyone with a computer and modem. Gonyea & Associates' main mission is to continue to provide online career and employment guidance and information electronically to individuals nationwide and around the world. As a result, the Internet Career Connection was established to service clients worldwide. Gonyea & Associates is staffed by the following individuals: James C. Gonyea - President and CEO Pam Gonyea - Vice President Wayne M. Gonyea - General Manager, Help Wanted-USA Kevin Machos - Director of Operations Korie D. Gonyea - Administrative Assistant Don Wood - Data Processing Specialist If you wish to contact us, please feel free to do so by phone, fax, mail or email: Gonyea & Associates, Inc. 1151 Maravista Drive New Port Richey, Florida 34655 813-372-1333 - voice 813-372-0394 - fax Email: careerdoc@aol.com To the best of my knowlege, these folks are highly legitimate (unlike a lot of turkeys on the 'net) and have always tried to operate in an appropriate manner. This note is just to set the record straight. I have no interest in any of Gonyea's activities but have used them as an example of businesses which make appropriate use of the power of the internet. It is very doubtful that they would jeopardize their reputation with an intentional spam. Cheers, Will Roberts The Old Bear oldbear@arctos.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think it was those folks at fault. It was the fellow who told them he could do their emailing for them -- who then proceeded to send spam and junk mail -- who is to be blamed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin) Subject: Need Help With Digital Muxes Organization: Charlie Don't CERF Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:47:51 GMT My company is in the process of deciding whether to make the (painful?) transition to digital telephony. We recently upgraded our phone system to a Norstar Plus, which can handle T1s. The theory is that we get a T1 from our LD carrier (currently AT&T, though that's up for review), and then route all our LD calls through it. However, this brings up a problem: first, all our bids so far presume that we'll route *all* our LD calls through the T1. Since about a third of our lines are dedicated modems or faxes, and the LEC T1 can't terminate phone calls to a local number, we have to retain some kind of connection with GTE, our local provider. (There are also some dialup modems.) Now, it appears to me that one problem with a mixed POTS-local and T1-long-distance scheme is that our Nortel system has to generate busy for the fax/modem lines in cases where the fax is dialing out over the LD T1 but an incoming call is simultaneously arriving on the POTS. BUT, since the fax came in over a POTS circuit, the customer then has to pay for the privilege of hearing a busy! Therefore, the only sensible way to handle everything in one big box is to go fully digital with both our LD carrier and GTE. We'd also like to add a frame relay data link (possibly carrying voice) to our Dallas office. (We're in LA.) Obviously, we'd need to split out the data channels on the *before* they get to the T1. Any pointers the audience could provide on hardware needed to do this, as well as any gaping logic holes in the above, are welcome. TIA. Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #452 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Aug 30 11:58:08 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA03852; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:58:08 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199608301558.LAA03852@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #453 TELECOM Digest Fri, 30 Aug 96 11:58:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 453 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson BellSouth Commercials Will Feature 'Celebrity' Customers (Mike King) BellSouth Signs Interconnection Agreement With Winstar (Mike King) Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer (John Holland) Optus Launches Global Managed Data Services (Prabha Aithal) Re: What Does a Call Cost? (P. Morgan) Re: BellSouth Ending Flat-Rate ISDN (Stephen Satchell) Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? (Wes Leatherock) Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? (Ken Colburn) Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Telegraph and Cable In Europe? (John R. Levine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Commercials Will Feature 'Celebrity' Customers Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 00:35:03 PDT Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:48:54 -0400 (EDT) From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH COMMERCIALS WILL FEATURE 'CELEBRITY' CUSTOMERS For Information Contact: David Rogers BellSouth Telecommunications (404) 529 8053 Bogues, Cox, Fuentes, Judd, Torres, Winans... NEW BELLSOUTH COMMERCIALS WILL FEATURE 'CELEBRITY' CUSTOMERS ATLANTA (Aug. 26, 1996) BellSouth Telecommunications will launch its biggest ad campaign ever on Sept. 3 with a series of television commercials designed to solidify the company's position in a competitive communications marketplace that is giving consumers more and more choices. To help establish BellSouth as the customer's best choice for communications, the company for the first time is utilizing a diverse array of celebrities from its nine state region to appeal to its diverse customer base. In the TV spots, Muggsy Bogues, Courteney Cox, Daisy Fuentes, Naomi Judd, CeCe Winans and Nestor Torres deliver the message that every customer is treated like a star. "The key to this advertising campaign is that these stars are very recognizable and have very strong ties to the BellSouth region," said Judi North, president of Consumer Services for BellSouth Telecommunications. The Hispanic population continues to grow throughout the BellSouth region. As part of its commitment to this important customer segment, BellSouth has enlisted two celebrities with Hispanic roots. MTV Star Daisy Fuentes and musician Nestor Torres will make Spanish language commercials promoting BellSouth's Complete Choice plan and MemoryCall service. The commercials spots highlight the BellSouth services used by the celebrities and point out that the same services that make their lives easier are available to all BellSouth customers. The services featured in the commercials include BellSouth Caller ID, MemoryCall service, additional phone lines and the Complete Choice plan. BellSouth Complete Choice, which is available in most states, combines customers' local phone service with up to 18 optional features for one fixed rate and includes Caller ID, Call Waiting, Call Forwarding and Call Block, among others. "As competition increases, our customers will be bombarded with more and more messages concerning telecommunications products and services," North said. "Using celebrities can help us break through the clutter, helping reinforce the BellSouth brand and improving viewer recall." Cox, who is originally from Birmingham, Ala., is nationally known because of her role in the top rated TV show "Friends." Nashville resident Judd, a native of Ashland, Ky., earned her early reputation singing with daughter Wynonna. Bogues was a basketball star at Wake Forest University and now plays for the NBA Charlotte Hornets. Winans, who made her mark in Nashville as a popular singer of R&B and contemporary Christian music, recently teamed with Whitney Houston on the hit duet, "Count On Me," from the "Waiting To Exhale" soundtrack. Fuentes, who is based in Miami, is well known among youthful MTV watchers and is a worldwide model. Torres is a renowned jazz flutist who also resides in Miami. The commercials will run on a rotating schedule in BellSouth's nine state area. As the campaign moves forward, plans are to add new commercials featuring additional celebrities. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., headquartered in Atlanta, provides telecommunications services in the nine state BellSouth region, which encompasses Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. For more information on BellSouth, visit our site on the World Wide Web at http://www.bellsouth.com. ---------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Signs Interconnection Agreement With Winstar Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 00:36:31 PDT Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:29:12 -0400 (EDT) From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH SIGNS INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT WITH WINSTAR FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Chandler BellSouth Telecommunications (404) 529 6235 BELLSOUTH SIGNS INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT WITH WINSTAR Nine State Agreement Is The Nineteenth Signed To Date (Atlanta, GA) August 26, 1996 BellSouth (NYSE: BLS) announced today it reached its nineteenth local interconnection agreement by signing a regionwide pact with WinStar Communications, Inc. This agreement allows WinStar to provide local telecommunications services to business and residential customers in competition with BellSouth. WinStar currently has been certified to provide local service in three BellSouth states Georgia, Florida and Tennessee, and has filed with state commissions to offer local service in Louisiana and North Carolina. "We've continued to negotiate with our competitors, and continued to sign interconnection agreements that result from these negotiations as was intended by the national legislation," stated Roger Flynt, Group President of Regulatory and External Affairs for BellSouth. "We remain committed to promoting competition in the entire industry, including long distance, even though confusion and uncertainty on the future of fair and open competition exist due to the FCC's recent order on interconnection," noted Flynt. The agreement sets the terms on how BellSouth and WinStar will interconnect their networks. These terms include: non discriminatory rates, terms and conditions for local interconnection; interim number portability; and the resale of BellSouth's services and network capabilities. With this agreement, BellSouth has now signed agreements with regional and national competitors, including: Time Warner, Intermedia, Teleport Communications Group, Hart Communications, The Telephone Company of Central Florida, Southeast Telephone Company, American MetroComm, Payphone Consultants, Georgia Comm South, MediaOne (US West Subsidiary), National Tel, Business Telecom Inc. of Georgia, Intetech, and the Florida Cable Association. BellSouth is a $17.9 billion communications services company. It provides telecommunications, wireless communications, directory advertising and publishing and other information services to more than 25 million customers in 17 countries worldwide. Its telephone operations provide service over one of the most modern telecommunications networks in the world for approximately 21 million telephone lines in a nine state region that includes Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. ------------------------ Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: John Holland Organization: Ericsson Systems Expertise, Dublin, Ireland Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:08:25 GMT Subject: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer Hi Patrick, Some of your readers may be able to help me. I'm looking for a good simple (if possible!) description of connection oriented and connectionless data transfer. I believe in connectionless each packet contains all the information it needs to traverse the network, where as with connection oriented means that a 'logical' connection must be first set up, data transfered and then the connection torn down. Really I'm looking for some good examples I can latch on to. I can't quite grasp how a 'logical' connection is set up. How do the packets get routed? Thanks in advance! John Holland Technical Trainer/Developer Ericsson System Expertise Limited Adelphi Centre Dunlaoghire Co. Dublin PH:353-1-2072698 FX:353-1-2802014 ------------------------------ Date: 30 Aug 1996 16:36:26 +1000 From: Prabha Aithal Subject: Optus Launches Global Managed Data Services. Media release August 30, 1996 Optus Launches Global Managed Data Services Optus Communications has launched its Global Managed Data Services (GMDS), offering premium quality, reliable and highly cost effective international frame relay services to the corporate sector. The launch follows extensive trials of the service with 15 customers, including Fidelity Investments and James Hardie Industries Ltd. GMDS is highly cost competitive, and can bring corporate customers savings of up to 50% over leased line solutions. This brings international data communications within the reach of organisations who have previously found them unaffordable. A key feature of GMDS is its outstanding geographic coverage, with connections to 27 countries including most major European and Asia destinations, and the USA. Optus' GMDS Frame Relay is being provided via the Cable & Wireless Group's Global Digital Highway (GDH), an advanced managed platform using leading edge optical fibre circuits around the globe. Cable & Wireless is one of Optus' major shareholders. It has established expertise in telecommunications and a history of providing excellent, innovative services in the Asia Pacific region. Optus Director of the Corporate and Government Division, Mr John Filmer, said: "The launch of a GMDS Frame Relay service confirms Optus' standing as a global player for the corporate and government marketplace. "GMDS provides our customers with an extensive and robust network for high speed data transfer. It's amongst the best in the world. "Our parent provider, Cable & Wireless, rated highly in the Data Communications Magazine users' survey of international frame relay service providers. We are more than competitive on cost effective pricing and in the speed and accuracy of fault handling." A key feature of GMDS is its ability to offer end to end global service management. This provides fast and accurate fault handling; managed by 24 hour a day, 7 days a week multi-lingual service management centres in key sites around the globe. GMDS also allows flexible billing options, defined by the customer. The bill is provided in an easy to read format, covering all GMDS connections in the customer's network. Optus will also consult with customers to provide service design assistance, providing optimal network configuration, using a team of network specialists. Optus is currently offering special introductory pricing. Customers signing a two year contact in the next three months will automatically receive the discounts normally available on a three year contract. They will also receive free installation in Australia, and the first month's charges will be waived at the Australian end. GMDS Technical Specifications The robust GDH network is engineered to meet all committed information rate (CIR) needs, with CIRs of 16 Kbit/s to 768 Kbit/s available. (The CIR is a fixed level of bandwidth capacity set to meet a user's average needs). This makes the GMDS ideal for 'bursty' traffic - at peak times a customer can send data in excess of their CIR. The bandwidth will always be there to match customers' requirements for flexibility and scalability. With its suitability to bursty traffic, GMDS facilitates LAN interconn- ectivity, so applications include e-mail, remote database access, and file transfer. For more info: contact Public Affairs, Optus Communications, OCS29 URL: http://redback.optus.com.au/optusnews/releases ------------------------------ From: P Morgan Subject: Re: What Does a Call Cost? Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 21:56:36 +0100 In message dcstar@acslink.aone. net.au (David Clayton) writes: > This will also be a significant problem here in Australia, as we are > changing from state based Area Codes to much broader regional Area > Codes, (as an example, one Area Code will cover an area which is > approx. 2/3 the area of the mainland USA). As everyone is aware, the UK is small enough to fit several times into some states/provinces/territories, but we too have an interest in such problems, as we move on from last years code change to new proposals. (For those not aware, the geographic codes for Aberdeen etc etc were changed last year and the significant starting digit is now a "1" so Aberdeen went from 0224 to 01224. Regional codes, with a "2" are now under discoussion, and one suggestion would renumber London 0171/0181 to 020, but there's a lot more chaos before that comes about.) We now have "personal" numbers, also known as "numbers for life", with a "7" to identify it, and the plan is to move all information lines, to "8", which will include a wide range of charge bands, from free to the current maximum of US$2.25/minute. Future "mobile" phones will be allocated codes in the "4" section. > * Before the first ring, modem tones are transmitted down you phone > line with information regarding the call cost etc. which is displayed > on a device which may be similar to the CID boxes that are used in > North America. Quite a nice idea. Some time ago I suggested the UK regulator "Oftel" should set up a similar service, which uses the calling party's number (from CLI) and prompts them to enter the number they would dial, and would then report the cost per minute... The regulator would have details of tariff from the carriers, and accessing a different carrier is most commonly done via an access code, so "1620" gets Energis and "1601" get ACC etc etc so the regulator could report accurately even if one doesn't use the "popular" national carrier BT (British Telecom). > * You may then have to confirm that you want the call to proceed, or > if it going to cost you more than you are prepared to pay, you may > want to end it. At present, most of the free (800) codes are charged when a call is made from a mobile phone. Similarly if I dial a USA 1-800 number, I get a warning "the call you are making is not free -- you will be charged at international rates if you continue" (giving one the option to hang up). It is OK for the infrequent call, but you'd perhaps want a mechanism to tell your exchange (a) the max charge you want without prompting, also (b) to give you the information anyway, and finally, (c) to get the number no matter what the cost, as I'm in a very big hurry!! > to pass this information in the required format, (especially for older > equipment). But surely a voice reporting "the call you are making will be charged at xxx per minute" would mean there would be no need for fancy modem equipment at customer and exchange ends, "just" at the exchange. > The whole point of this would be to have the information of what a > call is going to cost available to the consumer before the call is > made, not after the event when the bill arrives. Another benefit would > be the opportunity to record this data for your own bill reconcilation. Make that an option -- there's not a massive take-up of caller display everywhere -- since it costs US$6/quarter here, plus the equipment. > P.S. If this turns out to be one of those original, practical, and > very profitable ideas, would whoever eventually develops it, (and Good luck with getting royalties from a Telco :-> Peter. http://www.ultranet.com/~pgm/radio.htm nagrom@pobox.co.uk Tel: +44 7050 136 126 <- follows me around! Northern Wales, UK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 22:59:50 -0700 From: satchell@accutek.com (Stephen Satchell) Subject: Re: BellSouth Ending Flat-Rate ISDN Organization: Satchell Evaluations In article , John W Warne wrote: > There is a move afoot in BellSouth to file in all States to eliminate > flat-rate ISDN service. > In my opinion, this move is designed to eliminate the use of ISDN for > "nailed up" data interconnection. Some of us users have moved to this > type service to substantially reduce the costs associated with dedicated > private lines. > The purpose of my message is *not* to start debating the issue of > long call time durations on the network, but is really intended as a > "heads-up" for others in the same circumstance. This change can have a > $40,000.00 impact on our budget. When you consider that BellSouth has been calling for ISPs to end flat-rate access to the Internet in favor of measured service, this makes a great deal of sense. During the ACTA petition flap, I had researched an article for The Net magazine and got an offical statement from BellSouth to this effect. Their rationale: modem calls lasting for hours (or days) fall outside of the assumptions made when developing switch plant and trunk plant. Their concern is that excessive modem usage can cause denial of service to other voice callers at worst, and increased costs and degraded service at best. Discussions with Lucent people pretty much debunk the switch problem, but the trunk utilization problem remains. I had a chance to talk to Nevada Bell about this, and they tell me that here in Northern Nevada they haven't seen any problems with trunks. They *have* seen problems with week-long ISDN calls which interfere with regular maintenance, although to be frank NV Bell demonstrates little concern about knocking those connections down when they have to. One concern is that Nevada Bell hasn't provided a residential ISDN rate yet -- ISDN here is $80/month. Interesting, though, that Bell Atlantic has a trial going in Virginia of a low-cost leased-line option that could also relieve the congestion in the switches. This is based on a failed video-on-demand system, and they are trying to recast the investment as an Internet access method. I'm trying to learn more about it. Stephen Satchell, Satchell Evaluations http://www.accutek.com/~satchell ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Subject: Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:41:41 GMT In connection with Pat's comments on this subject: > ... Anyone could have (but usually only the larger > commercial accounts had) a 'cable address'. A 'cable address' was > what would these days be referred to on your computer network as > an 'alias' for delivery purposes. Instead of the sender needing to > know your complete name and address for the purposes of delivery, > all he needed to know was your 'cable address'. > For example, the cable address 'Housereps' was for the House of > Representatives. Here in Chicago I recall that 'Symphony' was tbe > cable address for the Orchestral Association, the management side of > the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Cable addresses were almost invariably > cutesey little words and short phrases. A couple others I remember > seeing a lot were 'Largest Store' for Sears, Roebuck and 'Beacon Hill' > but I do not remember who that was. Pat, I sent and received a lot of telegrams in an earlier day, and I don't recall a "cable address" ever being used for a domestic message, and it would seem to be pointless. The name and address of the addressee are (or were) free on domestic messages ... not like on overseas messages ("cablegrams") where there is a charge for every word including every word in the name and address. Surely the cable address for Sears must have been LARGESTSTORE, not Largest Store, which would have been two words. A cablegram would be addressed, for example, LARGESTSTORE CHICAGO (USA). (No charge was made for the "USA".) I believe there was a charge (monthly, perhaps?) for a cable address. And it was valid only for the carrier you registered it with. Many overseas carriers had offices in major cities like Chicago, and a message sent from overseas via RCA Communications or one of the Mackay/Cable and Wireless companies (and many others) would have been handled directly with the Chicago addressee by the carrier's Chicago office. (To points not served by the overseas carrier, they would interchange with Western Union, deliver by telephone or TWX, or whatever. And, of course, even to points at which they had no office some of the overseas carriers had tielines to a teletypewriter in some major companies' message centers.) Also, in some cases, there might be different cable addresses registered for different departments. Remember, in overseas telegrams the address is chargeable, so "Attn: Purchasing Department" or "Attn: Machinery Sales" would have been additional words. But would have been free as part of the address on domestic telegrams. [ ... text deleted ... ] > Larger customers quite often had a teletype machine on their premises > which was used to send/receive messages through the local Western > Union office eliminating the need for a messenger, but these were > customers getting fifty or sixty or even a hundred telegrams daily and > quite often sending that many out as well or perhaps they had a 'telex > machine' hooked directly into the network bypassing the local > telegraph office completely. The teletypewriter (isn't Teletype still a registered trademark?) on the customers' premises were called "WUX," and that plus the company name was sufficient address. For example, Johnson Company WUX CGO (or was it CHGO? larger places had standard abbreviations to eliminate the need for sending the full city and state on every telegram) would have been sufficient for Johnson Company if they had such a tieline. (Some of the abbreviated addresses were not entirely obvious, but many of them were.) I don't believe there was any network to hook into, at least not when Western Union was a common way to communicate. Telegrams were sent from telegraph office to telegraph office. Telex service was different, where you connected directly with the distant Telex machine, like TWX service. (I assume you could also probably use your Telex to send a telegram to the Western Union office for transmission in the usual way. After all, you could only connect by Telex to customers who had Telexes [and of the same carrier].) Western Union did have company offices on the premises of large customers. When the place I was working was the Western Union agent in a town in Oklahoma, we were on a single line (from the Oklahoma City Western Union office) which was shared with the Western Union-operated office at a large oil company 40 miles away. (Yes, Western Union had a lot of agency offices in smaller towns, in addition to the railroad offices at almost every railroad station which had an agent/telegrapher, which was practically everywhere in those days.) Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu ------------------------------ From: ezwriter@netcom.com (kEN Colburn) Subject: Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:34:00 GMT Wow $40?!? Thrifty Drugs has fax machines; You could have faxed your parents and had them pick up the fax there for $2. Just a thought. My Mom's Net rules: No running on the Net with scissors! Don't read email from strangers. Let your sister get online for awhile, dammit! Shut up, I'm on the modem! ezwriter@netcom.com http://www.mainelink.net/~writer/poster/Poster.html ------------------------------ From: hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa/Jeff) Subject: Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? Date: 30 Aug 1996 01:12:50 GMT Organization: Philadelphia City Paper's City Net A nice book describing the history of Western Union is "The Story of Telecommunications" by George P. Oslin. (Mercer University Press, 1992.) Mr. Oslin served as public relations director for Western Union for 35 years. Until the 1960s, it was cheaper to send a message by telegram than by long distance telephone. But new technology allowed AT&T to continue to lower long distance rates. Labor costs eat away at Western Union. By the late 1970s the bulk of WU's business was wiring money. News articles in the last few years about WU said they wanted to provide financial services for low-income people, such as wiring money, money orders, and the like. How much they got into is unknown. Western Union isn't the official name of the company anymore. To protect the name's public perception, the parent company gave itself a new name. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Aug 96 18:36:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Telegraph and Cable In Europe? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > I understand that in many European countries, telex/cable/telegraph is > often-used for business and personal communications. ... > So, just how extensive is this type of communication "over there"? For many decades, Telex was the only usable form of electrical communication in much of the world. It often worked more reliably than phones, and you could use it easily even if you and your correspondent didn't speak the same language and were in different time zones. These days, I get the strong impression that telex world-wide will be as dead as it is here. The reason? Fax. It now does everything that telex did, and a lot more, and usually at lower cost. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #453 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sat Aug 31 01:29:01 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA11882; Sat, 31 Aug 1996 01:29:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 01:29:01 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199608310529.BAA11882@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #454 TELECOM Digest Sat, 31 Aug 96 01:29:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 454 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Canada, Caribbean, International (Mark J. Cuccia) anon.petit Closes (Tad Cook) TCI Adds Phone, Net, Security Services (Tad Cook) Rural Phone 40km From CO Question (Jean-Francois Mezei) BellSouth Changes Their Minds! (305/954) (Ron Schnell) Re: MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent (David K. Burris) Re: MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent (Stuart Zimmerman) Re: MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent (wschochet@aol.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 18:37:11 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Canada, Caribbean, International The traditional LEC and intra-region (monopoly) DDD toll carrier for the Dominican Republic is "Compania Dominicana de Telefonos", aka CODETEL. It has been associated with GTE for several decades. Their homepage is: http://www.codetel.net.do/ From what I've been told, when the various other NANP Caribbean locations were planning on new area codes, the Dominican Republic has been quite firm in wanting to keep 809 as their area code. Presently, Bellcore's NANPA webpages (http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/newarea.html) indicate new area codes for every other NANP Caribbean location, except for the Dominican Republic, the Turks and Caicos Islands, and the US Virgin Islands. I have been told that the Turks and Caicos Islands (located just southeast of the Bahamas) have area code 649 reserved for them, and the US Virgin Islands have area code 340 reserved for them. A few months ago, I mentioned that in 1993, at the annual 809/NANP Carriers' meeting, the non-US NANP Caribbean carriers 'voted out' Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virign Islands from 809. Bellcore 'reserved' area code 340 for both, and last year, Steve Grandi's new area code compilation list showed 340 for Puerto Rico. That has been changed, as 787 was announced for Puerto Rico last December, to go into effect in March of this year. Permissive dialing of both 809 and 787 for calls to Puerto Rico will continue until early in 1997. However, as is the case in most other areas leaving 809 into their own new NPA codes, any *new* Central Office (NXX) Codes for those locations will be assigned and routed/switched such that they are available *only* via the new area code. Use of 809 to reach new NXX codes, *even during permissive dialing* will result in either a vacant code recording or in reaching an existing location in 809 which has had the same NXX central office numericals for some years. Most of the various NANP Caribbean locations are leaving 809 into their own new area codes, due to geopolitical and cultural reasons, as well as more efficient routing and switching, and billing and rating, from within the NANP, as well as from outside of the NANP, based on six (or seven) digit translation of the (+1)-NPA-NXX code. Also, many Caribbean locations don't want to be associated with fraud, which seems to be prevalent on calls *both to and from* the Caribbean, particularly with, *but not exclusively associated with*, the Dominican Republic. Such fraud includes cellular cloaning, calling card and other toll fraud, and the more recent 'premium rate' (or as I call it, PAY-PAY-PAY per call) calls, including sex/porno lines, psychic lines, tarot card lines, astrology lines, etc. From what I understand about the billing from the (continental) US to the NANP Caribbean, calls to (and from) Puerto Rico (a US commonwealth) and the US Virgin Islands are billed on a tariffed distance basis, using the V&H co-ordinates. The rates are similar to, and discount periods and package plans usually apply to Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands as they would on any other domestic call within the US, including calls to Alaska and Hawaii. Calls from the (continental) US to the non-US NANP Caribbean are billed at 'fixed' international rates. The point of origination in the (continental) US isn't calculated in any distances for billing. Time-of- day discounts can and do apply, but they aren't the same as for 'domestic' rated calls, nor for calls from the US to Canada. The prices for calls from the (continental) US are usually those also associated with the non-NANP Caribbean (+53 Cuba, +509 Haiti, +297 Aruba, +599 Dutch Antilles, French Antilles, Guadeloupe, Martinique, etc.) or to the countries of Central America and parts of South America. There are usually no day-of-week discounts on most 'international' calls anymore, although AT&T (Bell System) usually gave international discounts on Sundays up until the 1970's. Calls from Canada to just about every location in the Caribbean, whether NANP or not, whether US (Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands) or not, are all billed as 'international', at Teleglobe's tariffed rates, authorized by the CRTC. Teleglobe is still the international monopoly for calls from Canada (except to the US), but that might be changing next year. I don't know how calls from Alaska or Hawaii are presently being billed for calls to Canada or the Caribbean (including Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands). Some years back, these calls were billed under a different rate schedule than for calls to Canada and the Caribbean, which was more like an 'international' schedule rather than a 'domestic' one. Back then, even calls from Alaska and Hawaii to the US-NANP Caribbean locations of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands were billed as 'international' rather than 'domestic'. Calls between Alaska and Hawaii were supposed to be 'domestic' interstate rates, as well as calls from those two states to the contiguous forty-eight states. Calls within Canada have their own rate schedules. There have been intra-province rates schedules, as well as inter-province, or inter-company rate schedules. Most of the major (Stentor) telcos in Canada cover most or all of an entire province. Calls between two different provinces usually involve more than one connecting telco. Sometimes, calls *within* the same province might involve two different toll-connecting telco. There might be different rates for such. Calls from Canada to the US are billed on a 'direct' basis between the telco and a US Long-Distance carrier (traditionally it was AT&T), based on V&H distances. Calls from Canada to Alaska or Hawaii might be treated differently, and could even seem like an 'international' call depending on from where within Canada the call originated. Again, this might be changing as there is more competition in Canada, including the loss of Teleglobe's 'exclusivety'. While GTE's Codetel is the 'traditional' telco for the Dominican Republic, there is at least one other company operating in the Dominican Republic that I've noticed in Bellcore TRA's NANP documents. This company is known as "Tricom". They probably have some 809-NXX codes 'assigned' to them. Offhand, I don't know if they are a cellular/paging/wireless provider, a 'voicemail' provider, or a soon-to-be competitive LEC. I don't know if their 809-NXX codes are the ones being used, quoted in these 'call back' messages in the recent 809 pay-per-call scams. Most long distance carriers do block calls to the 976 pay-per-call exchange. I don't know how the new 555-xxxx numbers will be handled, however. There is discussion on that in the various industry forums, as to network interconnection, routing/switching, and rating/billing. While the new numbers in 555 might be similar to 976, it might be difficult to block certain numbers in 555, as many of them are legit telco-provided numbers, particularly directory assistance. For the most part, calls to 976 are handled only by the LEC, as intra-NPA or intra-LATA type calls. If there are certain NXX prefixes in 809 (and the recently split off Caribbean area codes) which are higher-rated pay-per-call prefixes, I don't know how the traditional IXC's (AT&T, MCI, Sprint, etc) could be authorized to charge the added on premium charges on top of the per-minute tariffed international 'MTS' charges. By the way, pay-per-call scams in the Caribbean don't seem to be associated with just the Dominican Republic. There also seem to be pay-per-call scams to the non-NANP Caribbean French and Dutch Antilles country codes. Again, I don't know if the charges are the tariffed international per-minute rate, or something higher. If they are billed at an even higher rate, I don't know how the international tariffs filed with the FCC would allow such. The non-US NANP Caribbean has traditionally been handled by Cable and Wireless and ITT. Cable and Wirelsss (usually in association with a local company or the island government) serves the 'British' Caribbean locations of Bermuda, Bahamas, Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks and Caicos, Cayman Islands, and the 'British West Indies' (British Virgin Islands to Grenada, including Barbados). It serves as the local telco, the DDD toll telco within the island country (if large enough), and the 'interconnecting' or 'international' carrier between islands and connecting to other companies for calls to and from the rest of the world. Cable and Wireless has also been involved in local or interconnecting other 'British' parts of the world, such as Ascension Island, St. Helena, the Falkland Islands, (British) Guyana, Belize (formerly British Honduras), etc. Traditionally, subsidiaries of ITT (such as Globe-McKay or All-America Cable and Radio) at-one-time-or-another has been a part owner and/or the interconnecting 'international' carrier for the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, as well as the non-NANP points of the French and Dutch Caribbean, Cuba, (parts of) Mexico, non-British locations of Central and South America, and many other parts of the world. ITT also purchased some of Bell (AT&T's) international holdings in Latin America and Europe (both equipment and part interest in the networks), in the late 'teens' or early 1920's, when AT&T decided to concentrate on its domestic operations (including parts of Canada through Bell Canada and Northern Electric). Also, Cable and Wireless, ITT, subsidiaries of them, or joint ventures of them with local government, have also been heavily involved in Telex (and public telegram service) in the same areas of the world where they were also involved in telephone networks. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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: Tad Cook Subject: anon.petit Closes Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 19:45:34 PDT Popular Internet Server Closes After Child Pornography Claims By MATTI HUUHTANEN Associated Press Writer HELSINKI, Finland (AP) -- Stung by child pornography allegations, a Finnish computer operator on Friday shut down one of the world's most popular ways to send e-mail on the Internet anonymously. At least one group, a British organization that has used the Finnish "anonymity server" to prevent suicides among despondent people who don't want to give their names, said it regretted the decision. Johan Helsingius, a private computer consultant who has operated the electronic message relay service since 1993, vigorously denied the pornography allegations but said he had received calls from people accusing him of pedophilia. "This is a blow for Internet users and computer privacy, but I feel I've no choice," Helsingius said Friday. "It's a lie, and it's not even possible." Anonymous servers or "remailers" are used by people to discuss banned issues in politically unstable countries and other sensitive matters like suicide, family violence and also sexual deviations. About 7,500 messages passed daily through Helsingius' service, which acts as an electronic filter, stripping the return address from data and relaying it to a destination in seconds. On Sunday, The Observer newspaper in Britain quoted an FBI adviser as saying up to 90 percent of all child pornography he'd seen on the Internet had been supplied through Helsingius' remailer. Helsingius said his computer can handle only messages smaller than 16 kilobytes, a way of measuring data. To send a single image, including sexually explicit material, a computer needs many kilobytes -- usually more than 100. Helsingius said he would sue The Observer over the "unjustified accusations." The Samaritans, a British group who counsels people contemplating suicide, have about 100 computer contacts per week. About 40 percent want to remain anonymous. "He's really been doing a great service to people; he's done nothing but helped," said Emma Borton of the Samaritans. Finnish police who have followed Helsingius' activities say they found no evidence of child pornography. "We think it's a pity that he's had to close down the server because of something he hasn't done," said Detective Sgt. Kaj Malmberg of the Helsinki Police. However, police officers have raided Helsingius' office five times, mainly because of complaints he has broken copyright laws or relayed messages insulting foreign nations' officials. Last week, a court ordered Helsingius to identify an Internet user suspected of stealing files from a Church of Scientology computer and disseminating them on the Internet via the anonymous remailer. Helsingius said he would appeal. "It's a bit like the Wild West," he said. "There don't appear to be any fast rules about what you can do and can't do." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I understand Clive Feather also got a horrible smear in that same piece of trash reporting. I wonder what it is going to take for people on the net to finally understand this simple concept: ** Newspapers; i.e. the traditional print media, are NOT your friends. ** Shall I repeat that a few times? Newspapers are not your friends. For many years, newspapers have been in trouble financially. Readership is down, and circulation problems mount. You do not see a single large city afternoon paper anywhere in the USA any longer. Many cities only have one newspaper when years ago they had ten, like Chicago and New York. Then along comes the Internet and all the newsgroups -- as crummy as some of them or a large majority of them are -- and all the stuff the newspapers used to sell to you each day is now coming to you for free or at greatly reduced costs. Not only are the newspapers not your friends, for the most part the newspapers *hate* you. Your newsgroups, mailing lists, e-zines and similar have cut greatly into their territory. Oh, I know they run their own web pages and online sites and such ... they have to play the game; they cannot stay out of the loop entirely, but they are not one bit pleased with the idea of you -- just a peasant and commoner -- being able to speak as you wish unimpeded or publish what you want with the ease it is done these days. So, they are going to work hard at silencing the net using all the tricks they know. A good newspaper reporter -- like any good police officer -- will lie, distort what is said, create all sorts of innuendo, etc to discredit the persons or institutions they are after. A dash of pedophelia tossed into the pot full of lies and half-truths never hurts either, and is bound to further drive a wedge between the victim and many members of the public who were heretofore somewhat indfferent on the matter at hand. Helsingius says he is going to sue them? What could they care? He has some full-time job for forty hours a week, rent to pay, a few mouths to feed and a bunch of other bills like all the rest of us. The way the newspaper looks at it, he will run out of steam soon enough, and they'll be home free, like they always are after they discharge some of their poison into society. And if Clive Feather has any ideas about attempting to vindicate himself, he can forget it also. Talking to a newspaper reporter is like talking to a police officer: they'll sound sympathetic and friendly, then they will twist and distort -- if not just completely lie -- about whatever you told them. The best way to deal with any newspaper reporter is by NOT dealing with them; refuse to have anything to do with them. Let them write down in the paper whatever it is their employer wants to have there; it saves everyone a lot of time and grief. Some of the writers at the {Chicago Tribune} are just plain rotten to the core and ignorant as they can be when it comes to computer news and the Internet. And the {Tribune} is not the only paper with reporters like that. And remember for the third, and hopefully last time: newspaper publishers are NOT your friends. They regard the net in a hostile way; they do not like the general public communicating so freely. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: TCI Adds Phone, Net, Security Services Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 20:10:22 PDT TCI to Add Computing, Telephone, Security Services in Tulsa, Okla. By Melanie Busch, Tulsa World, Okla. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Aug. 29--"Pick a deal." Any deal. That's how TCI Cablevision of Tulsa general manager Rick Comfort describes the many services, including Internet access, the cable company will be able to provide customers in the future once it completes the five-year replacement of its network. The company is currently upgrading its cable system throughout the Tulsa area, enabling it to offer high-speed computer-modem service, telephone service and home security along with traditional cable television. The system -- costing about $50 million -- should be completed next year or early in 1998, Comfort said. Called a "hybrid fiber-coaxial" system, the network combines traditional coaxial copper lines with fiber-optic lines, which are strands of glass that have a much greater capacity to carry information. One day, TCI will be able to offer customers Internet access faster than that available using computer modems. Internet users will be able to access pages of the World Wide Web -- the portion of the Internet that combines text with graphics and pictures -- in seconds instead of minutes. They will be able to view video, graphics and music. Signals sent along the new network are supposed to have sharper images and truer colors. Fiber-optic lines also are more reliable than coaxial cables because they are less likely to be affected by weather, Comfort said. The local system also is being upgraded to allow for two-way communication. It will be at least two to four years before Tulsans will be able to access cyberspace through cable, however, he said. "These things are not out there now," Comfort said. "They're just good ideas." Cable modems, which some companies will make available at the end of the year, allow computer users to get access to the Internet -- a global system of computer networks -- over their cable television lines, which are faster than telephone lines. In May, Zenith Electronics Corp.'s shares jumped to their highest level since the 1980s when it unveiled a cable modem developed with U.S. Robotics Corp. Motorola Inc. and Cisco Systems Inc. also are developing a cable modem. In addition to cable modems, several companies also are speeding up their plans to make Internet-ready televisions. Many analysts predict the Internet-ready television market will be one of the hottest of next year. Cable companies are jumping in line with telephone companies, who are rolling out a competing, albeit slower, technology called integrated services digital network, or ISDN. TCI, which is based in Englewood, Colo., and the nation's other large cable companies such as Comcast Corp. and Cablevision Systems Corp. have been preparing to offer access to the Internet and other online services. When they do go online, advocates say, they will be able to get people on the information superhighway at speeds hundreds of times faster than regular phone lines. Plans by cable companies to venture further into the telecommunications arena have struck fear in the hearts of telephone companies, which will have to invest billions to upgrade their lines if they want to reach the carrying capacity of cable. Oklahoma's largest phone provider, Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., plans to offer Internet access by the end of this year, said Steve Dimmitt, executive director for entertainment and information services marketing. "By offering Internet access, Southwestern Bell is getting closer to its goal of serving as one point of contact for all customers' communications needs," he said in a written statement. Southwestern Bell spokeswoman Michelle Leith said customers will be able to receive their phone bill and Internet in a "competitively priced package." "Southwestern Bell will be an aggressive competitor in the Internet-access market," she said. "The Internet-access market is a growing market, but our strong brand name will give us an advantage." Earlier this year, TCI said it formed a business unit devoted to developing products for the Internet. It has joined Comcast, Cox Communications Inc. and San Francisco venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers to form a company called At Home. The three cable companies have access to 40 percent of the people in the country. The group will begin testing Internet service in the San Francisco area in about two months, a spokeswoman said. The service will cost between $20 and $40 monthly. Officials at Tulsa Internet provider WebTek believe cable will make it much easier for more households to come online and will contribute to the "information explosion." "It's something that's been coming for a while," said WebTek president Brent Johnson. "It's something that needs to be there. It will help with the effective use of the Internet." The faster access to the Internet will keep more people surfing the World Wide Web, Johnson said. Many people get frustrated as they wait for access to the network. "Up until now, it's been limited by speed of modem and telephone lines," he said. "With the new technology ... it will be very, very fast." With cable lines already running into the homes of many people, some believe local Internet service providers will be driven out of business. Johnson doesn't believe so. "People are getting on the Internet so fast now. I don't think anyone is going to see a decrease in their numbers. I don't think it will adversely affect anybody," he said. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The above is just another example of the *dumb* stories newspapers run about the Internet. I am sure the reporter thinks she wrote a great article and is quite pleased with herself. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jean-Francois Mezei Subject: Rural Phone 40km From CO Question Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 21:29:04 +0000 Organization: Vaxination Informatique Reply-To: jfmezei@videotron.ca At the cottage, in the Laurentians, north of Montreal, the telephone we have (a party line!) is located some 40km from the Central Office in Arundel. The wires pretty well follow the road all the way and there are three very small villages between the CO and our cottage. I would be interested in knowing what sort of equipment would lie between the CO and the telephone, what it woudl look like and where it would be located. FWIW, it is a rotary telephone and the dial tone is more of a humm than a city dial tone. As well, if there is equipment between the CO and the telephone, does this mean that the cables that run on the telephone poles also carry power for that equipment? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Aug 96 07:16:57 EDT From: Ron Schnell Subject: BellSouth Changes Their Minds! (305/954) Well, I don't know if it had anything to do with my and others yelling and screaming, but apparently, with no announcement, one can now dial a 1+ for for digit calls, whether it is toll or not, to dial from 305 to 954 and visa versa. I find myself commending BellSouth for their swift action once again. For those of you who missed the original thread with the subject "End of permissive dialing in 954", BellSouth's implementation was really dumb, in that if the call was not a toll call, dialing a 1+ was disallowed, breaking winfax, and who knows what other software and probably even PBXs. Now, if it is a toll call, you must dial one. If it is a free call, you can dial one. Ron ------------------------------ From: David K Burris Subject: Re: MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent Date: 30 Aug 1996 15:26:07 GMT Organization: Netcom In article telecom16.443.6@massis.lcs.mit.edu, ritz@onyx.interactive. net (Chris Mauritz) said: > Is there anything we can do to prevent MCI et al from covertly > switching over our long distance carrier without our permission? > MCI has switched me from AT&T to their service twice in the last six > months without my permission. It's becoming a major nuisance. Christopher, depending on who your local carrier is, Bell South offers a "pick freeze" to prevent LDC's from switching you without your consent. Changing your LDC requires confirmation from you. Contact your local carrier customer service to check on this type of service. I believe this is known as "slamming", LDC's covertly changing your LDC without your knowledge. David K. Burris dburris4@ix.netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also please remember that the rules were changed and the local telco is no longer permitted to disconnect your service for failure to pay any portion of the other than their own part. That includes long distance charges from the (some would think) untouchable big three. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 11:54:16 -0700 From: Stuart Zimmerman Reply-To: f_save@SNET.Net Organization: Fone Saver Subject: RE: MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent In TELECOM Digest Vol. 16, Iss. 443, Chris Mauritz asked: > Is there anything we can do to prevent MCI et al from covertly > switching over our long distance carrier without our permission? Easy. Call your LEC (Local Exchange Carrier) and request that they block any changes to your LD without your direct approval. This is often called a PIC freeze. Most LECs do not charge for this. A complaint to the FCC may also be in order. (See their Web site at: http://www.fcc.gov) -- Fone Saver, LLC Phone: 1-800-31-FONE-1 Web: http://www.wp.com/Fone_Saver E-Mail: f_save@snet.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The FCC has become next to useless. I understand they no longer offer any help at all with informal complaints, so overwhelmed is their staff with complaints from the general public regards telco misconduct. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wschochet@aol.com (WSchochet) Subject: Re: MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent Date: 30 Aug 1996 13:11:04 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: wschochet@aol.com (WSchochet) You need to send a letter to your local phone company telling them that any changes in long distance service can come only from you and only in writing. This will solve your problem. ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #454 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Sep 3 09:36:19 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA00971; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 09:36:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 09:36:19 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609031336.JAA00971@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #455 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Sep 96 09:36:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 455 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Helsingius Shuts Down anon.penet.fi Server in Finland (Monty Solomon) Phone Firms Unhappy With Business Links (Sean E. Williams) Another Assault on Privacy (Babu Mengelepouti) Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 Pic (Rolf K. Taylor) GTE Offers Internet Connection in Fort Wayne (Tad Cook) Will Indian Telecom Privatisation be Scrapped? (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Help Me Replace My Watson Card With Something More Modern? (George Swan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 04:16:55 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Helsingius Shuts Down anon.penet.fi Server in Finland Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A similar report on this was published in the Digest over the holiday weekend, but Monty's report adds some new information. The complete report on 'pedophiles on the net' as it appeared in the {London Observer} is online in case you did not see the article when it appeared in the newspaper. Set your browser to: http://www.scallyway.com to read the false report the paper printed. PAT] Begin forwarded message: Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:33:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Agre Subject: Helsingius shuts down anon.penet.fi server in Finland =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help@weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:17:02 -0500 From: declan@well.com (Declan McCullagh) Subject: FC: Helsingius shuts down anon.penet.fi server in Finland This is a sad day in the history of the Net. Hundreds of thousands of people had accounts on Julf's pseudonmyous server and many netizens relied on it daily to preserve their privacy online. (Unlike cypherpunk remailers, it's not truly anonymous since Julf keeps records of what anon id maps to what email address.) From Azeem's report and the press release below, Julf's move seems to be in response to a Finnish court's preliminary decision that the privacy remailers could be violated by court order -- something the Scientologists have been pushing. Still, I'd be surprised if Julf's decision wasn't prompted in part by the hideous London Observer article that falsely accused him of being a middleman in the distribution of child porn -- check out a scan of the Sunday cover at: http://scallywag.com/ -Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:11:51 +0100 From: Azeem Azhar Subject: [ALERT] Penet is dead Hello all, I just got off the phone with Johann Helsingius who runs the anon.penet.fi anonymous e-mail service. 1. He has decided to close the service. 2. This is not related to the article in The Observer. It is, in fact, due to a decision of a lower Finnish court on petition from the Church of Scientology. Penet went to court last week and made the decision today. The implication of the decision is that e-mail over the Internet is not protect by the usual Finnish privacy laws. 3. The server is currently down while Julf re-writes the software. Once it runs again, it will be phased out for private use, but groups such as the Samaritans and human rights agencies should be able to use it. 4. They are appealing against the decision. 5. Julf expects that revisions in Finnish law to provide a safe legal status for anonymous remailers will be in place at the earliest in Spring next year. 6. Once again: this is unrelated to The Observer's scandalous reporting. Your faithful furry friend, Azeem ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:15:41 +0100 From: Azeem Azhar Subject: [ALERT} Penet is dead (correction) Sorry . . . a slight error: > 2. This is not related to the article in The Observer. It is, in fact, > due to a decision of a lower Finnish court on petition from the Church > of Scientology. Penet went to court last week and made the decision > today. The implication of the decision is that e-mail over the Internet > is not protect by the usual Finnish privacy laws. The implication of the court's decision (rather than Penet's to shut the server) is that e-mail over the Internet is not protected by the usual =46innish privacy laws. Sorry! [Julf's press release. -Declan] PRESS RELEASE 30.8.1996 Johan Helsingius closes his Internet remailer Johan Helsingius from Helsinki has decided to close his Internet remailer. The so-called anonymous remailer is the most popular remailer in the world, with over half a million users. "I will close down the remailer for the time being because the legal issues governing the whole Internet in Finland are yet undefined. The legal protection of the users needs to be clarified. At the moment the privacy of Internet messages is judicially unclear." The idea of an anonymous remailer is to protect the confidentiality of it's users' identity. The remailer itself does not store messages but serves as a channel for message transmission. The remailer forwards messages without the identity of the original sender. Finland is one of the leading countries in Internet usage. Therefore all decisions and changes made in Finland arouse wide international interest. "I have developed and maintained the remailer in my free time for over three years now. It has taken up a lot of time and energy. Internet has changed a lot in these three years -- now there are dozens of remailers in the world, which offer similar services." "I have also personally been a target because of the remailer for three years. Unjustified accusations affect both my job and my private life" says Johan Helsingius. He surmises that the closing of the remailer will raise a lot of discussion among the Internet community. "These remailers have made it possible for people to discuss very sensitive matters, such as domestic violence, school bullying or human rights issues anonymously and confidentially on the Internet. To them the closing of the remailer is a serious problem", says Helsingius. Child porn claims proven false Last Sunday's issue of the English newspaper Observer claimed that the remailer has been used for transmitting child pornography pictures. The claims have been investigated by the Finnish police. Observer's claims have been found groundless. Police sergeant Kaj Malmberg from the Helsinki Police Crime Squad is specialized in investigating computer crimes. He confirms that already a year ago Johan Helsingius restricted the operations of his remailer so that it cannot transmit pictures. "The true amount of child pornography in Internet is difficult to assess, but one thing is clear: We have not found any cases where child porn pictures were transmitted from Finland", Kaj Malmberg says. Ground rules need to be clarified There are several large network projects going on in Finland at the moment, such as the TIVEKE project run by the Ministry of Communications and the Information Society Forum project run by the Ministry of Finance. Johan Helsingius is participating the work of these projects. Projects assess the political and social issues of networks and the impact of these issues in the long run. These projects also need the support of daily, practical work to help short-term decision-making. Johan Helsingius is now taking an initiative in the development of the daily network rules. He wants to set up a task force to discuss the practical problems related to ethical and civil rights issues in connection with the Internet. "I will try to set up a task force which will include Internet experts together with representatives of civic organizations and authorities. The task force could take a stand on issues such as the network's practical operation methods and the misuse of the network. I hope that the results of this task force will support the development of the network", he says. For further information, please contact Johan Helsingius Oy Penetic Ab tel. +358 0400 2605 e-mail: julf@penet.fi ------------------------ fight-censorship is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fight-censorship/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 19:00:01 EDT From: Sean E. Williams Subject: Phone Firms Unhappy With Business Links PHONE FIRMS UNHAPPY WITH BUSINESS LINKS by Steve Orr from the Rochester {Democrat and Chronicle} Sunday, September 1, 1996 Most of us, especially at home, use a standard telephone line to link our computers to cyberspace. Data goes out over the phone line and is gathered up at the far end by an online service provider, who boosts it onto the Internet for us. We pay the residential flat fee for that phone line at home, and the online service providers pay a standard business fee for their lines. And there, they get a break. Business customers pay the phone company a flat monthly fee plus a per-minute usage charge for _outgoing_ telephone calls. But online providers don't make outgoing calls on their data lines. Everything's incoming -- and thus not billed. Everybody's happy -- except for Frontier Corp. and its Rochester Telephone subsidiary, and other local telephone companies. Internet and other data transmission are a fast-growing part of their business. In some cases, they say, the growth is coming too fast. "Modems and the growing use of the information superhighway really put a great strain on our infrastructure," said Jon Pomeroy, Internet marketing manager at Frontier. He said the average data call here is 35 minutes versus 6 minutes for the average voice call. (Pomeroy wasn't sure if Rochester Tel had studied how many data and voice calls the average user makes daily; I'd guess voice calls are much more common.) Some would argue that the Internet service providers and other online companies don't pay their fair share -- and deprive Frontier of the money it needs to pay for infrastructure improvements needed to handle all the data traffic. Many local telcos -- Rochester Tel among them -- would like to be able to charge online companies a special access fee, similar to the fee paid by long-distance companies. Such fees are now barred by the Federal Communications Commission; several larger telcos plan to ask for that ban to be lifted. Pomeroy said Frontier is following the regulatory moves carefully. If the FCC acts, state regulators still would have to give their okay before an access fee could be charged. Local Internet service providers hope that never happens. "If they did that I'd have a major problem with it," said John Warren of NetAccess, a Brighton service provider. The fear is the access fees could drive some Net companies out of business, and raise rates high enough that folks would be discouraged from going online. Stay tuned. The FCC will take up the matter in the coming months. Contact Steve Orr with your comments, ideas or suggestions [...] sorr@rochesterdandc.com ----------------------- Mr. Orr didn't mention this in the article, but it should be noted that Frontier Corporation currently provides its own PPP and ISDN Internet access in the Rochester area. It does this through its LEC unit, Frontier Communications of Rochester. Frontier Communications' "Frontier Internet Service" is also marketed by Frontier Corporation's other LEC, Rochester Telephone, as "Rochester Telephone Internet Access." If there are any questions regarding the corporate structure of Frontier Corporation and how it relates to Rochester Telephone and Frontier Communications of Rochester, you may wish to refer to Frontier Corporation's WWW page at http://www.frontiercorp.com/ ------------- mailto:sew7490@rit.edu http://www.rit.edu/~sew7490 Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA Mobile/Voicemail/Pager: +1 716 748-2960 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The reason he did not mention it in the article is because the phone company is a major advertiser in his newspaper. Newspapers don't publish things that their advertisers do not want to see in print. Now I cannot really blame them on that point; after all, I would not print negative things about Microsoft here when they were involved with this Digest. But let's be honest about it, okay? You think the newspaper is going to tell its readers that telco has its own plans regarding Internet service and that telco might have an agenda of its own to drive the ISP's out of business? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Sep 1996 11:26:07 PDT From: Babu Mengelepouti Subject: Another Assault on Privacy July 10, 1996 ACLU CYBER-LIBERTIES UPDATE An e-zine on cyber-liberties cases and controversies at the state and federal level. [. . .] * Five More States Assault Net Speech; ACLU Plans Challenges to Three [. . .] Georgia H.B. 1630, enacted May, 1996: A new law in the Peach state may criminalize the common use of pseudonyms on the Net, and may also prohibit unauthorized links to web sites with trade names or logos. The law makes it a crime to transmit any data that "uses any individual name ... to falsely identify the person." The use of vanity e-mail addresses or pseudonyms on computer networks is common practice, and safeguards user privacy in sending and obtaining information online. The law is certain to inhibit people from obtaining sensitive information online. For example, an abused woman may be afraid to seek out online information or help if she is forced to reveal her true identity. The law also makes it a crime to "use[] any ... trade name, registered trademark, [or] logo" that would "falsely state or imply that [the user] has permission or is legally authorized to use [it]." Since the statute contains no standard for determining when a user has "falsely implied" permission, it could prohibit web links to sites with trade names or logos. The ACLU of Georgia has joined with the Atlanta law firm of Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore in seeking an opinion from Georgia Attorney General Michael Bowers restricting the application of the law. If a favorable opinion is not forthcoming, they plan to file suit. ------------------------------ From: ac219@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rolf K. Taylor) Subject: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC Date: 3 Sep 1996 00:05:13 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Reply-To: ac219@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rolf K. Taylor) Many may know that one can force a call through a particular long distance carrier by dialing 10xxx+1+the area code and number. This works for ISDN as well, and it really comes in handy when you long distance company cannot handle a data call to a particular location, or your local telco forgot to set you up with a long distance carrier. (BTW only the big three can handle long distance data "switched data" call in the first place, and even ATT cannot connect everyone to anyone). In many locations this can also be used to force a "local long distance" ie intralata toll call, through a LD carrier rather than your RBOC. In any case, enough background. ATT will charge a surcharge for this type of connection, but suffice it to say, at least it can get you connected. I recently had a Bell Atlantic customer find out that the 10288 "10ATT" code no longer works for him. B.A. says that ATT has terminated their shared database arrangement with them and it is tough luck. This customer is a broadcaster who is sending digital audio down ISDN. He orders many ISDN lines every year. It is difficult enough to get the lines put in. Now he finds he has lost the ability to use this valuable troubleshooting code. ATT says to use 1800callatt. But how can he use it with a data call? No way. Thoughts/comments would be appreciated. Please send copies of any replies to: Rolf@Zephyr.com Thanks in advance, Rolf K. Taylor TEBR Electronics East Cleveland, OH 44118-1103 ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: GTE Offers Internet Connection in Fort Wayne Date: Mon, 2 Sep 1996 01:10:53 PDT GTE Offers Internet Connection in Fort Wayne, Ind., Market By Lynne McKenna Frazier, The News-Sentinel, Fort Wayne, Ind. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News FORT WAYNE, Ind.--Sep. 2--GTE has begun selling its Internet connection in the Fort Wayne market. The local telephone company's service, GTE Internet Solutions, is being built in partnership with UUNET Technologies Inc. UUNET is the largest commercial service provider, which resells its network to Internet providers. By using the UUNET network already in place, GTE also expects to begin operations with a reliable, high-quality network, according to William Kula, spokesman for GTE in Irving, Texas. The company is stressing its role as a single-source communications provider. GTE entered the long-distance market in May in Indiana and is the nation's largest local telephone service provider. AT&T plans to compete in GTE's core local telephone markets, including Fort Wayne. Last week, GTE said it would try to block such challenges, arguing the rules for local telephone competition are unfair. GTE Internet Solutions access will be offered through dial-up models up to 28.8 kbps, dedicated lines operating at 56 kbps through 45 mbps or Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) lines up to kbps. Monthly charges are $19.95 for unlimited monthly access or $8.95 for five hours of access and $1.95 for each additional hour. For information on GTE Internet Solutions, visit company's home page at http://www.gte.net or call GTE at 1-800-363-8483. ------------------------------ Subject: Will Indian Telecom Privatisation be Scrapped? Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 18:18:22 PDT From: rishab@dxm.org (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Reply-To: rishab@dxm.org The Indian Techonomist: bulletin, August 31, 1996 Copyright (C) 1996 Rishab Aiyer Ghosh. All rights reserved Will Indian telecom privatisation be scrapped? August 31, 1996: Well before the events of the past fortnight, when the former Communications Minister responsible for India's privatisation programme for telecom services was charged with corruption on a grand scale, doubts had arisen over the privatisation process itself. It is, today, exactly one year after the opening of bids for basic telephony services - a term which includes wireline, fixed wireless, and potentially multimedia services - across the country. In the months since, the unusual clarity and transparency of a tender worth some $30 billion over the next 15 years in licence fees has been hidden behind a curtain of fog that started its descent immediately after the opening. Privatisation of cellular and pager services have proceeded to operate fairly smoothly, not a single licence for basic services has been issued. Pessimism is growing in the telecom industry - which has recovered, perhaps too hastily, from its elatively wild optimism at the time of the first tender - and people are beginning to mutter that the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) will scrap the basic service licences altogether. That would be unwise, as the alternatives are not appealing - for the DoT, at any rate: the current process was never thought optimal for either telecom providers or their customers. After the retirement of R K Takkar, the top DoT bureaucrat during the tendering process, and the general elections the government has taken a vary lackadaisical attitude to the privatisation process, in particular the disagreements between private operators and the DoT regarding the terms for connectivity between their networks. Although the DoT has extended the deadline for operators agtreeing to its terms to September 12, nobody is likely to sign on the dotted line. What the DoT would do next is unclear - yet it does not have many options. The government's choice It could agree to operators' demands, or come to some sort of compromise. Many of its stipulations, such as one calling for private operators to pay for upgradations to its network - which will compete with one private licensee in each of 20 geographical circles - stem from its lack of finances to pay for rapid investment in infrastructure. None of the licence revenue will reach the DoT itself - everything goes straight into the treasury - and though India's DoT has one of the world's most profitable nationwide networks (providing the exchequer with a handsome surplus every year) its financial management is poor, as the latest report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General's office (the government's accountant) shows. Yet it cannot expect an understanding response from private providers if it continues to ignore blithely their own concerns - such as the need for immediate constitution of an independent telecom regulator, for which an Presidential ordinance has lapsed and legislation remains pending. This compromise and getting on, for the DoT, would be the most attractive way out. It is the only practical way of laying a hand on the money from licence fees, although this will become more of a concern to the Finance Ministry as the DoT will never actually get to use it. The next option, of having yet more bids, perhaps by scrapping all those past - tainted politically by association with Mr Sukh Ram, the allegedly corrupt former Minister - is easily dismissed. The last round of bidding to take place received only one participant, and even if the DoT were to remove most of its demands - such as illogical reserve prices - a much better response it unlikely in any further tender. Potential bidders are simply exhausted. An option occasionally favoured by the leading right- wing opposition party, the BJP, has been to return to the first, apparently corruption-free round of bids, scrapping all the controversial decisions (of Mr Sukh Ram) that led to two more, one to go (there are still 10 circles without any potential takers after numerous first-round bids were unnecessarily rejected). This is not going to cause much cheer in the industry; although some - BPL-US West and Birla-AT&T - will benefit from lucrative licences that were lost in the following confusion, others such as Tata-Bell Canada, RPG-NTT and Reliance-NYNEX will not enjoy losing their licences won in the second round of bidding. Besides, most of the first round bids are now widely thought to be too high, unless the DoT behaves itself on the matter of operational and interconnect agreements, of which there is no guarantee. The choice of much of the rest of Asia, of handing out build-operate-transfer or similar arrangements to private companies based on subjective criteria will never pass India's Parliament and courts; and in terms of fairness and transparency, there is not much to say for such methods, however rapidly they may lead to actual project implementation. As a senior banking- industry source puts it, India had the "most structured privatisation process" in the Asia-Pacific region - until Mr Sukh Ram decided on a more active role for himself, that is. And more objective methods of selecting DoT franchisees are likely to face the same inertia as as tenders for independent, competing licensees. There is one penultimate, very cynical option for the DoT - to do nothing. This would be an admission of the government's greed for licence revenues having absolutely overridden the country's need for investment, and would suit all those in the DoT who benefit, as did, allegedly, Mr Sukh Ram, from a monopsony's power to extort bribes from equipment suppliers. Thankfully, even the Communist parties, which jumped at the opportunity provided by the discovery of $1 million in cash in the former Minister's home to call for the total dismantling of the privatisation process have quietened down somewhat. The case for free competition Perhaps the only way out, then - and in all likelihood the only the mainly poorer circles left with no licensees so far - will be to issue multiple non- exclusive licences to all comers, without any competitive bidding to restrict licensees to one per region. It should be noted that this was never ruled out - the expensive cellular, pager and basic licences are all non-exclusive and the DoT retains the option to hand out more before the end of the licence term. A free-for-all approach (supervised by the independent regulator) will have its own problems, such as how to address the need to upgrade rural infrastructure. Ways can be found around this, partly by the DoT making more of an effort to demonstrate the potential of a 400- million plus market, currently with no access to - leave alone possession of - a phone. There could be rules governing technical standards and rural connectivity obligations - once again, administered by an independent regulator rather than the DoT itself, as the case is at present - while keeping revenue sharing very flexible, perhaps just limited to payment for accessing the DoT network. This relatively free competition will need a major shift in the DoT's mindset, in particular a return to the recognition that the need of 900 million Indians for better communications surpasses that of the government for licensing revenue. It is, a pessimist would say, extremely unlikely to happen, as the DoT will do anything - even agree to a reasonable interconnect agreement! - to forestall free competition. But if the government were to take this solution seriously, it would be a remarkable feat even in the global context. It could even bring last year's optimism back. For more information, follow the links from the hypertext version of this document at: http://dxm.org/techonomist/news/31aug96.html The Indian Techonomist: weekly summary. http://dxm.org/techonomist/news/ Copyright (C) 1996 Rishab Aiyer Ghosh (rishab@techonomist.dxm.org) A4/204 Ekta Vihar 9 Indraprastha Extension New Delhi 110092 INDIA May be distributed electronically provided that this notice is attached ------------------------------ From: gswan@io.org (George Swan) Subject: Help Me Replace my Watson Card With Something More Modern? Date: 2 Sep 1996 00:25:37 -0400 Organization: Internex Online (shell.io.org), Toronto, Ontario, Canada I bought a Watson card eight years ago. It is a digital answering machine. It stores your messages on your hard drive. It was programmable. It contained a Texas Instruments DSP, and when you weren't running the answering machine program, you could run a modem program, which downloaded a program into the DSP's memory, making it act like a modem. I thought it was kind of cool, and I got my money's worth out of it. Now I'd like to replace my Wang 14.4 modem with: * something faster; * capable of understanding caller-id; * able to dial out even when my call answer service alters my dial tone; * like the Watson, I'd like it to be capable of storing voice message, but I'd like it to use the caller-id information to organize the voice messages; * like the Watson, I'd like it to be able to interpret touch tones; * like the Watson, I'd like it to be able to dial out at specific times, and play voice message to the receipient, under software control. Your help will be appreciated. You might wonder, why don't I put my Watson back into commission? No caller-id, and the modem only runs at 1200 baud. ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #455 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Sep 3 10:32:04 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA06501; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 10:32:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 10:32:04 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609031432.KAA06501@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #456 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Sep 96 10:32:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 456 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Jersey May Conserve Telephone Numbers (Tad Cook) MCI Advertising as ISDN ISP, But Doesn't Have it Yet (Justin Hamilton) Pacific Bell At Hand(sm) Premieres A Must-See Website Guide (Mike King) 414 NPA Residents Prefer Split to Overlay (Tad Cook) PC Boards That Support SS7 Signalling From E1/T1 Link (Barry Gold) Directly Accessing UART Registers Under Windows? (Eric Nelson) North America Dialing (Feico Nater) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tad Cook Subject: New Jersey May Conserve Telephone Numbers Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 16:33:33 PDT New Jersey May Conserve Telephone Numbers Pending Area Code Decision By Raymond Fazzi, Asbury Park Press, N.J. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News NEWARK, N.J.--Aug. 29--Faced with choosing between two area code expansion plans that would inconvenience millions of telephone customers, the state Board of Public Utilities is considering a third option: buying time by conserving telephone numbers. BPU President Herbert Tate said last week that such a plan is feasible because, even though the state is running out of telephone numbers, about one million numbers have been stored away by companies planning to compete with Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, the state's local telephone monopoly. Devising a system in which numbers are doled out on an as-needed basis could delay the need for new area codes, he said. Under the current number distribution system, Bell Atlantic-New Jersey is required to allocate telephone numbers to potential competitors, upon request, in blocks of 10,000 numbers, state regulators said. "It's not efficient," Tate said. "We want to find out whether there are any methods the telephone companies can use to conserve telephone numbers." Tate stressed, however, that the BPU has yet to make a decision on how to proceed. All the alternatives -- the two area code expansion plans and the possibility of delaying any action -- will be reviewed in public hearings at the BPU's Newark headquarters next month, he said. The agency expects to make a decision by the first week in October, Tate said. It will be the BPU's second round of hearings on the issue. After taking testimony earlier this year, agency officials said more information was needed and put off a decision. Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, meanwhile, has been pressing for a decision, saying that telephone numbers will be depleted in the 201 area code by June 1997, and in the 908 area code by October 1997. A company spokesman argued that a number-rationing plan will not solve the problem. "We're at ground zero," Bell Atlantic-New Jersey spokesman Timothy Ireland said. "We've got to get new area codes soon." How to create the new area codes has been the subject of ongoing debate. Under a proposal touted by Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, the 201 and 908 area code regions of northern and central New Jersey would each get an additional area code, which would be assigned to new telephone customers. This would require customers in these area codes to dial ten digits on all their calls. The other option, supported by competitors of Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, would split the 201 and 908 area codes in half, creating two new area codes. This is the way area codes have traditionally been expanded, and would force customers and businesses in the new code areas to take on new telephone numbers. In public comments submitted to the BPU earlier this year, businesses supported the overlay plan by a margin of 21 to 6. This is presumably because of the costs incurred by businesses that have to change their telephone numbers, BPU Executive Director Michael Ambrosio said. Individual customers preferred the geographic split plan by a margin of 31 to 4, with another 21 suggesting alternatives, BPU officials said. Members of the public may submit comments on the plan until Sept. 16 or speak at a public hearing to be held that day from 1 to 4 p.m., and 5 to 7 p.m.,2 Tate said. The agency will also take testimony from experts on the issue on Sept. 6 at 10 a.m., he said. ------------------------------ From: JHamilton@Bridge.BellSouth.Com (Justin Hamilton) Subject: MCI Advertising as ISDN ISP, But Doesn't Have it Yet Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 20:58:04 GMT Organization: BellSouth ATG lab Reply-To: JHamilton@Mindspring.Com I've been looking into the possibilities of getting ISDN internet access. I would keep my existing POTS line for voice, and have the ISDN dedicated to the computer. I decided to checkout MCI's web page to see what they had. Eventually I found a page which contained info on "internetMCI Access for Home" and the pieces that caught my eye were: UNLIMITED ACCESS Software Cost: $0.00 Registration Fee: $0.00 Monthly Fee: $19.95 Local Access Hours: Unlimited! and internetMCI's Dial Access platform supports both analog (up to 28.8Kbps modems) and ISDN (integrated switched digital network) connections equaling 56/64 Kbps. and Key features supported by our universal dial platform include: Internet Access via asynchronous dial-in modems (up to 28.8Kbps speeds) ISDN BRI Digital Access at 56/64 Kbps Routed IP connectivity to both private and public networks and finally: To order internetMCI Access please call 1-800-550-0927. So I did, and the rep, whose name I didn't get (sorry), told me that they did not support ISDN and, although they will, she did not know when. Why do companies like MCI do this? Oh well ... If anyone has any good ISDN ISP's they can recommend, I would appreciate it much ... 8) Justin Hamilton http://www.mindspring.com/~tmenet JHamilton@MindSpring.Com - Rated #1 National ISP by C/NET JHamilton@Bridge.BellSouth.Com Member of B.U.G. Birmingham's Premier User Group http://www.bfc.net/bug [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They do it largely because it looks good in their advertising and they know -- like Sprint -- that no one will really be able to stop them in their claims. Now in the next article in the Digest this morning, let's see what Pacific Bell has to say for itself today ... what glorious and self-serving news they want to tell us about. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: Pacific Bell At Hand(sm) Premieres A Must-See Website Guide Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 16:55:29 PDT Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:07:00 -0700 From: sqlgate@list.pactel.com Subject: Pacific Bell At Hand(sm) Premieres A Must-See Website Guide FOR MORE INFORMATION: David A. Dickstein, Pacific Telesis (415) 896-1800 dadicks@legal.pactel.com Jennifer Weissman, Antenna Group (213) 975-4074 jennifer@antgroup.com Pacific Bell At Hand sm Premieres A Must-See Website Guide PASADENA, Calif. -- Californians can now utilize the vast information- gathering power of the World Wide Web to access a wealth of purchasing information with today's launch of Pacific Bell At Hand sm (point to http://www.athand.com ), a comprehensive on-line guide to merchants and services throughout the state. The free-to-use guide combines editorial content from 45 popular books and magazine titles with 1.2 million merchant listings and information from more than 65 advertisers. Pacific Bell At Hand has taken an innovative and ambitious approach for an on-line guide by thoroughly covering the entire state. By focusing on the area Pacific Bell has served for over 100 years, At Hand taps into the high concentration of Web users in the state in which approximately 40 percent of the world's Web traffic originates or arrives. "We've used this new medium to create a truly useful guide that combines the functionality of a directory with the entertainment and reference value of books and magazines," said Jeff Killeen, CEO of Pacific Bell Interactive Media, Inc. "At Hand puts all this organized information at users' fingertips, then provides personalized services such as maps and lists to make their shopping easier." Jeff Rios, manager of interactive services for The Good Guys, a consumer electronics retailer, explained why they chose At Hand for their first Internet advertising effort. "The information Pacific Bell At Hand has pulled together would be costly and time-consuming for people to research on their own. We think this will be genuinely helpful for our customers. At Hand is a one-stop, problem-solver for shoppers." Electronic, Theme-based Merchant Guides At Hand is designed to make purchasing decisions more efficient and convenient for the need-it-now shopper while also providing the best possible information resource for the category enthusiast or careful purchaser. For example, shoppers who want to find a gift for a golfer can easily locate promising merchants near their home or work locations, find out store hours, and quickly get maps on any scale. Golf enthusiasts will be able to browse golf course reviews from Foghorn's California Golf and get tips from the pros in Golf Digest. And if they're thinking about making that big investment in a good set of clubs, they can peruse equipment reviews and find out about sales and special promotions. Pacific Bell At Hand is organized according to an original and efficient hierarchy that groups hundreds of merchant categories into 13 themes. Comprehensive listings are included for all 13 theme guides. Initially, three of the guides have been enhanced with information such as business hours, credit card acceptance and special services. Ten additional guides will be completed in the months to come. The three showcased guides, House & Home, Entertainment & Leisure, and Sports & Outdoors are interwoven with articles and information from 45 books and magazines displayed next to related merchant listings. Integrated Editorial Content At Hand offers recognized editorial opinions to help shoppers make better purchasing decisions. Editorial content provided by 14 well-known publishers, including Harper Collins Publishers, Hearst HomeArts, New York Times Company Magazines Group and American Express Publishing, is featured throughout the enhanced guides. Titles such as People Weekly's "Picks and Pans," Zagat's Restaurant Surveys and Playbill offer engaging and useful content accessible within At Hand's Entertainment & Leisure. House & Home is decorated with content from Good Housekeeping, Food & Wine and over 1,000 Los Angeles Times Syndicate's "Do-It-Yourself ... Or Not?" columns. Golf Digest, California Camping and Ski Country Access Guide bring all of California out to play on Sports & Outdoors. Tim Albright, new media manager of American Express Publishing, said, "Pacific Bell's premier customer base and powerful brand make it a strong online partner to showcase Travel & Leisure and Food & Wine. Many of our readers are on the Internet and we believe At Hand's extensive California database of restaurants, hotels, spas and vacation areas broadens the resources available to our audience." Relevant Advertising At Hand is a new kind of advertising medium for both consumers and merchants. Consumers encounter only advertising relevant to the content they are interested in, and advertisers benefit by being in the right place at the right time. With its unique ability to deliver messages to interested audiences, At Hand provides advertisers a cost-effective method for reaching the large audience that is rapidly coming on-line. "We targeted mainstream retailers and services that have strong California presences to make sure customers see the businesses they know and trust," said Carla McMorris, At Hand's director of marketing, advertising and sales. "More than 20 national advertisers are on board, while many regional and local advertisers have found that At Hand is a place on the Web that is ready-made for them." Customized California Mapping At Hand's mapping function has been developed in cooperation with Thomas Brothers Maps, the West Coast leader in cartography. As a result, it may be the most detailed and scalable mapping function available on a commercial website today. Users of At Hand can specify any area in California, from a one-mile radius around a specific address to an entire city, and print out maps locating the retailers they have selected. Corporate Description Pacific Bell At Hand is the product and service of Pacific Bell Interactive Media, a subsidiary of Pacific Telesis Group which is a diversified telecommunications corporation based in San Francisco. At Hand acts as a localized and personalized electronic intermediary through which users can access a wide variety of theme-based information resources and through which businesses can advertise, communicate and transact with consumers. Pacific Bell Interactive Media is located at 35 North Lake Avenue, Suite 300, Pasadena, Calif. 91101. For business information call (888) 4AtHand, fax (818) 585-9774. The information email address is: reachus@athand.com. At Hand is a trademark of Pacific Telesis. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners ----------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: 414 NPA Residents Prefer Split to Overlay Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 20:02:43 PDT Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Technology Column By Lee Bergquist, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Aug. 29--An overwhelming majority of people in Wisconsin's 414 calling area prefer splitting the region into two area codes to help solve the problem of a quickly diminishing supply of phone numbers. In a survey released this week by a group of telecommunications companies, both residential and business customers said they favored a geographic split over a so-called overlay system. With a geographic split, generally much of metropolitan Milwaukee would remain in the current 414 area, while calling areas north of Port Washington would become part of a new area code. Since 1995, 30 new area codes have been added in the United States as explosive growth in telecommunications has mandated the need for more and more phone numbers. Of those 30 new area codes, 28 opted for the geographic split. The latest estimates show that Wisconsin will run out of phone numbers by the first quarter of 1998. In an overlay method, new phone numbers are automatically assigned a new area code. All calls local and long distance would require punching ten digits. The results of the survey give more credence to one side of the telecommunications industry that supports the concept of a geographic split. But despite a clear signal that people in the survey favored a geographic split, the area code issue has engendered a split of its own among phone providers, and now state regulators need to settle the matter this fall. On one side is Ameritech, MCI Corp. and other traditional phone companies that want the 414 calling area split because they believe that is what their customers want. On the other side are pager and cellular companies -- though not Ameritech's cellular unit -- who are in favor of an overlay. That's because with a geographic split, cell phone users would have to come into a store and have their phones reprogrammed. GTE Corp., the state's second-largest local phone company, also is in favor of the overlay because most of its customers lie outside of metropolitan Milwaukee and would be forced to change to a new area code if the 414 region was split in two. The exact boundary to divide the 414 area code a region of eastern Wisconsin stretching from Green Bay to Kenosha under a geographic split scenario will be decided by the state Public Service Commission. But a tentative line leaves most of metropolitan Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha safe from change. On the north, West Bend, Newburg and Port Washington would remain 414. To the west, the Oconomowoc area and to the southwest, Whitewater, Delavan and Lake Geneva all would stay 414. Milwaukee-area communities that would be just over the line include Belgium, Waubeka, Kewaskum, Allenton and Slinger. Boiled down to the basics, the survey tells us that we don't like change. When confronted with either splitting 414 into two area codes or starting out with a new way to dial phone numbers, most people prefer the split. The survey was conducted last May by Affina Research of Troy, Mich., for more than a dozen local telephone and cellular companies with customers in the 414 area. In the survey, 878 residential and business customers were surveyed. Here are some of the results from the survey: Among residential customers, 69 percent said they preferred a geographic split while 26 percent supported the overlay plan. Among business customers, 77 percent preferred the geographic split while 20 percent were in favor of an overlay plan. In both cases, the rest were undecided. The biggest reason in favor of the split is that people felt it would be less confusing. Other major concerns: Phone users did not want to punch ten digits to make a local phone call under the overlay plan. Also, with an overlay, they said they were concerned about calling a phone number down the block with a different area code. The biggest point in favor of an overlay was the belief by proponents that it would last longer and be easier to use. Some industry experts believe that in a few years we might all be dialing a 10-digit telephone number, as the need for more phone numbers continues to grow. Using ten digits would ensure consistent dialing across the country. Not everyone is pleased with the results of the survey. Atlanta-based BellSouth Cellular Corp., which has pushed for the overlay, said the survey was biased in favor of the geographic split. The company operates the Cellular One franchise in southern Wisconsin. Bill H. Brown, manager of state regulatory matters for BellSouth Cellular, complained that the survey is biased because Affina, the survey company, weighted results so that customers living in metropolitan Milwaukee would have more say. But Mary F. Danielak, Affina's executive vice president, said weighting figures in surveys is a standard research technique. Although more people in the northern part of the 414 calling area were queried, Danielak said the survey weighted comments from people in the southern 414 area more simply because there are more people there. BellSouth and others are seeking to delay state public hearings for at least a month and they want to add two more hearing dates so that consumers have more time to digest information about the plans. The delay also is being sought by, among others, GTE, which in Wisconsin has its headquarters in Wausau; Northeast Telephone Co., Pulaski; and PageNet of Wisconsin, Brookfield. The PSC is planning to conduct hearings Sept. 16 in Green Bay, Sept. 17 in Oshkosh, Sept. 18 in Waukesha and Sept. 19 in Watertown. Wisconsin is running out of phone numbers because of two trends. First, there's a growing appetite for communications devices everything from pagers to a second phone line in the home that is driving demand for a dwindling supply of phone numbers. Second, deregulation is bringing new companies into local phone markets and they are asking for phone numbers now so they can assign them to potential customers. A single area code accommodates seven million to eight million phone numbers. Lee Bergquist and the Journal Sentinel's business staff can be reached on-line at jsbiz@execpc.com ------------------------------ From: barry gold Subject: PC Boards That Support SS7 Signalling From E1/T1 Link Date: 2 Sep 1996 07:36:56 GMT Organization: enumclaw Please can anyone name/recommend some vendors who can handle SS7 signalling (preferably ISUP) on a PC (preferablly an NT OS). Any help or direction will be sincerely appreciated. Thanks, barry ------------------------------ From: eric@ns.net (eric nelson) Subject: Directly Accessing UART Registers Under Windows? Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 06:09:17 GMT Organization: NextGen Systems Internet Services In an application (16 bit, windows) I recently finished, I needed to know the exact moment when the UART was empty. The API calls would only let me know when the ram fifo was empty. The only thing I could think of was to read the bit in the uart which tells when it is empty. My understanding is I can't do this under NT. Can someone tell me a 'legal' way to access the UART registers, or some driver which will give me this information? Also, some other groups to post this request to? Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: effect@worldaccess.nl (Feico Nater) Subject: North America Dialing Date: Tue, 03 Sep 96 12:25:48 GMT Organization: Taal Effect This must be a simple question to you North-Americans, but not to me. My question is: how do you dial a number in North America? First, let me explain how this is in my country. In my country, the Netherlands, everyone has two numbers: an area code and a subscriber's number. An area code is (since last year) three or four digits, and its first digit is zero. A subscriber's number is (since last year) seven or six digits, and its first digit is never zero. Together, area code and subscriber's number have ten digits. Area codes are non-conflicting. That means that, if 023 is a valid area code, there are no four-digit area codes which begin with 023. This is unlike Britain where area codes may be conflicting, and the first digit of the subscriber's number gives more information. Area codes are published including the initial zero, but officially, this zero does not belong to the area code. When calling from abroad, this zero must not be dialed. To make an interlocal call (to another area), one dials the area code and the subscriber's number. To make a local phone call (in the same area), one dials just the subscriber's number. However, it is possible to dial all ten digits, and this will not be more expensive. A call to the same area, and to neigboring areas is rather cheap, a call to a remote area is more expensive. So far the situation in the Netherlands. Now for North America. An area code is three digits, and a (what do you call it?) is seven digits. The middle digit of an area code is 0 or 1 (I don't know why). What exactly does 'long distance' mean? Is it the same as a call to another area? To dial to another area, one dials all ten digits, preceded by 1. Is that always right? So the first digit of a subscriber's number is never 1. Correct? To dial to the same area, one dials just the seven digits. Is that right? Someone told me that if the first three digits of the subscriber's number are equal, it is sufficient to dial only the last four digits. Is that correct? And if so, how does the CO know whether you are going to dial four or seven digits? How does one dial from Canada to USA vice versa? Is it just as if they are one country? What is the price of a phone call? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps readers would like to respond direct to the correspondent with answers to the several questions he raises here. PAT] ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #456 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Sep 3 14:49:14 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA02946; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 14:49:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 14:49:14 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609031849.OAA02946@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #457 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Sep 96 14:49:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 457 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Hang-up Detection in Analog Line? (Avi Ilan) Used Cellular Equipment? (Ken Jongsma) Help With Standard Modem on Leased Line (Lukas Zahas) Area Codes in Java Applet Format (Robert L. Platt) Can't Bill LD DA to Calling Card (Philip Evans) Silly People: They Faxed in Their Bomb Declaration (Danny Burstein) Description of Coding Techniques Wanted (tbrink@teleport.com) Point to Point Microwave Radio? (visualsoft@aol.com) Fixed to Mobile Calls in UK? (Jesus Redondo Velasco) Seeking Broadcast Fax Services (Gordon Schultz) Positive ID Service From Southwestern Bell (David Gadbois) BellSouth Warns of New Telephone Scams (Mike King) Mitel SX-2000 Light Provisioning (Andy Spitzer) Re: Latest ITU Bulletin Available (Stephen Geis) Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA (Brian Bunin) Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA (John Nagle) Re: BellSouth Launches Internet Access Service (John R. Levine) Re: BellSouth Launches Internet Access Service (Mike King) Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA (Mike Fox) Re: Rural Phone 40km From CO Question (Jock Mackirdy) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Avi Ilan Subject: Hang-up Detection in Analog Line? Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 09:58:57 -0400 Organization: Tel-Aviv University Computation Center Hi all, In analog line, is there a way to detect that someone hang-up the phone even when Im not listen to the special beep signal of the telephone exchange. If there is a way I would be happy to know about that. Thanks in advance, Avi Ilan - ilani@shani.net ------------------------------ From: Ken Jongsma <73115.1041@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Used Cellular Equipment? Date: 3 Sep 1996 01:37:23 GMT Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736) My company has a bulk rate deal with a cellular provider. I can purchase a new phone through the provider, but the prices, while not particularly high, are more than I'd like to pay. (With the exception of a flip phone for $79, all the others are $200 or more. (I realize that most advertised phone prices are subsidized by a contract kickback.) Does anyone have any suggestions on how I could buy a used phone or where there might be good deals on mail oder new units? Thanks, Ken 73115.1041@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: lzahas@bu.edu (Lukas Zahas) Subject: Help With Standard Modem on Leased Line Date: 2 Sep 1996 21:32:15 GMT Organization: Boston University Is it possible to use a standard, off the shelf modem on a two-wire analog leased line? We would like to connect a PC and a piece of test equipment together with 2400 baud modems. The tricky part is the phone line will periodically be taken away from the modems, and when they get the line back, they should be able to start talking again without any special commands from us. In the limited experience I have with leased line gear, I know they don't get any special commands to start handshaking, they just start talking (I think). Anyone have any advice? Lukas Zahas lzahas@bu.edu ------------------------------ From: rlp@bga.com (Robert L. Platt) Subject: Area Codes in Java Applet Format Date: 1 Sep 1996 21:41:03 -0500 Organization: Real/Time Communications - Bob Gustwick and Associates I have rewritten the program 'areacode.c' by Ken Yap, Kelly Smith, et. al. as a Java applet. The applet allows users to look up U.S. and Canadian area codes using a Java-enabled Web browser. I've made the applet available at URL: http://www.realtime.net/~rlp/Java/AreaCode.html Source code for the original areacode.c and the applet AreaCode.java are available at this location, too. Bob Platt rlp@acm.org ------------------------------ From: pevans@mindlink.bc.ca (philip evans) Subject: Can't Bill LD DA to Calling Card Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 14:50:42 GMT Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada I was in Nova Scotia over the summer. When I dialed 0-604-555-1212 (same format as that used to charge ordinary calls to the card) I got a recording that said "please dial 1 or 0, followed by the area code ..." Then a warm body told me that MT&T cannot charge these calls to my card. Further, the operator cannot do a station-to-station or person-to-person call to that number either. What's up? (The recording is obviously broken, I'll write them about that). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 23:18:49 EDT From: danny burstein Subject: Silly People: They Faxed in Their Bomb Declaration Let's see now. What are the chances that they knew enough to do it from a non-traceable (at least back to them) phone line? Do the central offices in Memphis have SMDR records? Does a bear s*t in the woods? danny 'let's see that videotape from Joe's Bar and Fax Service for 4:15 pm' burstein (with apologies to the AP for forwarding their clip as-is> dannyb@panix.com --------- Forwarded message ---------- > Pro-Animal Group Claims Blast > MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) -- An animal rights group claimed responsibility > for a firebombing attack Saturday that burned a truck at an egg > production facility. > The Animal Liberation Front sent a facsimile to The Commercial Appeal > in Memphis and other news organizations saying that the attack was on > "behalf of more than a half-million chickens imprisoned and in forced > labor at the factory farm." > Federal, state and local authorities were investigating the predawn > incident at RusDun Farms Inc., located near Collierville, which is 22 > miles east of Memphis. > The group, which has sabotaged research laboratories, furriers and > meat plants around the world, said incendiary devices were planted in > four trucks and in the loading dock area. It also said that warehouse > air-conditioning units were sabotaged. > However, RusDun president Melvin Russell said only one truck actually > burned. > Investigators, including the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and > Firearms, were withholding further details of the incident. ------------------------------ From: Tom Subject: Description Wanted of Coding Techniques Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 02:29:08 -0700 Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 I am looking for a good description of the various coding schemes 2B1Q used in ISDN, AMI and CMI. Thanks, Tom ------------------------------ From: visualsoft@aol.com (VisualSoft) Subject: Point to Point Microwave Radio Date: 03 Sep 1996 05:45:31 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: visualsoft@aol.com (VisualSoft) Hi, Does anyone know of a list where they discuss point to point microwave radio? I'm thinking primarily of radio operating in frequencies from 1 GHz to 50 GHz. Thanks, John ------------------------------ From: Jesus Redondo Velasco Subject: Fixed to Mobile Calls in UK? Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 12:56:59 (MET) How does it work a phone call from a fixed line to a mobile in UK? I don't know whether a BT subscriber can select the carrier (i.e. Mercury or BT) that will convey his call to the mobile operator's network. Does anyone have any idea? Thanks in advance, Jesus Redondo DIT-UPM e-mail: jrv@dit.upm.es Ciudad Universitaria s/n Fax: +34 1 5432077 28040 Madrid Spain ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 15:59:36 -0400 From: Gordon Schultz Reply-To: gs@sourcesgroup.com Organization: The Sources Group Subject: Seeking Broadcast Fax Service I must fax twice every business day about 40 pages to 14 different sites. Needless to say it ties up my fax for most of the day. Does anyone know of a broadcast fax service that charges less than 20 cents a page? You may e-mail me directly, if you wish. Thanks, Gordon Schultz Concord, Mass gs@sourcesgroup.com ------------------------------ From: gadbois@cs.utexas.edu (David Gadbois) Subject: Positive ID Service From Southwestern Bell Date: 02 Sep 1996 18:27:10 -0500 Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin Southwestern Bell has a service called "Positive ID" that lets you set up access control lists so that only calls from certain numbers or with a password are completed to a given trunk or number (the glossy brochure isn't clear on this). It also can give you audit reports of incoming calls. This service seems like a good cheap way to restrict access to dial-in modems. Does anyone have anything good/bad/ugly to say about it? How does it interact with other features, especially call forwarding? What are the risks involved versus other access restriction methods such as Caller Line ID, dial-back systems, smart cards, or plain vanilla passwords? Thanks, David Gadbois [TELECOM Digest Editor's Ntoe: This service is basically a big expansion of the existing service known as Call Screening. In Call Screening, you can set up a personal list of numbers that you do not wish to have reach you. Those callers are given a message from the central office saying 'the party you are trying to reach is not accepting calls at the present time ...'. Instead of this 'allow all, deny xxx, yyy, zzz' approach, the service David describes begins from the opposite direction and says essentially, 'deny all, allow xxx, yyy, zzz'. Think of it much like an .htaccess file for your web page. I do not know how well the SW Bell scheme works as of yet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Warns of New Telephone Scams Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 00:34:23 PDT Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:21:18 -0400 (EDT) From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH WARNS OF NEW TELEPHONE SCAMS BELLSOUTH WARNS OF NEW TELEPHONE SCAMS Telephone scam artists don't appear to be slowing down, and you could be the next victim, according to BellSouth media relations manager Bill Todd. "The most recent scam we've heard about is where someone calls your home and says they are with the FCC, or Federal Communications Commission," Todd said. "Or, they will say they are with the fraud division of `the phone company.' They tell the customer that excessive charges have been made to the customer's calling card, and they need to verify their calling card number and the four-digit personal identification number, or PIN. "Never give out that kind of information. Nobody from any regulatory agency or telephone company will ask you for your calling card number and/or PIN code, so don't give it out," Todd said. "They also will never ask you to accept third party-billed calls on their behalf." Todd said consumers should also remember to shield their calling card numbers at pay telephones. Calling card numbers can be sold and used for long distance fraud, making unsuspecting victims of consumers who do not keep these numbers private. "If you have any reason to be unsure of a call's legitimacy, ask the caller for his or her name, and the company they work for. Tell the caller you intend to call the company yourself to verify their work information. "Also, if you think you or someone you know is the target of a fraudulent telephone marketing scheme, call your local district attorney's office, the Better Business Bureau, or register a complaint with the Alabama Attorney General's office," Todd said. ---------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Sep 96 14:48:50 GMT From: woof@telecnnct.com (Andy Spitzer) Subject: Mitel SX-2000 Light Provisioning A T1 connection from Bell Atlantic to our Mitel SX-2000 Light carries DID trunks. Whenever an outside caller dials one of our DID numbers, the cadence of the audible ring tone that the PBX generates is not the USA normal "2 seconds of RING, followed by 4 seconds of SILENCE", but instead is approximately of the form: 1 second of RING short gap of SILENCE 1 second of RING 3 seconds of SILENCE The company that installed and provisions the PBX has spoken with Mitel, and insists there is no way to change this cadence to 2 seconds of RING, 4 seconds of silence. Please note: I am not discussing the ringing of the PHONES on the PBX, but rather the audible ring tone that a caller hears when dialing our DID numbers. I appeal to the wisdom of TELECOM Digest readers: Can a Mitel SX-2000 Light be provisioned to generate USA standard audible ring tone on DID trunks? If so, would some kind soul please let us know how? The PBX is running (load/version/generic/???): MS2007-F-NA-00, Edition SX.N16.1.1 Thanks for your time. Andy Spitzer woof@telecnnct.com The Telephone Connection 301-417-0700 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 17:06:31 +0200 From: Stephen Geis Subject: Re: Latest ITU Bulletin Available Zev Rubenstein said: > Readers of TELECOM Digest may find the Operational Bulletins issued by > the ITU to be a valuable resource. The latest one (# 625) is now > available. ... > To track when they become available, monitor the following URL: > http://www4.itu.ch//itudoc/itu-t/op-bull.html To find the operational bulletin, rather than using the URL given in the posting (which is subject to change), readers should point to http://www.itu.int and click on the item "Operational Bulletins" in the ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector section of our home page. The operational bulletin may be downloaded only by registered users of ITU's Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES). TIES registration is free to participants in ITU activities (see the TIES FAQ at http://www.itu.ch/special/faqties-q.html) Stephen GEIS Information Services Department International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Geneva, Switzerland e-mail: stephen.geis@itu.int ------------------------------ From: brian.bunin@mountaingate.com (Brian Bunin) Subject: Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA Date: Mon, 02 Sep 96 18:19:35 GMT Organization: Great Basin Internet Services, Reno, NV In article , slichte@cello.gina. calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) wrote: > Tad Cook writes: >> U.S. Consumers Ripped Off in Calls to (809) Area Code > Here is another side to the scam, sorry about all Caps, but that is the > way it was sent to me. > SCAM ARTISTS ARE TRYING TO GET AROUND THE U. S. REGULATIONS > GOVERNING PAY-PER-CALL SERVICE IN THE 900 BLOCK BY OPERATING > OVERSEAS. PEOPLE ARE REPORTING THAT THEY ARE GETTING MESSAGES > ON THEIR ANSWERING MACHINES TELLING THEM THAT IT IS IMPORTANT > THAT THEY CALL A NUMBER BEGINNING WITH 809. WHEN THEY DIAL > THE NUMBER, THEY HEAR A LONG RECORDED MESSAGE. WHEN THEIR > TELEPHONE BILL COMES, THERE IS A HUGE CHARGE RELATING TO THE > CALL. etc ... I'm confused. How can they be billed for other than the time the connection was in place? How can someone make money on this as the LEC and your LD Carrier are the ones billing you? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You need to go back and read the thread on this topic in the Archives. We have covered it here on a couple of occassions. The information provider (in this case the persons receiving the calls in the foreign country) guarentees the carrier a certain volume of traffic each month in exchange for a percentage of the carrier's profits. Here in the USA as one example, AT&T works with a fellow in Nevada who operates a conference bridge for gay men. He stirs up the traffic; AT&T 'backs him up' by billing for it; and they give him a few cents for every minute of traffic. So he offers his service for 'free', telling the callers there is no charge to use this service, 'all you pay is toll ...', and of course everyone used to calling 900 numbers with big premium fees attached thinks this is a great deal. Now the same thing happens in other countries. Customer of the poor telco in some far away place says to telco he will generate lots of traffic just for the sake of stirring it up if they will cut him in on the action. So he runs advertising all over the place in the United States depending on the kind of calls he wants to deal with. People here start calling there in massive numbers. The telco in that country rubs their hands in glee and licks their chops as they watch their resulting balance on the books of AT&T (usually a deficit in AT&T's favor) decrease. Soon they are collecting lots of money from AT&T for calls AT&T is billing to USA customers, and needless to say they show their gratitude by giving some of it to the guy who made it all possible; the guy with his conference bridge; the guy who managed to induce a closeted gay guy in North Dakota to chat for an hour with another anonymous and closeted gay guy in South Dakota via a conference bridge in Guyana or wherever. Now all this *is* legal -- stirring up traffic for the sake of stirring it up, just to generate revenue for calls that would never have occurred had not someone suggested it -- but there is supposed to be something of perceived benefit to the original caller; some form of gratification or reward or enlightenment, etc. In the case discussed, the callers were getting nothing at all except a message telling them to call another (equally) long-distance point. In turn, that second number had some sort of nonsense, and a third telephone number to call was also involved. The people running the scam (and that may very well be the foreign telco itself without anyone on their end prompting them to do it) watch the inbound traffic from the USA make them rich. Check out the Telecom Archives at http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/back.issues for more details on this, or if you prefer FTP you can connect with us at ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/common/telecom-archives/archives. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 10:39:05 GMT Michael J. Wengler writes: > Tad Cook wrote: >> The last two calls, which have 809 area codes, might look like regular >> long-distance numbers within the United States. But they're really >> phone calls to the Dominican Republic. > And thus get charged pretty large charges. Why is the Dominican Republic still in the NANP? Why don't they have their own country code? Saudi Arabia used to be in the NANP, before international direct dialing worked, but that was a long time ago. John Nagle [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, so you remember when Saudi Arabia had a USA area code, do you? Yeah, that was a long time ago, like around 1970 perhaps. Anyone remember *what* 'area code' it was? I can't remember. It was that way because a certain very large oil company in New York with branches in Saudi Arabia wanted to make lots of calls there daily with ease in dialing. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 10:49:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: BellSouth Launches Internet Access Service Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > BELLSOUTH LAUNCHES INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE > BellSouth provides the service with two attractively-priced plans: > 1) an unlimited usage plan priced at $19.95 per month; This wouldn't by any chance be one of the RBOCs that's been moaning and groaning about how their network is being destroyed by ISPs and wants to charge them by the minute for incoming calls, would it? What a bunch of two-faced slimers. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - Stanford econ prof [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I recently heard someone say that John Levine was stealing unix accounts intended for space aliens and using them to post to Usenet news groups. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: Re: BellSouth Launches Internet Access Service Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 16:49:45 GMT John R. Levin responded to this posting: >> BellSouth provides the service with two attractively-priced plans: >> 1) an unlimited usage plan priced at $19.95 per month; > This wouldn't by any chance be one of the RBOCs that's been moaning and > groaning about how their network is being destroyed by ISPs and wants to > charge them by the minute for incoming calls, would it? Actually, I've not been watching on an RBOC-by-RBOC basis. I do know that in PacBell land, it hasn't been overtly mentioned. As a matter of fact, PacBell is pushing people to get additional lines (NPA saturation be dammed) for online activities, and recommending flat-rate plans. Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Mike Fox Date: 03 Sep 1996 09:29:42 GMT Subject: Re: US Callers Ripped Off in Calls to 809 NPA > Another reform that could be considered: a set of standards for > remining in the NANP (North American Numbering Plan, the people you > reach by dialing 1+AreaCode+NXX-XXXX). > Perhaps places like the D. R. want to stay in the NANP. Then they > should be required to: [...] > OTHERWISE, it should be a very simple matter to reprogram North American > switches to see a "011+" before the "1809" which could serve as the > D.R.'s international code, without requiring much change outside of > North America. Then the scammer's going to have to get you to dial the > international access code to perpetrate their scam. Hear hear! It's been really interesting listening to all these discussions of ripoff calls to foreign countries in the NANP at the same time we are adding more foreign countries to the NANP (670, 671). Talk about asking for fraud! I don't think that international codes can be more than three digits though, so that specific remedy would be a problem. We should just kick them out and make them get their own damn code. Why make it easy for them when the reason we would be doing it is because they harbor fraudsters? Of course, just beginning that process of kicking them out may be enough to fix the problem. Later, Mike [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The only thing is, sweetheart, 670 and 671 are not assigned to 'foreign countries' any more than 808 is assigned to a foreign country. 808 is of course the state of Hawaii and the territory of Midway Island. 670 and 671 are the territories of Guam that other place in the Pacific Ocean whose name escapes me at the moment. By the way, Puerto Rico isn't a foreign country either, although the status of New Mexico has not yet been clarified in the telemarketing department at Columbia House (i.e. the old Columbia Record Club). ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jock Mackirdy Subject: Re: Rural Phone 40km From CO Question Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 22:55:56 GMT Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: > At the cottage, in the Laurentians, north of Montreal, the telephone we > have (a party line!) is located some 40km from the Central Office in > Arundel. The wires pretty well follow the road all the way and there are > three very small villages between the CO and our cottage. > I would be interested in knowing what sort of equipment would lie > between the CO and the telephone, what it woudl look like and where it > would be located. FWIW, it is a rotary telephone and the dial tone is > more of a humm than a city dial tone. > As well, if there is equipment between the CO and the telephone, does > this mean that the cables that run on the telephone poles also carry > power for that equipment? AFAIK, it would not be possible to operate a standard rotary dial phone over 40km of copper line without some form of digit regeneration (and speech amplification). The distortion of dial pulses and the line loss would be too great (assuming we are not talking 800lb. per mile conductors). Are you sure that your party line is not served by a concentrator situated in the nearest village or perhaps mounted on a telephone pole? It would share its phone numbering range with the CO on which it is parented. Concentrators were used to some extent in the UK but mainly to alleviate a chronic shortage of pairs to the CO. The maximum line length from your telephone to such a device would probably be 5km or less. There is a modern digital equivalent (the pictures I have seen are of Ericsson AXE-10 equipment). Jock Mackirdy Business Advisory Services, Luton (UK) E-mail: jockm@basluton.demon.co.uk Independent telecomms. and business advice ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #457 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Sep 3 16:33:25 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA15438; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 16:33:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 16:33:25 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609032033.QAA15438@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #458 TELECOM Digest Tue, 3 Sep 96 16:33:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 458 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: "Industry Standard" vs "Telco Grade" (Tom Sweet) Re: GTE Says Continuous Internet Connection Desirable (Paul Wilson) Re: Cellular Phones: Analog v. Digital? (jseder@syntel.com) Re: Cellular Phones: Analog v. Digital? (Lynne Gregg) Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions (jseder@syntel.com) Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions (John R. Levine) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Tor-Einar Jarnbjo) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Stanley Cline) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Yigal Arens) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (John L. Meissen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Sweet Subject: Re: "Industry Standard" vs "Telco Grade" Date: 3 Sep 1996 17:00:18 GMT Organization: GTE You might find this interesting too. HIGH SPEED (28.8 KB/Sec) V.34 MODEMS ON THE TELEPHONE NETWORK The technology of dial modems has reached the point where they are pushing the theoretical limits of how much data can be passed over an analog telephone connection. The latest type of high speed modem is built per a standard called V.34. Under the best of conditions these modems can pass data at 28.8 kb/sec. The data speed that can be supported on an analog circuit is a function of the bandwidth of the channel and the noise on that channel. Wide bandwidth, low noise connections, can carry more data than narrow bandwidth, high noise connections. The telephone network was designed to provide a connection with enough bandwidth so that voices could be heard clearly and that the speakers voice could be recognized. That's why the bandwidth of a voice channel is from 300 Hz to over 3000 Hz. Noise is inherent in a telephone system and can have many sources. The telephone company will try to control noise so that it is not objectionable to most people. Any attempt to increase bandwidth or reduce noise, costs money. So the bottom line is that the telephone company will try to provide a good quality voice connection at a reasonable cost. Some connections on the telephone network are better than others. If two subscribers who are located close to the central office call each other, they will probably have an excellent connection with high bandwidth and low noise. Loaded cable pairs and digital loop carriers have less bandwidth than non loaded cable. The frequency response of non-loaded cable is not as good as for loaded cable. Digital switches have less bandwidth than analog switches. Universal digital loop carriers will have more noise than integrated digital loop carriers, because of the extra digital to analog conversion in the central office. Even though some of these facilities and switches have more noise and less bandwidth than others, none of them are objectionable for a good voice connection. Their placement in the network is based on cost, voice quality, demand (how any customers need to be served in an area), and features (digital switches offer more features than analog switches). The telephone network is designed to provide good voice service on most connections at a reasonable cost. Any connection can be made up of combinations of local facilities, multiple switch connections, and multiple interoffice facilities. Because of these variables, not all connections will be the same. Some connections will be better than others. Modem manufacturers have taken advantage of the fact that some connections will have higher bandwidth and less noise than other connections. When connections are ideal, the new modems can run at 28.8 kb/sec. If there is less bandwidth or more noise, the modem may end up running at a lower speed. These modems are designed to adjust their speed to deal with less than ideal conditions. As conditions permit they will run at 26.4kb/sec or 24.0kb/sec or 19.2kb/sec or less. The additional variable is the modem itself. Some modems will deal with line conditions better than others. The telephone company cannot guarantee any minimum speed on any connection on the telephone network. Some modems deal better with the normal limitations of the telephone network than others. The telephone company must, however, ensure that it is providing good quality voice service. Some impairments may not be detectable with a simple voice test. Things to talk to the telephone engineers about: Any local loop less than 12,000 feet should be non-loaded (if there is loading on a loop of less than 12,000 feet there is usually only one load. A single load is of no benefit.) Any local loop 12,000 to 18,000 feet can be loaded but must have at least two loads. (Non-loaded is acceptable but may cause V.34 modems to reduce speed on some connections). Any local loop over 18,000 feet must be loaded. There must be no loads on the bridge tap or beyond the customers terminal, regardless of the length of the pair or the bridge tap. (Bridge tap is ok as long as its less than 6,000 feet.) Noise on a cable pair must be no more than 20dbmC Message noise on a digital loop carrier must be no more than 28dBmc and notched noise must be no more than 45dBmcO with -13dBmO holding tone. A 5ESS line wired to a universal digital loop carrier must have RANGEX = Y in translations. Data service on very short loops served by a 5ESS may be improved by setting the RANGEX = Y in translations. Some of the things that have affected v.34 modems in particular are: Universal digital loop carrier. Analog to digital conversions that take place in digital loop carrier channel banks and digital switches cause quantizing noise. This noise is not objectionable for conversations but multiple conversions can limit modem speed because of the additive effect of the noise. Long local loops: When using these facilities a V.34 modem sometimes will not run at 28.8kb/sec. They still work very well, but at a slower speed. Lars Poulsen wrote in article ... > Someone said: >> modems that are installed are not $140 USR Sportster modems either. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 12:14:29 -0700 From: Paul Wilson Subject: Re: GTE Says Continuous Internet Connection Desirable Jack Decker (jack@novagate.com) writes: > So, in this press release, we have GTE on record as saying that a > continuous connection to the Internet is a desirable thing - not that > we needed GTE to tell us this, but it's refreshing to hear a phone > company admit that a 24 hour per day connection is desirable, rather > than blaming Internet users who spend time online as the reason that > the phone system is "going to Hell in a handbasket" (as some of the > "Baby Bells" are apparently trying to do)! Jack, I have not read GTE's press release, but I would imagine it propaganda for their new Internet service. Secondarily, they are trialing ADSL as the facility to provide this service. Other LECs also have ADSL trials in progress. One of the problems to be addressed is the affect asyncronous bandwidth will have on the existing services (specifically DS1) in the network. ADSL is essentially data over voice and therefore its use by traditional ISPs would not be as simple as an ADSL modem at your location and one at the ISP. Your voice and data would still need to be separated at the LEC switch location. I doubt if you or I would want to pay for a full time data connection and I doubt ISPs would want, or could, pay for full time connections to every subscriber. GTE can push it because they have the copper to your premise or business anyway; using ADSL to provide Internet service will be a bonus and a "full time connection" will not cause a burden on the switch since that traffic will not hit the switch. Believe me the "Baby Bells", along with other LECs, have been made aware of the additional burden of Internet traffic through experience. And that experience has not been good. When you realize that very few computer users are Interent users you realize the problem will only grow worse if that traffic continues to traverse the public switch network as it grows. Paul Wilson Rowlett, Texas ------------------------------ From: JSeder@syntel.com Subject: Re: Cellular Phones: Analog v. Digital? Date: 2 Sep 1996 20:10:32 GMT Organization: BRAINSTORM Networks Reply-To: JSeder@syntel.com I recently bought an analog cellular phone (MicroTAC Lite II) which I rather expect to discard after the initial one-year contract. I paid $89 for the phone, slim NiMH battery, smart charger, and activation, with a one year commitment. I understand that PCS-based wireless (like GSM) will begin its nationwide rollout in the spring of 1997. The compact telephones and advanced services will be very attractive, and I suspect I will replace my analog cellular phone with something like a Nokia 9000 -- a full-function PDA with telephone -- sometime in 1997. PCS will be aggressively priced (the providers have to get current cellular users to switch), and because of that, current cellular providers are beginning to cut prices and offer special deals on two-year commitments. Analog cellular will have better coverage and voice quality than the PCS services. If you want a phone that will work from a lonely highway late at night, analog is the best choice. PCS will be for urban areas. Based on my own experience, the quality of TDMA-based digital cellular is unacceptable. Give it a try before you buy it. CDMA-based systems might be better, but availability is limited. All digital cellular phones are "dual mode", I think, so you can always run analog (albeit at a higher rate). I believe that PCS gives more bandwidth to voice channels than digital cellular -- 9600 baud vs 5600 (experts, please step in!) -- so it approaches "toll quality". > Also, does anyone have analog or analog/digital phones they like well > enough to recommend? I've been eyeing the Motorola Micro-Tac Elite > and the Nokia 232 (both are about the size I'm looking for) The Elite is much smaller and more expensive than the 232. Maybe you mean the Lite II/XL. Basically, you get what you pay for. This is a very competitive marketplace. > "user-friendly" The better phones store 100+ numbers, have a directory lookup function, lock up, have authentication firmware (not yet used by the providers), long-life small batteries, and are pretty easy to use. You should read the manual carefully. > (e.g., information about the particular cell my phone happens to > be using) I don't think any phones provide this. I'm not sure what I would do with this sort of information. All phones give a signal strength display and a "roaming" indication. I hope this is helpful and not too inaccurate. It has been said that the fastest way to get good information on the Internet is to post bad information. Let's see if that rule applies. ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: Re: Cellular Phones: Analog v. Digital? Date: Tue, 03 Sep 96 12:10:00 GMT James Crawford Ralston \ qralston+@pitt.edu inquired about new TDMA phones, and expressed particular interest in phones that "gives me all the possible information it can (e.g., information about the particular cell my phone happens to be using)". Currently, TDMA phones support such services as Caller ID and Message Waiting Indicator. AT&T Wireless is set to offer the next generation of digital wireless phones (called Digital PCS or IS-136) nationally (where AT&T Wireless coverage now exists). These phones are indeed capable of displaying "neighborhood" location in addition to delivery of Caller ID and MWI info. Digital PCS or IS-136 phones also support short messaging (i.e., sending numeric or text messages to the phone as you would a pager today). For more information on TDMA and AT&T Wireless PCS (IS_136) you can write me at lynne.gregg@attws.com or check out our new Web Page at http://www.attws.com/mm/. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ From: JSeder@syntel.com Subject: Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions Date: 2 Sep 1996 20:19:56 GMT Organization: BRAINSTORM Networks Reply-To: JSeder@syntel.com I got the following information from Cellular One in advance of a recent trip to the East Coast: If I use my cellular phone there, a charge of $0.75/minute applies. If I call a number in Boston, that's the only charge. If I call a San Francisco number, I pay $0.75 plus long distance charges. If someone calls me from San Francisco by dialing my 415 cell phone number, I pay $.75 plus long distance. If someone in Boston dials my San Francisco cellular number, both they AND I pay long distance charges (in addition to my $.75 airtime charge). But -- someone in Boston can dial 617-633-7626, and at the tone dial my San Francisco cellular number, and NEITHER of us will pay long distance charges -- I pay the airtime charge, and that's it. Call your Cellular One rep to get additional local access numbers. Maybe someone from Cellular One can jump in here? I don't have my bill yet, so I can't tell you what really happened, but all this seems reasonable and not unfair. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers should note that '7626' spells 'ROAM' and the use of areacode + xxx + ROAM (7626) is almost universally established in the USA for roaming purposes. The little roaming guides I have received from Ameritech, Frontier and Cellular One all list the numbers to call all over the USA for the local 'roaming port' in that community, and with very few exceptions all the numbers end with 'ROAM'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 13:58:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > One of the questions I couldn't get a coherent answer to, though, was > how roaming is billed with long distance charges. For example, suppose > I am in Albuquerque and use my cellphone as a roamer, making two outbound > calls -- one to San Francisco and the other to Albuquerque. Will I pay > long distance charges on one, the other, or both calls? To San Francisco, definitely (and not with your preferred IXC, either, nor at a rate that will please you.) To Albuquerque, nobody can tell you. Maybe they'll charge 2 or 5 cents min as a local access charge, maybe they'll charge some random toll rate from one part of Albuquerque to another, maybe they won't charge you toll at all. Roaming toll charges are a great black hole that nobody can explain. For example, on my current bill I have a roaming call on SBC/Cell One-Boston to Gardner, Mass. which I in fact placed while in Gardner. Toll: ten cents/min on top of the per-minute charge, although the last I heard, they charged their local customers no more than five cents/min toll for in-area calls. I also have two calls on Comcast-Mercer N.J. to Princeton N.J. placed while in or near Princeton, also ten cent/min toll. But I have a call from Springfield Mass. to Cambridge Mass., on BAM/NEX, an actual inter-LATA toll call for which they charged me twelve cents/min, and a call from Boston (SBC/Cell One, again) back to my home in upstate N.Y. for which they charged me an outrageous fifty cents/min toll on top of the airtime. Next time I'll call my 800 number. Confused? I sure am. Nobody at any customer service number has ever been able to explain roaming toll charges. They can barely explain roaming airtime. For that matter, my local cell carrier is in the process of an oddly botched combination of the switches in Syracuse and Ithaca. Both are considered local, same SID, but when I'm physically in range of the Syracuse switch, Cell One charges the toll themselves rather than handing it to my IXC, at toll rates which nobody can explain. They seem to be charging 15 cents/min, although their published toll rates are 20 cents. They promise long distance routing will be fixed this week. We'll see. > The other question I couldn't get a coherent answer to is whether the > digital service is in a completely different frequency band from the > traditional analogue service, It's the same band. A new band would have cost them several billion dollars. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com ------------------------------ From: bjote@cs.tu-berlin.de (Tor-Einar Jarnbjo) Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: 3 Sep 1996 16:05:18 GMT Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany Yigal Arens (arens@ISI.EDU) wrote: > I live in Los Angeles and have a contract with a local cellular service > provider. When I'm in San Francisco and a friend of mine in San > Francisco calls me on my cell phone, charges accumulate as follows: Well, to extend the problem a little bit, I have always wondered about something. When I roam in Germany with my Norwegian GSM-cellular, the German networks are pretty aware of my Norwegian phone-number, as this is passed on with outgoing calls (CLID). When another cellular-subscriber is booked into the same network, which in my case happens pretty regulary, it should be _very_ easy to not route this call via Norway, making the caller pay for an international call, and making me pay for roaming, but it ought to be _very_ easy, to route and charge this as a network to network call, making it as cheap as possible. Regards, Tor-Einar Jarnbjo, bjote@cs.tu-berlin.de Fetschowzeile 11 13437 Berlin, Germany ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 00:03:12 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: scline@usit.net In comp.dcom.telecom, grendel6@ix.netcom.com wrote: > this, but I think that my cellular company (Comcast/Metrophone - > Philadelphia Metro "A" side carrier) charges LD on *any* out of the > area roaming call. For example, if I am in Baltimore (where I > frequently travel) and I call a Baltimore local number, I pay: > .99 / minute roaming charge > A N D > long distance from Baltimore to Philadelphia > WHYZAT ? If you are in Baltimore and call BALTIMORE (not Philadelphia) This makes no sense at all, since your call is NOT going from C1/SBC's Balto-DC switch, to Comcast in Philly, back to Baltimore in any way. The call goes directly from C1 Balto's switch to the number you are calling (if local.) It is possible that Comcast is "surcharging" roaming calls, in lieu of a daily fee, but I doubt that's the case. Or the "toll" charge is actually an interconnect fee imposed by C1/Balto-DC, showing up as "toll." Why this would appear on the "local" portion of your bill, rather than with roamer charges, is not clear to me. With roaming in general ... If you are RECEIVING a call using any form of call delivery (NACN/FMR/FMR+/NationLink/MobiLink/IS-41): You will be charged roamer airtime (whatever that may be) and a long distance charge from your home city to your roaming city (unless special arrangements are in place, such as within Tennessee with GTE Mobilnet and Bachtel Cellular.) HOWEVER, GTE Mobilnet also supposedly adds "home" airtime for calls forwarded using NACN or NationLink to points OUTSIDE Tennessee. Their excuse (the same excuse as all carriers that charge airtime for call forwarding and No-Answer Transfer:) You're tying up circuits in their switch. **IS-41 SS7 cannot "redirect" a call without it going through the MTSO (unlike landline SS7, which can.) BellSouth Mobility, in contrast, does NOT charge "home" airtime for forwarded roaming calls. If you are RECEIVING a call using a ROAMER PORT: You will pay no LD. You will pay the normal roamer airtime charges. The caller will pay any message units/LD charges (if any) for the call to the roaming city. If the roaming city and the caller are local calls to each other, than NO LD is involved. If you are PLACING a call: You will pay roaming airtime. You will POSSIBLY pay an interconnect fee (9c/call in AirTouch Atlanta system, 2-3c/min elsewhere) to the LEC (this is often listed as a "toll" charge which is a bit misleading IMHO.) If the call is local to the ROAMER CARRIER service area, you will pay only airtime + any interconnect fee. If the call is to OUTSIDE the roamer carrier's calling area, you will pay airtime, the interconnect fee, and long distance -- billed by the ROAMER CARRIER (not the IXC you use in your local area. GTE's Follow-Me Roaming Plus and AT&T Wireless do allow "portable" PICs, but the vast majority of carriers don't.) Note that the local calling area for roamers may not necessarily be the same as the local calling area for "local" customers. For example: US Cellular in Knoxville does not charge LD for *its Knoxville customers* to call anywhere in NPA 423 or 615, but roamers are charged LD (by USCC) for calls outside the Knoxville LATA (to Chattanooga, etc.) The same holds true for GTE Mobilnet all over Tennessee -- Tennessee GTE customers pay no long distance for any in-state calls (while in the state) but roamers from other carriers pay LD for calls outside the local *MTSO's* coverage area (which, with an A-band carrier, may span multiple LATAs.) In *isolated* cases, LD has been charged even for "local" calls -- when USCC had Dalton, GA (mentioned in the Digest frequently) calls were routed from the Dalton cell site to a MTSO in Farragut, TN -- 140 miles away. Roamers were for a time charged LD *from the MTSO back to Dalton* since no local trunking seemed to be available (and USCC has a history of gouging roamers anyway.) In this case, one used to be able to place a LOCAL call from Knoxville to a USCC customer in Dalton, by using the Knoxville-Farragut roamer access number! (It also signaled phones in the Dalton area.) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 22:12:36 -0700 From: Yigal Arens Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes > I suppose that with increasing SS7 connectivity it'd be > possible not to set up the two toll calls, but the billing would be > tricky. For example, what happens if someone calls you from Santa Monica? > Does he pay the message units to LA, an unexpected inter-LATA toll to > SF, or what? Your proposal is at least as good as mine. But I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to come up with a system that selected a path that would reduce network traffic, but not at the expense of increasing cost to the caller. Basically, calls from far away from LA would be routed directly to SF -- since that would either keep the cost to the caller constant (if it's from NY, say) or reduce it (if it's from the SF Bay Area). Calls from close to LA would take the same route they do today. With SS7 anything will be possible ... Thanks for helping me out with the roamer number. My wife, who happens to be visiting San Francisco with her cell phone at this very moment, is already making use of it! Yigal Arens USC/ISI Phone: 310-822-1511 4676 Admiralty Way Fax: 310-822-0751 arens@isi.edu Marina del Rey, CA 90292 http://www.isi.edu/sims/arens ------------------------------ From: jmeissen@teleport.com (John L. Meissen) Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: 03 Sep 1996 17:26:02 GMT Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 In article , Yigal Arens wrote: > I live in Los Angeles and have a contract with a local cellular service > provider. When I'm in San Francisco and a friend of mine in San > Francisco calls me on my cell phone, charges accumulate as follows: [description of routing deleted for brevity] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tell your friend to start dialing into > the number for the roaming port in San Francisco. Then he will pay for > just a local call and you will pay only whatever roaming charge applies > for roamers making/receiving local calls in SF. PAT] How does one find this number? Also, I mentioned this to a friend in the San Francisco area, and he responded. > I don't know, but I'm going to try to find out! When I was in LA > recently I used my phone quite a bit, then found out that the local > roaming charge was $15.95 per connection. Wow! Is this typical for roaming charges? jmeissen@teleport.COM jmeissen@pyramid.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ask your cellular carrier to send you a copy of whatever they have in print pertaining to roaming. What I got from Frontier was a little pamphlet with several dozen phone numbers listed for roaming ports in cities and towns all over the USA and Canada. The pamphlet also mentioned the use of *18 to set up (what Ameritech calls) Fast Track roaming service and the use of *19 to shut off Fast Track. It mentioned that when an Ameritech customer (and by extension, a Frontier customer where they are reselling Ameritech) roams in any of the several Ameritech markets, i.e. Chicago, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Detroit, Dayton and many other places, "... there is no need to initiate Fast Track roaming, since the computer will locate you wherever you are in Ameritech's five state region and automatically begin transferring your calls to you." I think that is a rather nice feature, and Ameritech charges nothing extra for it. I pay 35/18 cents per minute in my home Ameritech market (Chicago) and a flat rate of 50 cents per minute in any other Ameritech market. Now if you do NOT want to receive calls in the Fast Track mode while roaming (you only want incoming calls via the roamer port) then you can still use *19 to turn off Fast Track, which had been automatically initiated the first time one of the towers in the city where you are traveling caught a glimpse of you. It then stays off until you dial *18 to turn it back on again. Actually I pay 35/18 cents per minute in the Milwaukee area also since my phone has a dual (Milwaukee/Chicago) NAM. One little item which caught my eye suggested that if you are an Ameritech Cellular customer and you travel much between two cities which are both Ameritech markets that you get the dual NAM in your phone activated with a number in that other city and switch the phone to that mode when in that city to '... take advantage of Ameritech's 35/18 rates in that city as well ... but even if you don't, Ameritech will never charge its customers more than fifty cents per minute with no additional fees for roaming anywhere in its own territories ...' The other neat thing with Ameritech Cellular service at least where I am concerned as a Frontier wholesale customer of Ameritech is that they charge next to nothing for calls involving a combination of long-distance and airtime. I called someone long distance from my home territory on my cell phone, talked for about ten minutes at night rates and got a bill of two dollars. I figure $1.80 was for airtime ... Ameritech Cellular uses its own (Ameritech) long distance; they must give it away if you are already paying airtime, or maybe its the airtime they give you free if you make a long distance call, I don't know which. If I go up to Milwaukee on the Greyhound bus, my phone keeps a very strong signal all the way, even without the antenna extended. If I get to Milwaukee and switch to the Milwaukee NAM then calls back to Chicago cost me a grand total of about 35 cents per minute, airtime and all. If I stay on the Chicago NAM up there the same call costs about 50 cents per minute, but interestingly, it is totally transparent to people who call me. They dial me (on Chicago number) and in a second or two they hear it ringing and I get the call in Milwaukee at 50 cents per minute. Having signed up with Frontier for Ameritech service I can't see myself changing anytime soon. Curiously, I have to use a pin when on the Milwaukee NAM either when actually in Milwaukee or when on that NAM as a 'roamer' here in Chicago. But the Chicago NAM does not ever require a pin, regardless of location. In general I would recommend Ameritech (or one of its resellers such as Frontier) to anyone who happens to live in one of Ameritech's various markets if for no other reason than there are so many cities where you can travel with Ameritech 'roaming agreements' for flat rate roaming service, automatic location service, etc. The little pamphlet I got did not however say a word about charges *in other non-Ameritech markets*; just that 'other charges will apply'. And when you call to ask them on the phone about roaming in non-Ameritech places they don't seem to have any reliable or authoritative answers either -- just like all the others. PAT] ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #458 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Sep 4 13:15:15 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA04885; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:15:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:15:15 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609041715.NAA04885@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #459 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Sep 96 13:15:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 459 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Florida Leads Fights Against Phone Card Fraud (Tad Cook) NYS-PSC Sues to Block FCC's Local Telecom Rules (Danny Burstein) Phone Technology and Privacy (Tad Cook) Line Conditions and Modems (John Cropper) The DEMA Web Site: The Spammer's Secret Clubhouse (Mark Boolootian) Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? (Joel M. Hoffman) Looking For Constructive Criticism of Web Page (Carla Legendre) How to Find Nynex Agent or Reseller? (Anita M. Wilcox) Discount International Phone Providers (Ratnadeep R. Damle) Re: MCI Advertising as ISDN ISP, But Doesn't Have it Yet (Henry Mensch) Re: Hang-Up Detection in Analog Line? (Mariana Sanchez) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tad Cook Subject: Florida Leads Fights Against Phone Card Fraud Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 01:25:28 PDT Florida Leads the Fight Against Phone Card Fraud By Mark Silva, The Miami Herald Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News TALLAHASSEE--Sep. 4--The proliferation of pre-paid telephone cards has made dialing from a pay phone as easy as the swipe of a magnetic stripe. But this also has opened new territory for swindlers, the government says, and has provided criminals new masks for disguising themselves in phone calls. Now companies that issue pre-paid phone cards in Florida without first licensing their business with the state will face fines, under path-finding rules that the Florida Public Service Commission is developing. "It sends a strong signal," said Joe Garcia, a PSC member from Miami. "At least these will be a stimulus, a shot across the bow to make sure that any unsavory customers ... will understand there's a new sheriff in town." Industry experts say Florida is leading the way in the regulation of a still-evolving business with fines approved by the PSC on Tuesday. Yet, the PSC still is hung up on the question of what rules to place on a business born within the last few years yet already totaling $1 billion nationwide. With pre-paid phone cards, a customer pays a fee for a card that enables the caller to use a pay phone for a limited amount of time. Companies that issue the cards purchase time from phone companies and resell it at a profit. These cards are hot sellers among tourists entering the country, college students or anyone who wants to buy a temporary calling card. Occasionally, though, customers have found themselves holding worthless cards. And in the hands of criminals, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, the cards are another means of masking calls and covering trails. "There are countless renegade companies that have no intention of cooperating with any state regulation," said Kelly Pennington, a special agent with the DEA in Miami. "Without some punitive action, there is no incentive for those companies that are not complying to start complying." Among 30 or more companies that Pennington has come across in the past four years, he says, the majority were operating under the table. Although it's estimated that more than 500 companies are selling the cards nationwide, only 104 have registered to do business in Florida. The PSC says "the large disparity" suggests there are many companies avoiding regulation of any kind -- or taxation -- by the state. The PSC's vote Tuesday means that companies that fail to register can face fines of at least $1,000, starting in December. "Florida is breaking ground nationally," said Howard Segermark, executive director of the International Telecard Association in Washington. Still, the PSC faces a question tougher than fining scofflaws: what to require from legitimate companies selling the cards. The PSC's staff has proposed to require that a pre-paid phone card: Show its face-value. This includes both the total dollar-value of phone calls available to the purchaser of the card and the cost for each minute that the card is used. Display its expiration date, if there is one. If not, the card is active until the full value of its pre-paid calls are made. Display the name and address of the company that sold the card, along with a toll-free phone number that a purchaser can call for help in the event of trouble. Complaints should be addressed within 24 hours. Big, legitimate companies in the business say there are too many variables in the services they offer to print everything on a card -- for instance, one card may be "rechargeable" for more time, making its face value meaningless. Printing an address on a phone card is no guarantee for a consumer, says Martha McMillan, representing MCI. "If you're dealing with an unscrupulous company, they could make up a phony address," she said. The fines for companies ignoring the state's requirements to register with the PSC are a good start, Segermark said. "It doesn't matter what regulations you adopt, if the bad guys are going to ignore them," Segermark said. "I think that fines could encourage more compliance. Some of our members say, $1,000? Let's work from $10,000." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 07:02:58 EDT From: danny burstein Subject: NYS-PSC Sues to Block FCC's Local Telecom Rules (from the NYS PSC web page, at www.dps.state.ny.us. dps= dep't of public service) STATE OF NEW YORK Public Service Commission John F. OMara, Chairman Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 Further Details: (518) 474-7080 http://www.dps.state.ny.us 96062 NEW YORK STATE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION FILES SUIT AGAINST FCC Albany, September 3 -- The New York State Public Service Commission has petitioned the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to annul the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) First Opinion and Order establishing rules to implement the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The New York Commission has been a national leader in establishing policies to promote the development of competition in the local telecommunications market. In its various competition- related dockets, the Commission has tailored its competitive policies to reflect local market conditions and local public policy concerns. We realize the FCC opinion is intended also to further the development of local competition, said New York State Public Service Commission Chairman John OMara. However, despite FCC Chairman Hundts recent assertions, we believe it substantially violates the regulatory scheme preserved in the 1996 Telecommunications Act, and established by Congress in 1934, which reserves to the states the regulation of intrastate communications. The New York State Public Service Commission argues that the FCC order is an intrusion on the states authority to set local telecommunication policies, and it would undercut a regulatory scheme which, by relying on the states to serve as regulatory laboratories, has provided a marriage of innovation and public responsibility that has served the nation well for over half a century. Among other things, the FCC opinion would preclude the state from carrying out the plans it has for bringing competition to the local exchange and preserving universal telephone service at reasonable rates for all customers in a way best suited to the needs of New Yorkers. http://www.dps.state.ny.us/PRESS/96062.WPD-2.t ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: Phone Technology and Privacy Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 15:57:47 PDT Big Brother Inc.? Gizmos for Evading -- or Snooping on -- Callers Via AP By GAUTAM NAIK The Wall Street Journal As large phone carriers race to smarten up their networks, an enterprising array of tiny companies are also trying to reach out and grab customers eager to dodge unwelcome callers. Some of their futuristic products, typically peddled by mail or on the Internet, chill privacy experts. Among the more intriguing: The JunkBuster, a $99 gadget from PreFone Integrated Products Inc. of Troy, Ohio, plugs in like an answering machine and wards off telemarketing calls. Before the phone rings, callers hear a prerecorded message that warns telemarketers to hang up, citing the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Law of 1992. It also tells them to "Place this number on your `Do Not Call' list." (Should the salesperson persist, PreFone promises to assist customers in collecting the fine they are entitled to under the law.) Ordinary callers are told to press 5, and the phone rings the usual way. For $150, PreFone sells another gizmo for identifying callers by the sound of the telephone's ring. A user's mother, for example, might be told in advance to press 4 every time she calls, a code that triggers a distinctive ring. Hello Direct Inc. in San Jose, Calif., sells a $60 gadget that "electronically alters your voice so it can fool unwanted callers," according to the company's catalog. A woman's voice can sound like a man's; an adult's can sound like a child's. The user has a choice of 16 separate "masking levels." Businesses, too, are beginning to make use of similar technology -- often to snoop on potential customers. CTI Interactive Inc. of Atlanta markets a system that harvests incoming phone numbers via Caller ID, then uses them to retrieve the callers' names and addresses from a separate database. The software can even spit out the average income of a particular neighborhood. Among CTI's customers is Premier Ford Lincoln Mercury, a car dealership in Columbus, Miss. At a cost of $5,500, plus a $990 monthly fee, Premier has installed a computer, CTI's software and a special Caller ID device called Whozz Calling made by Zeus Phonstuff Co. of Norcross, Ga. With this setup, Premier's sales manager can continually monitor how employees handle customer phone inquiries. And because the name and address of every caller is automatically recorded, follow-up is easier. Premier's owner Bill Russell says, "now we know where our prospects are located," and can direct marketing accordingly. Sales have risen by 25 to 30 cars a month since the phone system's installation, he adds. Retrieving such customer information is perfectly legal. Nonetheless, privacy experts are worried. Now that businesses can identify and track even casual callers without their knowledge, phone numbers have become keys to unlock storehouses of electronic data. To weed out potentially troublesome tenants, for example, a realtor could identify a caller surreptitiously and then search for his or her name in an electronic registry of landlord-tenant court cases. Another business might match callers' names with census data, to pinpoint the demographics of their neighborhoods by race or income. "The melding of data bases raises profound privacy questions," says Don Haines, a legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. "Big Brother is not necessarily a government surveillance scheme. It can just as readily be a private business." ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Line Conditions and Modems Date: 3 Sep 1996 21:35:59 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 03, 1996 17:00:18 in article , 'Tom Sweet ' wrote: > You might find this interesting too. > HIGH SPEED (28.8 KB/Sec) V.34 MODEMS ON THE TELEPHONE NETWORK > The technology of dial modems has reached the point where they are > pushing the theoretical limits of how much data can be passed over an > analog telephone connection. The latest type of high speed modem is > built per a standard called V.34. Under the best of conditions these > modems can pass data at 28.8 kb/sec. The data speed that can be > supported on an analog circuit is a function of the bandwidth of the > channel and the noise on that channel. Wide bandwidth, low noise > connections, can carry more data than narrow bandwidth, high noise > connections. What he said is pretty much consistent with the types of connections I get on average: Local "clean": 28.8-31.2, with an occasional 33.6 Local "narrow": lucky if I get 19.2, and it backs down to 12.0 Most LD carriers cross-US: 24.0 to an occasional 28.8 >> Someone said: >>> modems that are installed are not $140 USR > Sportster modems either. I've found that price usually has very little to do with modem performance; the key factor is the company's consistent quality of product. I've heard horror stories galore about every company in the market. My 2c, from firsthand experience: Avoid: Cardinal (above the 2.4k models): 32% failure rate with intermittent use (29 out of 91 units customers of mine had took a dirt nap in a year or less) Practical Peripherals (14.4k models): 33% failure rate with daily use (4 dead out of 12 in TWO MONTHES TIME at one of my accounts that "wanted to save some money") Marginal: Hayes (14.4 and 28.8): One failure, but rampant connection problems in some of the 28.8s I've used, especially the PCMCIA line. (one unit failed after eight months of daily use out of fifty installed). Zoom (14.4 and 28.8): No failures, but did not negotiate well with ANY line noise. Some problems connecting to other brands as well. No problems, ever: USR (9.6, 14.4, 28.8, 33.6): The header says it; I recommend these as I've never had a bad unit, having tried purchasing through various sources. Sportster is not as good with throughput as higher-priced Courier, but for a 10-20 cps difference in tests, you get alot for the money. Motorola: They've supplied the midrange end for years, and are now in the PC-end of things. Always a top-notch product. Our Motorola on our AS/400 has been running for over 5 years, and never complained once (it's outlasted two prior boxes that it was attached to). John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: booloo@cats.ucsc.edu (Mark Boolootian) Subject: The DEMA Web Site: The Spammer's Secret Clubhouse Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 13:51:52 PDT Pat, I thought you might be interested in the following: Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 18:33:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Agre To: rre@weber.ucsd.edu [An RRE subscriber has found the spammers' secret clubhouse. Don't flame or trash them, but I think it would be great if somebody wanted to monitor the list and/or read the archives and write a thoughtful commentary on the spammers' methods and thinking. I should say that not everyone on the list is a spammer, but many are.] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help@weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 18:43:31 -0500 From: <> You might be interested to know about a list that appears to be gaining in credibility among Internet marketers, the DEMA (Direct Email marketing Association) list. I detest unsolicted commercial email but joined the list just to keep tabs on what they're up to. Topics include such things as which newsgroup email-gathering software is the best, how to make your unsolicted email targeted for the group so it's more easily accepted, etc. I was mildly amused once that the moderator clipped a poster's sig file because it exceeded the "6 lines dictated by netiquette"! I emailed and asked, "Is it ok to waste someone else's resources but not your own?". He wasn't amused, though. Needless to say my comments didn't make it to the list. DEMA postings are archived at http://kww.com/dema/. ----------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wouldn't it be great if somehow someone eventually brought the nuisance of spam and junk mail on the net to a screaming halt once and for all? What nerve they have to talk about the requirements of netiquette! By their very existence on the net, spammers and junk mailers violate the very core of netiquette. No, by all means, just because those people send out jillions of pieces of unsolicited email every day and spam every newsgroup they can find, that is no reason for anyone to go and wreck their secret clubhouse. I have to wonder though how *they* would like getting at least a dozen copies of the same 'make money fast' letter in their mail each day. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 96 10:12:00 EDT From: joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > Easy. Call your LEC (Local Exchange Carrier) and request that they > block any changes to your LD without your direct approval. This is > often called a PIC freeze. Most LECs do not charge for this. A > complaint to the FCC may also be in order. (See their Web site at: > http://www.fcc.gov) -- Has anyone, ever, gotten any help from the FCC? We've heard lots of reports (including my own) of the FCC's inaction. Has anyone ever been called back by someone from the FCC, or received a written response to a written inquiry? Joel (joel@exc.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It used to be years ago the FCC did help out members of the public who wrote to them with complaints. They would explain how to file informal complaints and help the public in getting things resolved. I think in the past few years their volume of mail -- as the public has learned more and more about their rights where the carriers are concerned, etc -- has grown so heavy they cannot begin to work on it all. Also, I think some of the commissioners in recent years are a lot more friendly with the carriers than they used to be. Now-days I would consider the FCC to be pretty ineffectual at resolving public complaints. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Carla Legendre Subject: Looking For Constructive Criticism of Web Page Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 17:46:49 -0700 Organization: CITI Hi, We just launched a site for commmunications research and we're looking for constructive criticism. The site is not graphics-intensive, since it's meant to be a utility for gathering information. Please check us out at http://www.ctr.columbia.edu/vii -- any and all comments or questions are welcome. ------------------------------ From: uplink@uplinktech.com (Anita M. Wilcox) Subject: How to Find Nynex Agent or Reseller? Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 10:36:55 GMT Organization: UpLink Technologies Reply-To: uplink@uplinktech.com Hi, I'm trying to find an agent/reseller of Nynex to provide me with frame-relay circuits in Massachusetts. I have an ISP, I just need to get circuits for my clients. The reseller I used before (CTC) in a word, sucks! As soon as I signed the contracts, it's like they disappeared off the face of the earth. I had to resort to calling them every half hour and filling up their voicemail and paging them nonstop just to get a response to my call. I do NOT want to deal with them anymore, since they are obviously uninterested in my business (which is too bad for them, since I expect to have requirements for lots of services). My problem is that I can't seem to find any other agents to provide me with the services I need. The phone book wasn't much help and I didn't find anything on the Net. I called Nynex directly, but got shuffled off and transferred several times before I reached someone who told me that they would call me within 48 hours. Well, it's been 3 days and no call yet. This is getting ridiculous! If anyone has a number of someone to call at Nynex or of a reseller/agent, please let me know. Thanks in advance! Anita ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 10:20:42 EDT From: Ratnadeep R. Damle Subject: Discount International Phone Providers I have recently come across three companies which provide steeply discounted international phone rates. I have never heard of these companies before, and was wondering if anyone has any information on them. The following questions come to mind, but any other information which you have would be appreciated: 1. Has anyone used any of these companies before, and are they legitimate? 2. How can they provide rates which are so steeply discounted? 3. What is the quality of the connections provided? 4. Are there any "hidden" costs which are not detailed in the provided information? 5. How reliable is the service (can I get access at any time, or are there limited periods of operation only)? 6. Are there any other companies which provide similar services which any of you can recommend? The companies: *Primecall Seattle, WA *Kallback Seattle, WA *New World Telecommunications Teaneck, NJ Thanks in advance for your help, (Mr.) Ratnadeep Damle Washington, DC rdamle@mil3.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 22:28:02 PDT From: henry mensch Subject: Re: MCI Advertising as ISDN ISP, But Doesn't Have it Yet > From: JHamilton@Bridge.BellSouth.Com (Justin Hamilton) > Subject: MCI Advertising as ISDN ISP, But Doesn't Have it Yet > Date: Mon, 02 Sep 1996 20:58:04 GMT > I decided to checkout MCI's web page to see what they had. Eventually > I found a page which contained info on "internetMCI Access for Home" > and the pieces that caught my eye were: > internetMCI's Dial Access platform supports both analog (up to > 28.8Kbps modems) and ISDN (integrated switched digital network) > connections equaling 56/64 Kbps. Elsewhere in that selfsame web site MCI tells the customer to phone their local office if they require ISDN dialup capability, so I did. (Actually, I sent a few faxes ... my experience with their tech support is that they take days and weeks to answer) ... this was months ago, and I still have no answer. In short: MCI comes up short. Why anyone would take them seriously to provide their dialtone if they can't provide the services they say they provide is beyond me. # henry mensch / po box 14592; sf, ca 94114-0592 / # http://www.q.com/henry/ ------------------------------ From: sanchema@telefonica.com.ar Subject: Re: Hang-Up Detection in Analog Line? Date: Wed, 04 Sep 96 10:02:00 PDT Avi Ilan wrote: > In analog line, is there a way to detect that someone hang-up the > phone even when Im not listen to the special beep signal of the > telephone exchange. > If there is a way I would be happy to know about that. We still have many analog exchanges in our network, but depending on the provider, they have different ways to identify the hang-up. The most used is a change in the voltage (i.e. when the line is not being used, there's -48 V/-60V depending on the provider, when you hang up, it turns to 48 V/60 V for a slot of time and then return to a level of reference, others falls to a lower level like -20 V or something of the sort), an other signal is a burst of noise out of band (you work between 400 Hz-4000 Hz aprox. and the burst is in the range of tens of kHz) when the hang up takes place. There are in the market a number of dispositives that measure these parameters and can detect the changes made in the line. You would first determine which kind of parameters must be measured in your system. Regards, Mariana Sanchez ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #459 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Sep 4 17:01:25 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA04152; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 17:01:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 17:01:25 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609042101.RAA04152@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #460 TELECOM Digest Wed, 4 Sep 96 17:01:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 460 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada ISP Dispute Nearly Over? (Ian Angus) Albanian Telecom Network Modernized; AT&T Direct Service Started (N Allen) Re: GTE Says Continuous Internet Connection Desirable (Bill Sohl) Re: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC (Jack Adams) Re: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC (Stuart Zimmerman) Re: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC (John R. Levine) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Michael J. Wengler) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ian Angus Subject: Bell Canada ISP Dispute Nearly Over? Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 16:07:35 -0400 Organization: Angus TeleManagement Group Bell Canada Proposes Win-Win Solution to Internet Tariff Battle By Ian Angus, Angus TeleManagement Group (Reprinted with permission from the September issue of Telemanagement magazine) It looks as though the Bell-ISP dispute is finally over. After months of public acrimony followed by even more months of private negotiations, technology trials, and engineering studies Canada's largest telephone company has filed a tariff which should make everyone happy. Tariff Notice 5806, submitted to the CRTC on August 1, has three major features: 1.Bell withdraws its opposition to the use of Centrex for dial-up data services. Internet Service Providers who have been using Centrex may continue to use it, paying standard Centrex rates. ISPs and others who wish to convert from other access services to Centrex may do so. 2.The Information Service Access Line tariff will be withdrawn. Customers who are now using ISALs may convert to other lower-priced access services for their inbound data connections. 3.Bell proposes to introduce a new service, ISP Link, which is specifically designed for high-volume inbound data services. The new service offers digital trunks at rates which are lower than the current rates for digital trunks under the Megalink and Digital Exchange Access (DEA) tariffs. Bell asked the CRTC to approve the changes by September 1, for implementation on September 12. Bell vs ISPs The Bell-ISP battle began in the fall of 1995, when Bell engineers discovered that some new Centrex customers were putting an unusually heavy load on the local phone network in major cities. These customers were Internet Service Providers who had installed Centrex lines to allow customers to dial in to their operations. Bell's product management group then realized that using Centrex for such a purpose was contrary to the tariff even though it was installed on the recommendation of Bell sales reps, and even though the ISPs had signed contracts with Bell. The tariff says that a Centrex line connected to a computer is an ISAL, and subject to a much higher monthly rate. (ISPs in Toronto were paying from $22.60 to $39.00 a month for each Centrex line; each ISAL would cost $85.50.) Bell sales reps began telling their ISP customers about the price increase and the ISPs rebelled. Using their Internet know-how, they organized letter-writing and phone campaigns and threatened boycotts of Bell services. It was David vs. Goliath and David was getting all the good press. Bell offered to negotiate, suspending any price changes until a new tariff for an ISP service was approved by the CRTC. Win-Win Bell's proposals offer a win-win solution to a very messy conflict. ** Internet Service Providers get to keep Centrex lines. This was the biggest bone of contention. ** ISP Link offers an attractive alternative for the largest ISPs and online service providers. Luring such customers away from Centrex will reduce the traffic problems which the sudden growth of the ISP industry produced last year. (ISP Link connects to the trunk side of Bell's switching equipment, and so bypasses the Line Concentrator Modules which caused all the difficulty with high volume Centrex use. For details, see http://http://www/isp-bell/ib.html In order to achieve this solution, however, Bell had to take a hit to its pocketbook, by eliminating the ISAL tariff. The Telecom Act prohibits undue discrimination in telco tariffs which means that Bell can't let ISPs use Centrex or ISP-Link, while forcing banks, universities, and other large customers to pay the ISAL rate for identical service. So the ISAL Tariff has to go, and current ISAL users will migrate to ISP Link or Centrex. Some estimates suggest that Bell's revenues could drop by three to five million dollars a year as a result. That's not chicken feed, but it's a small price to pay to end a marketing and public relations nightmare. Any other approach for example, requiring all ISPs to use ISP Link would have further poisoned relations between Bell and many of its fastest-growing customers. ISP Link For several years, Bell has offered bundles of 23 or 24 digital circuits under its Megalink (ISDN Primary Rate) and Digital Exchange Access (DS-1) tariffs. Those services are widely used to provide inbound and outbound trunks on PBXs and Automatic Call Distributors. ISP Link provides a Megalink or DEA service which is limited to inbound data calls only. It will support: ** Incoming data-only calls. ** Incoming data calls from analog modems, switched 56 Kbps services, or ISDN 64/128 Kbps services. (ISDN works on Megalink only.) ** Non-dedicated 800/888 calls. Calls must terminate on ISP Links. ** Equivalency within a Megalink System Group or within a DEA System Group. ** Up to five one-way incoming numbers and up to five hunt groups per DEA Link service. ** Up to five inward numbers and up to five Virtual Facility Groups per Megalink/ISP Link service. ** Direct Inward Dial (DID) service. The following features will not be permitted on the ISP-Link service: ** Outbound calling. ** Analog speech. ** Calling Line Identification and Calling Name Display. ** 900 and 976 calls. ** Overflow outside a System Group. ** Emergency Call Completion using AIN switch redirect or 800/888 emergency call completion. Monthly Rates ISP Link rates are based directly on existing tariffs the only new item is an ISP Link charge of $22/Link/month. A separate Link is required for each simultaneous incoming call. For Megalink, the price is the Megalink Access rate (charged for each 23B+D or 24B connection to the customer fromthe telephone network) plus the appropriate number of ISP Link charges. For DEA, the price is the DEA Access rate (for each DS-1) plus the PSTN termination charge ($216/month/DS1) plus the appropriate number of ISP Link charges. In each rate group, the Access rate varies according to the rate group in which the service is provided, the number of Megalinks or DEAs, and the length of the contract. The bottom line: if this tariff is approved, Megalink-ISP Link customers will pay between $37 and $61 per channel per month, and DEA-ISP Link customers will pay between $37 and $56 per channel per month. (If Direct Inward Dialing is required, DID charges apply in addition.) This is more than most ISPs have been paying for Centrex locals, but it adds digital access, so that ISPs can support their ISDN Basic Rate or switched-56 customers over the same trunks as their analog customers. This should simplifying configuration planning and reduce management costs. Installation Charges Bell's tariff filing includes two proposals to reduce the up-front cost of installing ISP Link. The normal installation charge of $25 for each ISP Link (maximum $575 per order) will be waived in the first six months. Centrex customers who change to ISP Link will have their Centrex contract termination charges waived, if the ISP Link contract period is the same as that on their Centrex contract, and if they take the same number of ISP Links as they had Centrex locals. A Marketing Solution From Bell Canada's point of view, there were three different problems to solve in this case. ** Technical: The Internet is radically changing traffic patterns on local telephone networks. Modifying the network to handle the change will be costly. ** Tariff: The Tariff is explicit. Centrex lines connected to computers must pay the ISAL rate. ** Marketing: With local competition just around the corner, Bell was in a public relations nightmare. It was being denounced on all sides as anti-Internet, anti-competition, anti-entrepreneur. The situation became a crisis because middle managers at Bell saw only the first two issues, and dealt with them in a business-as-usual manner. The crisis was resolved when senior marketing managers (most notably Group VP Don Morrison and VP Terry Mosey) recognized that the marketing problem had to be solved first. Allowing the ISPs to keep Centrex solves the marketing problem. Abolishing the ISAL tariff solves the legal problem. And introducing ISP Link if it is effectively sold and supported by Bell sales and technical personnel will reduce, if not eliminate, the technical problem. These proposals all require CRTC approval, but we'll be surprised if the regulator raises any major objections. If we're right, the battle is now over. IAN ANGUS ianangus@angustel.ca Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca 8 Old Kingston Road tel: 905-686-5050 ext 222 Ajax ON L1T 2Z7 Canada fax: 905-686-2655 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 20:50:35 GMT From: Nigel Allen Organization: 8 Silver Avenue, Toronto ON M6R 1X8 Subject: Albanian Telecom Network Modernized; AT&T Direct Service Started For most of my adult life, I have been fascinated with Albania and how isolated and Stalinist it was until the Party of Labor of Albania finally lost power a few years ago. Albanians are now more free politically, but ordinary people are no better off economically than they were before. Still, it's good to see that the phone system is improving. What follows is a press release from AT&T that I found on the company's Web site. (AT&T press releases can be found at .) ----------------------- Albanian Telecom network is modernized; AT&T Direct Service introduced TIRANA, Albania -- AT&T and Albanian Telecom today announced the availability of direct, digital communications between Albania and the U.S. This development more than triples the available telephone circuits between the two countries and improves sound quality. To make this possible, AT&T provided an earth station and worked closely with Albanian Telecom on its installation and maintenance. In addition to these network improvements, AT&T announced the availability of its AT&T Direct(sm) Service in Albania. AT&T Direct Service helps tourists and business travelers in more than 85 countries call more than 200 countries with the help of an English-speaking operator. To use the service in Albania, people call +00800-0010 from any hotel or residential phone. Some phones may require a coin or card deposit to access local service. The balance of the call is billed to an AT&T Global Calling Card or made as a collect call. AT&T, incorporated in 1885, provides communications services to businesses and consumers in more than 200 countries. Its Worldwide Intelligent Network carries more than 200 million voice, data, video and facsimile messages every business day. For more information, reporters may contact: Valerie Hasselbach - AT&T +355-42-35035 (Albania, Rogner Hotel) +32-2-676-3196 (after Sept. 5, Belgium) vhasselbach@attmail.com Phil Coathup - AT&T +44-1527-354935 (U.K.) pcoathup@attmail.com Laura Qorlaze - Albanian Telecom +355-42-32087 or 32169 (Albania) KEYWORDS: earth_station, digital_communication, global_calling_card forwarded by Nigel Allen ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen/ ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: GTE Says Continuous Internet Connection Desirable Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 18:08:15 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises Paul Wilson wrote: > Jack Decker (jack@novagate.com) writes: >> So, in this press release, we have GTE on record as saying that a >> continuous connection to the Internet is a desirable thing - not that >> we needed GTE to tell us this, but it's refreshing to hear a phone >> company admit that a 24 hour per day connection is desirable, rather >> than blaming Internet users who spend time online as the reason that >> the phone system is "going to Hell in a handbasket" (as some of the >> "Baby Bells" are apparently trying to do)! > ADSL is essentially data over voice and therefore its use by > traditional ISPs would not be as simple as an ADSL modem at your > location and one at the ISP. Your voice and data would still need to > be separated at the LEC switch location. I doubt if you or I would > want to pay for a full time data connection and I doubt ISPs would > want, or could, pay for full time connections to every subscriber. If residential ISDN was affordably priced, then a D channel virtual connection (X.25 packet) could be left up for indefinete time periods without incurring usage costs except for incoming and outgoing email. The X.25 connection wouldn't likly be cost effective for WEB access (in either direction), but it could provide that instant email reception at low cost. > GTE can push it because they have the copper to your premise or > business anyway; using ADSL to provide Internet service will be a > bonus and a "full time connection" will not cause a burden on the > switch since that traffic will not hit the switch. > Believe me the "Baby Bells", along with other LECs, have been made > aware of the additional burden of Internet traffic through experience. Not really that worse than teenagers on indefinite calls in flat rate calling areas. The connection is all that matters, usage (i.e. data or voice) should be immaterial to the telco. Resources are the same for ither type of call. > And that experience has not been good. When you realize that very few > computer users are Interent users you realize the problem will only > grow worse if that traffic continues to traverse the public switch > network as it grows. Most internet traffic does not traverse the telco switched network except in the local Intra-switch arena. Few people make long distance calls for internet access and those that do pay long distance rates for the time they are connected. I dial a local exchange number for access to my ISP so the only resources being used is one intra-switch connection. That's identical to what a teenager uses for a two hour connection to their friend(s). I live in a town with 20,000 plus population. At any one time I really doubt that there is any more than a couple of hundred switch connections used for internet access. That's in sharp contrast to the volume of voice calls. One question: I find the comment that MOST computer users ae not internet users to be totally the opposite of what I see and hear in this area. It may be true in some parts of the country, but I suspect not in the NY/NJ/CT tri-state area. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: Jack Adams Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 08:57:30 -0400 Organization: AT&T Laboratories Reply-To: jacka@ffast.ffast.att.com Rolf K. Taylor wrote: > Many may know that one can force a call through a particular long > distance carrier by dialing 10xxx+1+the area code and number. > In many locations this can also be used to force a "local long distance" > ie intralata toll call, through a LD carrier rather than your RBOC. > In any case, enough background. ATT will charge a surcharge for this > type of connection, but suffice it to say, at least it can get you > connected. Oh really? My 10288 ... calls are all lower than equivalent BA rates within my LATA. > I recently had a Bell Atlantic customer find out that the > 10288 "10ATT" code no longer works for him. B.A. says that ATT has > terminated their shared database arrangement with them and it is tough > luck. I sense some confusion here. The agreements that are no longer being honored are the so called Mutual Card Honoring Agrements (MHAs). These agreements were reciprocal and applied to 0+ calls only. Ie, a LEC calling card would be honored for LD 0+ toll calls by AT&T (And most of the other IXCs) and conversely, the LECs would accept AT&T's calling card for intraLATA 0+ calls. These MHA's are being dissolved for reasons that I won't comment on. However, this is not the case with carrier override for 1+ or 7 digit intralata calls. This is a function of digit translation tables in each local switch and has little to do with the MHAs. I suspect that Rolf's example is confusing 0+ MHA rejection with 1+ which continues to work at least as far as I can determine. > This customer is a broadcaster who is sending digital audio down ISDN. > He orders many ISDN lines every year. It is difficult enough to get > the lines put in. Now he finds he has lost the ability to use this > valuable troubleshooting code. > ATT says to use 1800callatt. But how can he use it with a data call? > No way. Agreed, the "Call ATT" service flat out won't work in his case. 10ATT.1.NPA.NXX.XXXX or 10ATT.NXX.XXXX continues to work. Jack Adams|AT&T Labs|jacka@ffast.ffast.att.com|908.870.7051[voice] 908.261.1303[page]|908.313.4358[mobile]|908.870.7286[fax] "Man is the only animal that blushes. Or needs to." ...Mark Twain ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 09:50:38 -0700 From: Stuart Zimmerman Reply-To: f_save@SNET.Net Organization: Fone Saver Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC In TELECOM Digest V16 #455 ac219@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rolf K. Taylor) wrote: > In many locations this can also be used to force a "local long distance" > ie intralata toll call, through a LD carrier rather than your RBOC. > In any case, enough background. ATT will charge a surcharge for this > type of connection, but suffice it to say, at least it can get you > connected. I recently had a Bell Atlantic customer find out that the > 10288 "10ATT" code no longer works for him. B.A. says that ATT has > terminated their shared database arrangement with them and it is tough > luck. Your client should still be able to use the 10288 code to get to AT&T if he establishes an account with AT&T for the phone numbers involved. This is often called secondary service. (There also should avoid the per call surcharge.] Depending on the type of service, there may be a $5 per month charge if he does not use at least $5 per month of AT&T service. Have him call AT&T sales to set it up. (Their residential number is 1-800-222-0300. Their commercial service number is 1-800-222-0400.) The biggest problem with this is that they will usually screw up the order and change the default carrier. You may want to call Bell Atlantic and ask for a PIC [Primary Interexchange Carrier] code freeze first. Fone Saver, LLC Phone: 1-800-31-FONE-1 Web: http://www.wp.com/Fone_Saver E-Mail: f_save@snet.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 16:43:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. [re intra-LATA ISDN calls sent to an IXC via 10XXX (is that enough acronyms for you?)] > ... I recently had a Bell Atlantic customer find out that the > 10288 "10ATT" code no longer works for him. B.A. says that ATT has > terminated their shared database arrangement with them and it is tough luck. Someone's blowing smoke in your direction. The shared database business only affects calling card calls placed via 0+10D. If he's dialing direct, and there's intra-LATA toll competition in that area, the call should work. Can he still dial 10288-1-number between voice phones in the same prefixes he's trying to use for data calls? If so, I suspect that the problem is that someone at the central office messed up the programming on the ISDN lines. If he can't even make the voice call, BA has really messed up their switch and need to be leaned on, perhaps with assistance from the state regulators. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - MIT econ prof ------------------------------ From: jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 08:59:48 PDT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. In article , writes: >> I suppose that with increasing SS7 connectivity it'd be >> possible not to set up the two toll calls, but the billing would be >> tricky. For example, what happens if someone calls you from Santa Monica? >> Does he pay the message units to LA, an unexpected inter-LATA toll to >> SF, or what? > Your proposal is at least as good as mine. But I'm sure it wouldn't > be hard to come up with a system that selected a path that would > reduce network traffic, but not at the expense of increasing cost to > the caller. Basically, calls from far away from LA would be routed > directly to SF -- since that would either keep the cost to the caller > constant (if it's from NY, say) or reduce it (if it's from the SF Bay > Area). Calls from close to LA would take the same route they do > today. > With SS7 anything will be possible ... I wouldn't count on any of the current SS7 ISUPs in North America to be able to straighten out the "hairpin" of cellular/PCS/GSM call delivery to a roamer. A carrier may elect to absorb the long distance for call delivery to incur roamer airtime, but this does not mean that path minimization has occurred. ISDN can barely do path minimization within a single switch and SS7 is between multiple switches. Also, the billing problem of who pays how much remains confounding as long as long distance is distance and time sensitive, eg. intra-state long distance is subject to state sales tax. It is interesting to note that call delivery (as opposed to call forwarding) to a roamer is similar to call routing for Number Portability. There is the potential to solve the hairpin routing for both but this probably won't happen since Local Number Portability as defined by the FCC rules is only concerned for portability within a "Rate Center" which means one part of the LNP hairpin will never be a long distance call. Since the cellular/PCS/GSM industry is maybe one tenth of the non-mobile landline local loop industry, it may be more effective to concentrate efforts towards National Number Portability to solve the hairpin path a roaming call takes. Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com ------------------------------ From: Michael J. Wengler Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 14:02:51 -0700 Organization: QUALCOMM, Incorporated; San Diego, CA, USA Yigal Arens wrote: > Yigal Arens wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tell your friend to start dialing into >> the number for the roaming port in San Francisco. ... PAT] > That's fine with me, but how do I find out that number? When you arrive at the place you will be roaming, dial 611 (or *611 if that doesn't work). This is a free call. Ask the service person you finally get (probably having to wander through voicetext hell to get there.) "I will be roaming in this area for a few days. I want people to be able to call me on a local number here. What is the roamer access number?" Hopefully, you will be given the number. When your callers call you at this number, they will hear a dialtone after dialing this number. At that point, they have to dial your regular cell number including areacode to get you. > I see it on my long distance bills, but that is long after I get back ... I've seen the numbers you mean, but they were different for different calls. These are NOT the numbers you want! I think these are dyanmically assigned numbers, and probably change for every call you get. > Of course, this still doesn't solve the problem of the person who > doesn't know that I'm roaming. You want calling to be handled differently than it is. I think you want one whole layer more signalling than is currently implemented. It COULD be done the way you say, and possibly will sometime, but for the present, its not unreasonable for a call dialled to your home area code to have to wander through your home area code on the way to wherever you actually are. An added complication: suppose someone in or near your local area calls your cell phone. Do they get charged for a long distance call because you are actually somewhere else, even though they dialed local? That seems unfair. My opinion is free. My employer's opinion costs big bucks. But their products are just dandy! See them at and . ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #460 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 01:51:33 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA28763; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 01:51:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 01:51:33 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609050551.BAA28763@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #461 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 01:51:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 461 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ITU Bulletin Number 626 Now Available (Zev Rubenstein) UCLA Short Courses on Communications (Bill Goodin) 800/888 Calls From Jails/Prisons (hhzietz@aol.com) Percent of USA With Toll Alerting (Greg Monti) Technical Question on GSM (alkamman@slip.net) Fibre Optic Cables / Networks, Need Information (Philip Ber) Re: Why is the Internet So Slow? (Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Internet Overload and DNS (Joel M. Hoffman) Re: What Does a Call Cost? (Tor-Einar Jarnbjo) Re: Can ISP Dial-ins Really Cause Blocking in the CO? (Jock Mackirdy) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Phil Ritter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 20:20:00 +0000 From: CMS!WIRELESS!zev@wireless.attmail.com (Rubenstein,Zev) Subject: ITU Bulletin Number 626 Now Available ITU Operational Belletin No. 626 is now available. Below is a summary of its contents. Zev Rubenstein Nationwide Telecommunications Resources ------------------------------------------- SUMMARY of ITU Operational Bulletin # 626 APPROVAL AND DELETION OF ITU-T RECOMMENDATIONS A listing of new, approved Recommendations is provided. Services and applications that may be impacted by these Recommendations include: facsimile, digital compression, multimedia conferencing, cooperative document handling, open document architecture and binary file transfer. A listing of deleted Recommendations is provided. Services and applications that may be impacted include: facsimile apparatus for document transmission. Recommendation T.2 and T.3 are deleted. SHIP STATION SELECTIVE CALL NUMBERS Numbers 69900-69999 have been assigned to Malaysia ASSIGNMENT OF SIGNALLING AREA/NETWORK CODES SANC 4-009 has been assigned to the Republic of India LEGAL TIME CHANGES Provided is notice of time changes in specific countries MESSAGE HANDLING SERVICE BELGIUM PUBLINK has been authorized to provide Message Handling Service TELEPHONE SERVICE AUSTRALIA Provided are changes to the telephone numbering plan in Australia BAHAMAS A new geographical area code (NPA) 242 has been assigned to the Bahamas NAMIBIA Changes to Namibia's telephone numbering plan are provided ST.KITTS & NEVIS A new geographical area code (NPA) 869 has been assigned to St. Kitts and Nevis SIERRA LEONE A new number range beginning with "8" in Sierra Leone for Audiotex service has been announced. Administrations are requested to open access to this number range. INAUGURATION OF UNIVERSAL FREEPHONE NUMBER FOR INTERNATIOANL FREEPHONE SERVICE. ADVANCE INFORMATION AND TIMETABLE Provide are general guidelines for the application and assignments of UIFN numbers DATA TRANSMISSION SERVICE LUXEMBOURG The data network identification code (DNIC) 270 5 has been allocated to LUXNET OTHER COMMUNICATIONS YUGOSLAVIA The special call sign 4N140 has been authorized Call-Back Cyprus Call-Back is formally prohibited in Cyprus REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONAIRE ON CONDITIONS FOR PROVISION OF CALL-BACK SERVICES The results of a questionaire concerning Call-Back are provided (Note 44 provides comments provided on behalf of the USA by the FCC) AMENDMENTS TO SERVICE DOCUMENTS LIST OF COAST STATIONS Changes to the List of Coast Stations are provided for the following countries: Australia Denmark Spain LIST OF SHIP STATIONS Changes to Sub-Section 2A are provided LIST OF DATA NETWORK IDENTIFICATION CODES Changes are provided for the following country: Luxembourg LIST OF INTERNATIONAL SIGNALLING POINT CODES IPSC changes are provided for the following country: Republic of India LIST OF NAMES OF ADMINISTRATION MANAGEMENT DOMAINS Conatact information for PUBLINK (Belgium) is provided. LIST OF ISSUER IDENTIFIER NUMBERS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CHARGE CARD SWITZERLAND New IIN Assignment: 89 41 20 Assigned to: Modacom AG DIALING PROCEDURES Changes to the dialing procedures of the following country is provided: The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ANNEX TO ITU OPERATIONAL BULLETIN A revised annex "List of ITU-T Recommendation E.164 Assigned Country Codes" is included. ------------------------------ From: BGoodin@UNEX.UCLA.EDU (Goodin, Bill) Organization: UCLA Extension - contact Postmaster@unex.ucla.edu for problems Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 17:13:58 -0700 Subject: UCLA Short Courses on Communications Three short courses on communications with Bernard Sklar and frederick harris at UCLA. On November 18-22, 1996, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Processing", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bernard Sklar, PhD, Communications Engineering Services, and frederick harris, MS, Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State University. As part of the course materials, each participant receives a copy of the text, "Digital Communications: Fundamentals and Applications", by Bernard Sklar. This course provides comprehensive coverage of advanced digital communications. It differs from other communications courses in its emphasis on applying modern digital signal processing techniques to the implementation of communication systems. This makes the course essential for practitioners in the rapidly changing field. Error- correction coding, spread spectrum techniques, and bandwidth-efficient signaling are all discussed in detail. Basic digital signaling methods and the newest modulation-with-memory techniques are presented, along with trellis-coded modulation. The course fee is $1495, which includes the text and extensive course notes. These course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. __________ On December 2-3, 1996, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Advanced Digital Communications: The Search for Efficient Signaling Methods", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructor is Bernard Sklar, PhD, Communications Engineering Services. The approach taken in this course is quite different than in a basic course. Here, we begin with some system requirements and understand how to make reasonable design choices. The requirements then drive us toward the selection of some candidate systems. The course reviews system subtleties in transforming from data-bits to channel-bits to symbols to chips; it also reviews the Viterbi decoding algorithm. Other important topics include trellis-coded modulation, power- and bandwidth-efficient signaling, and spread spectrum signaling. The course emphasizes fading channels and how to mitigate the effects of fading, with specific examples of how various mobile systems have been designed to withstand fading. These systems include the Viterbi equalizer in the Global System for Mobile Communication (GSM) and the Rake receiver in CDMA (IS-95). The course also examines the recently discovered Turbo codes, whose error-correcting performance is close to the Shannon limit. The course fee is $895, which includes the text and extensive course notes. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. _________ On December 4-6, 1996, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Multirate Digital Filters and Applications", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructor is Professor frederick harris, Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State University. This course is an introduction to multirate digital filters, which are variants of non-recursive filters, and incorporate one or more resamplers in the signal path. These embedded resamplers affect changes in sample rate for upsampling, downsampling, or combinations of both. Changes in sampling rate as part of the signal processing is a feature unique to sampled data systems. and has no counterpart in continuous signal processing. Benefits include reduced cost for a given signal processing task and improved levels of performance for a given computational burden. This economy of computation has become an essential requirement of modern communication systems, particularly battery-operated equipment. Specific course topics include: Introduction to sample rate conversion, Non-recursive (finite impulse response) filters, Prototype FIR filter design methods, Decimation and interpolation, Multirate filters, Two-channel filter banks, M-channel filter banks, Proportional bandwidth filter banks and wavelet analysis, Polyphase recursive all-pass filter banks, Multirate filter applications. The course fee is $1195, which includes extensive course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. __________ For additional information and complete course descriptions, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/ These courses may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: HHZietz@aol.com Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 18:37:11 -0400 Subject: 800/888 Calls From Jails/Prisons Previous articles mentioned exorbitant charges for calls made by inmates of jails or prisons. This is apparently the case where the penal institution contracts with an "alternate operator service". I am curious as to what would happen if a prisoner attempts to call a toll free number under those circumstances. For example, if relative sets up a toll free number at thier residence to receive calls from the inmate. Could / would a surcharge be billed to the 800/888 number itself? Would such a surcharge be billed through the Responsible Orginization that provides the toll free service, or would it be billed separately? Could / would the 800/888 access be blocked? It is never blocked out in the real world (ha ha). An inmates civil rights are limited (I think), so could that disallow some of the FCC requirements for access to toll free services? I would like to receive responses from people with personal or practical experience, as well as any theoretical answers. I encourage any direct responses, as well as ones to the group itself of course! (No spam please, I am a vegetarian. Please do not confuse a "vegetarian" with the "vegetables" that send or respond to spam!) Thank you in advance! HH Zietz@aol.com. PS: Patrick, Congratulations once again, fifteen years can seem like an eternity, except when you love what you do. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yep, this Digest started fifteen years ago last month, in August, 1981. As far as I know, 800/888 calls are blocked on all jail phones, as are calls to 900/976, 500, and anything else which is not considered a 'regular' call. Your own personal calling card will not work either. Calls to the '0' operator or the '00' oper- ator go to intercept and 'call cannot be completed as dialed'. The only thing which will work is zero plus ten digits, since all calls have to be made collect. The responding operator who places the collect call for you sees on her screen that you are a prisoner with a cautionary note to take care that no fraud occurs. She has been trained to respond to you as rudely as possible considering your less than dirt status. If you don't like it, then don't be an innocent person who gets hassled by a police officer with an ax to grind or a quota to meet or a dislike for 'your kind'. If the person you are trying to call for assistance has a 'collect block' on their line, i.e. billed number screening, well that's just too bad. That'll teach your family (friend) to sign up for those fancy services the telephone company offers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 23:18:26 -0400 From: cc004056@interramp.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Percent of USA With Toll Alerting With all the talk on the group about what 1+ dialing stands for, I thought it might be interesting to review what parts of the US have/don't have 1+ for toll alerting. The TOLL ALERTING dialing plan: home NPA, local call: 7 digits (10d or 1+10d may also be permitted) home NPA, toll call: 1+10d foreign NPA, local call: either 7d or 10d (or 1+10d?) foreign NPA, toll call: 1+10d The NON-TOLL-ALERTING dialing plan: home NPA: 7d (1+10d may also be permitted) foreign NPA: 1+10d The non-toll-alerting states are: Number Population State of NPAs (millions) ----- ------- ---------- ME 1 1.3 NH 1 1 RI 1 1 VT 1 1.6 NY 9 18 NJ 3 8 PA 5 12 WV 1 2 IL 9 12 CA 13 32 ---- ------- --------- 10 44 88.9 The 10 non-toll-alerting states are 20% of US states. The 44 non-toll-alerting NPAs represent about 25% of the NPAs in the US. The 88.9 million people living without toll alerting represent about 33% of the US population of 267 million (my estimate). Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@interramp.com ------------------------------ From: alkamman@slip.net Subject: Technical Question on GSM Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 12:24:21 GMT Organization: Slip.Net When we use the GSM phone with a GSM card the GSM network does only record the GSM card data or also the serial number of the telephone we are using? In other words: Does the network notice that I am using my GSM card on my friend's Siemens instead of on my own Philips? Thanks. ------------------------------ From: ber@ecf.toronto.edu (BER PHILIP) Subject: Fibre Optic Cables / Networks, need info Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 23:30:23 -0400 Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility I am looking for information on who the largest (or most prominant) fibre-optic cable manufacturers are? Also, I am wondering what companies install the fibre-optic networks for the major telcos (Bell, MCI, Sprint etc)? Or is it done in-house? Thanks in advance, Philip Ber Computer Engineering University of Toronto ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:06:00 EDT From: joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Why is the Internet So Slow? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services >> I am performing some research and am interested in hearing from anyone >> with an interesting theory of why Internet access is so slow? >> For instance, >> Is it the data com backbone, the protocol, the routers, the >> Servers, or the browsers? > Most people who complain of slow Internet access do so when using Web > browsers, since its now the most widespread real-time Web use. A great My problem is telnet. I would >really< like to be able to use my machine from remote sites, but telnet is much too slow, unless I'm on a local network. Keyboard response times are generally > .5sec (unusable), and significant gaps of up to ten seconds are common. And here in NYC (Nynex and Sprintnet), packet losses of up to 40% across networks are common. Feh. Joel (joel@exc.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How about significant gaps of up to thirty seconds at times when things are really hopping? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:01:00 EDT From: joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Internet Overload and DNS Organization: Excelsior Computer Services In article is written: > The possibility of a "meltdown" seems real to me given the growing > traffic load, technical problems as with the routers and DNS updates, > reflective routing by certain backbone operators, and various > technical problems. DNS is certainly an area for improvement. The original idea was that the Internet would be divided into domains, with a hierarchical look-up strategy. To find a computer called a.b.c.edu, I would find c.edu from the .edu server, and then b.c.edu and finally a.b.c.edu. But there were only a few thousand .edu domains, so that was easy. Now, the vast majority of sites end .com, and, in fact, there's very little structure. DNS basically consists of contacting one of seven computers to look for a.com, which is basically the same as just looking up a. If one of the main servers goes down, everything slows down drastically on the whole internet. I would propose 26 servers for each major DNS server, one for each letter of the alphabet. Then foo.com would be serviced by the "f" server, but bar.com by the "b" server. Each secondary server would have to memorize not just two or up to seven DNS computers, but at least 52 (2 * 26) computers. Joel (joel@exc.com [hopefully one day to be served by e.dns.net]) ------------------------------ From: bjote@cs.tu-berlin.de (Tor-Einar Jarnbjo) Subject: Re: What Does a Call Cost? Date: 4 Sep 1996 17:52:43 GMT Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany David Clayton (dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au) wrote: > I have observed a increasing quantity of correspondence in the Digest > regarding the issue of no longer being able to determine what sort of > call type is being made by analysing the dialed digits. Well, not exactly what you suggested, but the Norwegian Telecom runs a free number, where you can either enter one phone-number and let the system tell you the charge for a call from your number (known because of CLID) to this number, or you can enter two numbers, and you'll know what a phone-call between those two numbers costs. As Norway still only have one phone-company, a call from A to B will always cost the same as a call from B to A :-). Regards, Tor-Einar Jarnbjo, bjote@cs.tu-berlin.de Fetschowzeile 11 13437 Berlin, Germany ------------------------------ From: Jock Mackirdy Subject: Re: Can ISP Dial-ins Really Cause Blocking in the CO? Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 21:35:50 GMT lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) wrote: > Both in TELECOM Digest and on the COM-PRIV mailing list, the issue has > been raised about telephone companies complaining to the regulatory > authority that home access to the Internet through modem dial-in to > a local ISP places an undue burden on the local exchange facilities, > and the telco wants a regulatory change to put an end to this "misuse" > which is caused by the availability of flat rate local calling. Which is precisely why the UK telcos will not consider a move away from "per-second" metering of all calls, local, regional, national and international. Of course data calls cause increased traffic, which leads to blocking on CO's which were provisioned on the basis of typical voice call holding times. If (as an example) a typical voice call is assumed to last two minutes and the average call from a computer user lasts five minutes (which may well be an understatement), then there is 2.5 times the traffic to carry. In the UK with call metering, the telco gets a return on that increased holding time and can invest in more equipment and inter-office trunks but where there is flat rate call charging the telco loses out. Jock Mackirdy Business Advisory Services, Luton (UK) E-mail: jockm@basluton.demon.co.uk Independent telecomms. and business advice ------------------------------ From: RitterP Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 17:25:11 -0700 > ...much discussion by many folks re: the "hairpin" path used to > deliver a call to a wireless phone while roaming ... The solution to this "problem" is actually well known and part of the proposed standards for the "wireless intelligent network". The solution is called "efficient routing" and requires that the originating switch (1) recognize the number as wireless and (2) initiate a "locate" request to the wireless subscribers home system (their "home location register", or HLR) to return a routing number. If the subscriber is "home", the routing number is the same as the wireless MIN. If they are roaming, then a "temporary local directory number", or TLDN from the system that the mobile is visiting is returned and the call is routed directly to the visited system. The technology is simple and can be rolled out with software changes in the landline network [stated as if this is a small thing :-)]. The real difficulty is (as usual) in the billing arrangements. Nobody seems to agree who should pay toll to whom and which carrier should be used. I'll try to explain: 1. In the simple case, the call originator (lets call them the "land party", even though we all know that they could be mobile) is "local" to the mobile's normal rate center (the one associated with its NPA-NXX) and the mobile is roaming. Here, assuming that we could get the call data into the mobile system's billing system, the toll could be applied to the mobile customer. Of course, the system would need to ensure that the mobile customer's PIC'd carrier is used for the call, which can be troublesome when there are proprietary long distance carriers used by some mobile providers that are not accessible from landline networks (e.g., AirTouch long distance, etc.). 2. Assuming that you apply toll as in (1), what do you do when the mobile is roaming "near" home but is called from a phone that is a long way away (e.g., a Los Angeles mobile in San Francisco is called from a land party in Boston). You don't want all of the long distance charged to the mobile, as in (1), but there is no mechanism to "separate" the toll. Perhaps you could recognize this case and charge the toll to the land party [or perhaps not]. Perhaps you could try separations, but you run into trouble if the two parties to the call disagree about which IXC to use ... 3. And if the mobile is roaming halfway between its "home" system and the land parties location ... I could go on with other scenarios, but you can see that this is a troublesome problem. There may be solutions on the horizon that mitigate some of these issues, but somebody is going to have to agree to "eat" more than their fair share of the toll -- probably the wireless customer, which does not make many wireless carriers too happy. As usual, it is not the technology preventing the implementation of a solution to this problem, but the complex nature of the carriers involved (the originating LEC, the IXCs, the "home" CMRS provider and the "visited" CMRS provider). Expect to see some carriers/LECs/IXCs to provide limited solutions based on regional systems and/or "affinity" relationships (can you say "Friends & Family"? I knew you could) but don't expect any really acceptable, consistent solutions without regulatory "assistance". Phil Ritter RitterP@CoxPCS.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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #461 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 13:13:21 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA12444; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 13:13:21 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 13:13:21 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609051713.NAA12444@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #462 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 13:13:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 462 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Email to FCC Chairman About Universal Service and Online Seminar (R Hauben) Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? (Rich Osman) Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? (Michael P. Deignan) Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? (mexitech@netcom.com) GSM Page Updated (Matthew McDonald) Sales Tax on Long Distance (Linc Madison) Nailed up Lines Are Also Fault Tolerant (Gary Johnson) How to Determine Current LD Provider (Bob Hogue) Internet Fax Mailing List (Richard Shockey) Re: 800/888 Calls From Jails/Prisons (Brian Brown) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rh120@labdien.cc.columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben) Subject: Email to FCC Chairman About Universal Service and Online Seminar Date: 5 Sep 1996 11:04:51 GMT Organization: Columbia University Open email to Reed Hundt, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission I wondered if you could explain a bit about the nature of the online seminar mailing list on Universal Service that Bob Carlitz is moderating? In welcoming the seminar you wrote: > To Seminar Participants: > Greetings and good luck in beginning your on-line course! Bob Carlitz > has set up a great example of the way technology can increase > communication, learning, and participation in public debate. > As you know, Universal Service policy will impact all Americans, but it's > especially important for our education hubs: schools and libraries. > Universal Service can help bridge the gap between the information > "haves" and "have nots" by giving every child the tools and knowledge > essential for the 21st century. > I look forward to reading your course discussions in the official FCC > record, and thank you for your contribution to this important > policy-making process. > Best Regards, > Reed Hundt > Chairman, Federal Communications Commission Reed, my questions are: In comments to the FCC on the issue of Universal Service, in email, and in questions raised at the INET '96 (the Internet Society Meeting) in Montreal to the FCC chief of staff who gave a talk for you, and in a Report from INET '96 circulated on the Internet after the conference, I stressed the importance of opening up the comment process in the rule making procedure so that those who would be affected by the rule making on the issue of universal service in the new Telecommunications Act would have a chance to provide input to the FCC on this issue. Others have supported this sentiment. Yet no one from the FCC ever commented on these comments nor made any effort to talk about the need for some form of online process to open up the rule making process. Instead there was this online seminar announced. Who is funding it and why? And what is the role of the FCC in the online seminar? Is the online seminar to be a means for the FCC to justify removing universal service from the home telephone user by raising the cost of their service to subsidize school and library service because corporate entities will be getting all kinds of lower prices from the new telecommunications law? Why was the online seminar created with a strict moderator to direct discussion away from the broad set of issues that need to be discussed and considered in any rulemaking process regarding universal service? Why wasn't the unmoderated prototype created by the NTIA online hearing on the issue of the future of the Net held in Nov. 1994 followed, where there were newsgroups created and a mailing list and public access terminals made available around the country to provide for a broad set of views and input? (See http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ -- especially chapter 11 and 14 describing that online conference.) Didn't the Communications Act of 1934 charge the FCC with promoting "a rapid, efficient, nationwide and worldwide wire and radio communications service with adequate facilities at reasonable charge"? Has that changed? Has the FCC now become the U.S. Department of Education obligated to provide service to the schools and libraries at the cost of the home user? Previously the Department of Education was obligated to oversee what was provided to the schools and libraries out of general tax funds. Has the new telecommunications act changed that so that the home telephone user is now obligated to support lower prices for the schools and libraries for undefined telecommunications services and at the expense of POTS for the home user? The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was drafted with no discussion nor input allowed from the home user, those who have the need for the universal service provision. Instead the teleco's and even some nonprofits had a means to promote their interests to those in the U.S. Congress. But laws, especially laws regarding telecommunications infrastructure need to be crafted considering the interests of all involved. If the issue before the FCC is the issue of universal service, then the needs and interests of the home user have to be solicited and considered. In my efforts to participate in the current seminar, just as in my efforts to contribute comments to the proceedings, I have tried to raise the questions involving the interests and concerns of the home user. These should be similar to the interests of those involved in the schools and libraries. However, instead of the FCC encouraging seeing this similarity of interest, there seems to be the encouragement that schools and libraries seek how to get lower rates at the expense of the home user. Subsidizing school and libraries at the expense of the home telephone user cannot provide for universal service. It can only provide for the taking away of universal service where the home user is seen as needing a certain minimal level of service (traditionally called POTS - Plain old telephone service). Is there some reason why the FCC has not addressed this issue? Also, the issue of providing funds to schools and libraries for telecommuni- cations should be part of what the U.S. Department of Education funds out of general tax revenue, not a burden on the home telephone user. Or it should be the concern of the National Science Foundation, or other appropriate government body. The National Science Foundation demonstrated that by providing start up funding for access to the Internet to colleges and universities it helped make that access broadly available in the academic community. The U.S. government should be drawing on these lessons and creating a similar way to make access available to schools and libraries. But it isn't the home telephone user who can be asked to subsidize such access or it will lead to the taking away of universal service rather than a means of implementing universal service. Regardless of what the telecommunications act of 1996 states, the job of the FCC is to provide Congress with the information and background to understand the needs and interests of those for whom universal service was crafted over 50 years ago. A moderated seminar with a moderator who is encouraging schools and libraries to see their interests as different from those of the home telephone user cannot be helpful in sorting out the principles to guide universal service rulemaking. Also an online moderated process which discourages the broad discussion that is needed to determine the principles that are needed to guide rulemaking can't be helpful. Since I have clearly asked for an online process, I wondered why instead of anyone from the FCC ever contacting me or discussing what I was proposing, a strictly controlled and moderated seminar was set up to narrowly focus the issues that could be discussed. Who is funding this effort and why? And why isn't the FCC willing to help open up the rule making process so that appropriate rules can be drafted? In the development of the Internet, J.C.R. Licklider, who was one of the important visionaries helping to guide the earliest developments that led to the Net, recognized that when there is a need to figure out a real problem, a broad investigation is necessary to solve the problem. "There's a lot of reason for adopting a broad delimitation rather than a narrow one because if you are trying to find out where ideas come from, you don't want to isolate yourself from the areas they come from." (see quote in Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet, chapter 8, http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/) Ronda rh120@columbia.edu ae547@yfn.ysu.edu Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook ------------------------------ From: osman@NTCSAL01DA.ntc.nokia.com (Osman Rich NTC/Dallas) Organization: Nokia Telecommunications Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 17:42:39 +0300 Subject: Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? Our highly esteemed moderator said: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It used to be years ago the FCC did > help out members of the public who wrote to them with complaints. > They would explain how to file informal complaints and help the > public in getting things resolved. I think in the past few years > their volume of mail -- as the public has learned more and more about > their rights where the carriers are concerned, etc -- has grown so > heavy they cannot begin to work on it all. Also, I think some of the > commissioners in recent years are a lot more friendly with the > carriers than they used to be. Now-days I would consider the FCC > to be pretty ineffectual at resolving public complaints. PAT] While commisioner bias and increasing workload a likely factors, all of this is exacerbated by **substantial** staff reductions. ------------------------------ From: kd1hz@anomaly.ideamation.com (Michael P. Deignan) Subject: Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? Date: 5 Sep 1996 00:39:42 -0400 Organization: The Ace Tomato Company In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Joel M. Hoffman : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It used to be years ago the FCC did > help out members of the public who wrote to them with complaints. > Now-days I would consider the FCC >to be pretty ineffectual at resolving public complaints. PAT] This isn't just a trend with carriers, either. The FCC is pretty much ineffectual at resolving *ANY* kind of public complaint. For example, many of the amateur radio bands have turned into a cesspool of filth due to illegal operators and operators that just do not obey the regulations. Although we're self-policing, we don't have any police powers, so even if you do "catch" someone, they know there isn't much anyone is going to do about it. On the other hand, if someone interferes with a commercial service, it always seems that the FCC responds immediately. Could it be they are merely living up to the 'money talks' syndrome. The poor public can't compete financially with major commercial vendors. MD [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, I would say 'money talks' has a lot to do with it. It is the same way with law-making in general. A long time ago laws were passed which had to do with the welfare of the public in general. Now the laws that are constantly being passed and pushed off on us have to do with corporate profits. Large companies and institutions come first and the individual comes last. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mexitech@netcom.com (Patrick) Subject: Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 20:18:20 GMT Joel M. Hoffman (joel@exc.com) wrote: >> Easy. Call your LEC (Local Exchange Carrier) and request that they > Has anyone, ever, gotten any help from the FCC? We've heard lots of > reports (including my own) of the FCC's inaction. Has anyone ever > been called back by someone from the FCC, or received a written > response to a written inquiry? It has been my personal, up front experience that the best way to get anything from the FCC is to make your complaint to the actual field agents, these guys need action, they are so bored :-). Believe me, it does work, and if it doesn't the States Public Utilities need to justify their budgets and love a good story, but better make it true. Patrick mexitech@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: matthew@sv.net.au (Matthew McDonald) Subject: GSM Page Updated Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 09:19:30 GMT Organization: Netspace Online Systems Reply-To: matthew@sv.net.au Mat's GSM Page has just undergone a major renovation, this includes a Major update of the GSM operators list, a new Sim card picture area, and more ... -GSM Phone Secrets Codes and special functions that aern't documented -GSM Information All the information you need on the GSM Network -Phone Information Specifications and Information on ALL GSM Mobile Phones -Manufacturer and GSM Links Links to Phone Manufacturers and Other GSM Pages -GSM Network's WorldWide A List of ALL GSM Networks Worldwide -Sim Card's WorldWide Pictures of Sim Cards from around the Globe -GSM Quick Reference Guide A Ready Reference to Codes for the GSM Network -Service Centres Service Centres Worldwide -Battery Information Information on all types of Batteries And more to come ... |\ /| --------------- \ / --------------- Matthew McDonald \ / Email: Tasmania Australia \ www.sv.net.au/~matthew / matthew@sv.net.au +61 41 Matthew / GSM and Piazza Info \ Files etc: +61 416 288 439 / \ matthew@trump.net.au _______________ / \ _______________ |/ \| ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Sales Tax on Long Distance Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 02:31:39 -0700 Organization: Best Internet Communications In article , jeffrey.rhodes@attws. com wrote ("Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes"): > Also, the billing problem of who pays how much remains confounding as > long as long distance is distance and time sensitive, eg. intra-state > long distance is subject to state sales tax. Actually, *all* long distance calls are subject to state sales tax. There was a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the mid-1980's (?) that allowed states and municipalities to tax interstate long distance charges. I checked into this when I moved to Berkeley and found the (quite substantial) municipal utility tax applied to all of my calls. At the time, the federal tax was about 3% and the city about 9%, I think. The municipal tax applied even on international calls. Never mind the principle that "the power to tax assumes the power to destroy" and the states and cities do not have jurisdiction to prohibit interstate calls. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ From: gjohnson@dream.season.com (Reality is a point of view) Subject: Nailed up Lines Are Also Fault Tolerant Date: 4 Sep 1996 22:18:03 GMT Organization: season.com [205.179.33.0] While watching the ongoing communication wars I've noticed a common complaint from the common carriers. 24x365 line usage ties up their resources. There has been debate on the size and scope of this problem. Odds are good that it is at least a minimal problem. And I'm one of them, so I was trying to think of a fair break for all. It occurred to me that the typical 24x365 customer has a computer nailing up that line. Software would allow that computer to deal with random disconnects. Quite a different situation than voice. If the phone company regularly dropped voice lines their customers would get upset. Or do, depending. Digital customers might get upset too. But there might be some sort of balance that could fit both the customers and the vendors needs without a war. It would probably be best to have some game theorists deal with developing rules that would lead to fairness on both sides. Off the top it seems that critical numbers would be the range of drops per month/week/day/hour/etc, time delay before trying to reconnect, and the range of time between drops. Some sort of advance warning would also be cool. Before any 24x365 users say "Hey, what about me being in the middle of a critical download!" remember that the CO's have a similar complaint. TCP/IP can deal. At least until broadcast packets using strong encryption make the whole mess obsolete. Gary Johnson gjohnson@season.com Freedom? CAMPAIGN '96: Juck 'em if they can't fake a toke. ------------------------------ From: bob@cis.ysu.edu (Bob Hogue) Subject: How to Determine Current LD Provider Date: 4 Sep 1996 17:31:53 GMT Organization: Youngstown State University--Computer and Information Sciences With all of the horror stories about slamming, it just occurred to me that there is (or used to be) a number that one could call to determine the long distance carrier that was currently assigned to that person. I think it was a 700-number, though it may have been an 800. I think it simply gave a recording with the name of the LD carrier. Does anyone know if such a number still exists? If so, I think it would help unsuspecting consumers who would then be able to just check once a month or so to ensure that they still have the provider they want. I understand that the local provider can be requested (in writing, I believe?) not to switch LD providers without consent, but I think this dial-up service would be good as a periodic double-check. Bob Hogue Computer Science & Information Systems Internet: bob@cis.ysu.edu Youngstown State University Phone: 330-742-1775 Youngstown, OH 44555 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are thinking of 700-555-4141 and/or 700-555-1212 in some areas. Yes, it is still working as noted. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rshockey@ix.netcom.com (Richard Shockey) Subject: Internet Fax Mailing List Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 18:05:01 GMT Organization: Nuntius Corporation Members of this group who have a interest in Internet Fax may wish to take a look at this new list. The ietf-fax mailing list covers the integration of FAX techology and the Internet. It is mailing list for a BOF held at the recent Montreal IETF meeting, and may lead to a full IETF Working Group. To see what has gone on before, please see the mailing list archive at http://www.imc.org/ietf-fax/ To subscribe to the ietf-fax mailing list, send a message to: ietf-fax-request@imc.org with the message: subscribe If you need to contact a human about this mailing list, please send a message to: phoffman@imc.org Richard Shockey Developers of Fax on Demand Systems President For Business, Industry, Government Nuntius Corporation and Media Markets. 8045 Big Bend Blvd. Suite 110 St. Louis, MO 63119 For a Demonstration Call: Voice 314.968.1009 x110 314.968.3461 FAX 314.968.3163 Internet rshockey@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ From: bfbrown@csn.net (Brian Brown) Subject: Re: 800/888 Calls From Jails/Prisons Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 16:07:42 GMT Organization: SuperNet Inc. +1.303.296.8202 Denver Colorado HHZietz@aol.com wrote: > Previous articles mentioned exorbitant charges for calls made by > inmates of jails or prisons. This is apparently the case where the > penal institution contracts with an "alternate operator service". > I am curious as to what would happen if a prisoner attempts to call a > toll free number under those circumstances. For example, if relative > sets up a toll free number at thier residence to receive calls from > the inmate. > Could / would a surcharge be billed to the 800/888 number itself? > Would such a surcharge be billed through the Responsible Orginization > that provides the toll free service, or would it be billed separately? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As far as I know, 800/888 calls are > blocked on all jail phones, as are calls to 900/976, 500, and anything > else which is not considered a 'regular' call. The ANI information digits passed to service bureaus with 800 access (in particular, phone sex service bureaus use this) have a special code for prisons. They also have codes for hotels, pay phones, businesses, private residences, hospitals, etc. In the case of one particular phone sex bureau with which I am familiar (I set up their phone services), they refuse ALL pay phone and prison calls. Whenever they receive the ANI information digits indicating either of these instances, the trunk does not go off hook. Similarly, their 900 services (which, from a strictly telecom view, function exactly like 800, except that the FCC allows you to charge the originating number for services) refuse calls not only from prisons and pay phones, but also hotels and hospitals (where the likelihood of a disputed 900 charge is very high). Now, keeping in mind that the 800 numbers generally require a credit card to be processed, it stands to reason, "why not accept them from payphones?" The answer is this: it used to be that, when credit cards were stolen, one of the easiest ways the thieves had to see if they were valid were to call a phone sex number, enter the card, and see if it worked. If it did, the thieves would rush to the nearest electronics/other store and max it out. Since these types of service bureaus caught on and refused pay phone calls, an interesting thing happened: now the preferred venue for testing stolen credit cards has become gas stations which let you "pay at the pump". If the card is refused, they drive away scot-free and toss the card (as opposed to going inside a business to try the card and risking a clerk identifying the thieves). If the card is authorized at the pump, they fill up their car and drive to the nearest electronics store. As far as charging extra for the 800 numbers, most 800/900 service bureaus negotiate a low, fixed rate per minute of long distance (e.g. $0.10 or less, based on volume) and pay exactly that no matter where the call originated in the continental U.S. The numbers are generally blocked (as are most toll-free numbers) outside the continental U.S. I don't see how they could be charged variable outside-their-contract rates for any calls from prisons or elsewhere. In addition, I believe Pat's assumption that 800/888 calls and 900/etc. calls are blocked by the prison pirates, where the normal FCC reg's don't apply to their phones. Normally, public pay phones have to accept 800/888 calls, but not 900/976/500 etc. calls. Brian Brown Visionary Consulting ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #462 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 16:00:17 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA02892; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 16:00:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 16:00:17 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609052000.QAA02892@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #463 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 16:00:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 463 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Malcolm Caldwell) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (Darryl Smith) Re: Percent of USA With Toll Alerting (John Cropper) Re: Percent of USA With Toll Alerting (Bob Goudreau) Re: Bell Canada ISP Dispute Nearly Over? (Jack Decker) Re: Bell Canada ISP Dispute Nearly Over? (Ian Angus) Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? (Steven Lichter) Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? (Bob Schwartz) Re: The DEMA Web Site: The Spammer's Secret Clubhouse (Matthew B. Landry) Re: Privatizing The Big Lie (Bill Sohl) Re: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer (Tim Ottinger) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: malcolm@abu.cs.ntu.edu.au (Malcolm Caldwell) Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: 05 Sep 1996 15:10:57 +0930 Organization: Northern Territory University > "I will be roaming in this area for a few days. I want people to be > able to call me on a local number here. What is the roamer access > number?" > Hopefully, you will be given the number. > When your callers call you at this number, they will hear a dialtone > after dialing this number. At that point, they have to dial your > regular cell number including areacode to get you. It would be nice if GSM had a similar service for international roaming. At the moment (as I understand it) if I am visiting a country with a GSM network (eg the UK) with my Australian GSM phone, people in the UK who want to ring me have to ring my Australian number (+61418...) and pay for the call to Australia. Then I have to pay for the call from Australia to the UK + roaming charges. I would not be surprised if this situation was never fixed -- it generates revenue form these international phonecalls. Malcolm Caldwell - Network Supervisor Email:malcolm@it.ntu.edu.au Information Technology Support Ph: +61 89 466631 Northern Territory University,Darwin Fax: +61 89 466630 CASUARINA 0909 Australia ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:00:57 +1100 From: Darryl Smith Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Hello from Australia. When it comes to mobile phones here in Australia there is no such thing as roaming as such. Sure the roam light on my mobile goes on, but it means nothing. Here in Australia we have the concept of caller pays. With mobiles for long distance it is the distance between phones which generally determines the cost of the call. There are generally different prices for over 165 Km and less than 165 Km. We have area codes (014) (015) (018) (019) and maybe another dedicated to mobile phones regardless of what part of the country people are in. If they are on a digital phone, their number has an area code of (014x) where x designates the carrier. Thus the caller has no idea of what he is being charged for a call to a mobile. The number gives nothing away about location. Calls too and From the mobiles go through the carrier for that mobile phone. Sure it is possible to use a calling card, but these calls are charged at the local call rate (even though they are to free call numbers, freecall numbers are charged on mobiles) so it is more expensive to choose your carrier with a calling card. Whilst we are on mobiles in Australia I may as well explain the mobile situation here -- Telstra (Formally Telecom Australia) is the government owned former monopoly. It competes in the Analogue mobile phone network with Optus which sells time on the Telstra Analogue network. The Analogue network has over 3,000,000 subscribers (Australia's population is only 18,000,000) and will be switched off before 1 January 2000. There are three digital networks country wide -- Telstra, Optus and Vodaphone with over 150,000, 150,000 and 100,000 respectively. And the digital system is TOTALLY incompatable with the analogue system. This was done so that the new entrants would be given an equal playing field with the government owned telstra. And people are still buying the analogue (AMPS) mobiles in droves although digital phones are starting to become a similar price without too many strings. Many people feel that the government will delay the mobile turn off -- after all three million analogue phone users is a lot of voters who have spent a lot of money on their phones. Penetration of mobile phones here is such that 95% iof the population is covered with a cellular service (Which is amazing concidering the size of the country and the number of people) and more than 20% of the population have a mobile phone. Darryl Smith, BE, VK2TDS vk2tds@ozemail.com.au ; Sydney Australia Pacific Power - The former monopoly NSW government owned power generator. ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: Percent of USA With Toll Alerting Date: 5 Sep 1996 06:42:03 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 04, 1996 23:18:26 in article , 'cc004056@interramp.com (Greg Monti)' wrote: > With all the talk on the group about what 1+ dialing stands for, I thought > it might be interesting to review what parts of the US have/don't have 1+ > for toll alerting. > The non-toll-alerting states are: > Number Population > State of NPAs (millions) > ----- ------- ---------- > ME 1 1.3 > NH 1 1 > RI 1 1 > VT 1 1.6 > NY 9 18 > NJ 3 8 > PA 5 12 > WV 1 2 > IL 9 12 > CA 13 32 > ---- ------- --------- > 10 44 88.9 > The 10 non-toll-alerting states are 20% of US states. > The 44 non-toll-alerting NPAs represent about 25% of the NPAs in the US. > The 88.9 million people living without toll alerting represent about 33% > of the US population of 267 million (my estimate). Greg's info is out-of-date with respect to WV (According to BellCore 01/96, WV is 1+10D (mandatory) for HNPA toll). As for the others listed above, the following have "permissible" (optional) 1+10D for HNPA toll: ME, NH, NJ, PA, CA Four of NY's NPAs (315, 518, 607, 716) also have the option of 1+10D for HNPA toll (212, 718, and 917, where the bulk of the population is, is LOCAL within each NPA anyhow). NY NPA 914 is the *ONLY* NPA in the state without the option of 1+10D ... population 1.8 million On the list above, only RI, VT, and IL have NO "permissible" HNPA toll options when it comes to non-toll-alert dialing. John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 11:57:58 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: Percent of USA With Toll Alerting cc004056@interramp.com (Greg Monti) writes: > The non-toll-alerting states are: > Number Population > State of NPAs (millions) > ----- ------- ---------- ... > VT 1 1.6 The only correct datum in the above entry is the number of NPAs. Vermont's population is only about one-third of what is listed, and the NANP "Numbering Plan Area Codes - 1996 Update" document lists Vermont's HNPA toll dialing procedure as 1+10D, not 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: jack@novagate.com (Jack Decker) Subject: Re: Bell Canada ISP Dispute Nearly Over? Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 07:56:53 GMT Organization: GTE Intelligent Network Services, GTE INS On Wed, 04 Sep 1996 16:07:35 -0400, Ian Angus wrote: > Bell Canada Proposes Win-Win Solution to Internet Tariff Battle [.....] > Bell sales reps began telling their ISP customers about the price > increase and the ISPs rebelled. Using their Internet know-how, they > organized letter-writing and phone campaigns and threatened boycotts > of Bell services. It was David vs. Goliath and David was getting all > the good press. I hope that the phone companies of the United States understand that if they try to impose usage-based charges on customers that have been accustomed to having flat-rate service, it is not going to happen quietly. I would bet you that not only the FCC, but every congressman and every senator in this country will be deluged with mail from angry Internet users. If you think the protest against the Communications Decency Act was loud, I assure you that it wasn't a drop in the bucket compared to what you will hear when Internet users perceive that their very access to the net is being threatened. If they perceive that there is a problem, then I strongly suggest that they begin looking for technical solutions, not regulatory ones that will cause grief for everyone concerned. I would hope that the folks at the FCC are smart enough to realize that having to deal with hundreds or thousands of letters, faxes, and telephone calls each week from Internet users is not going to be any picnic. I'll bet that there will be even more mail about this than the bogus "petition to ban all religious broadcasting" that has generated bags upon bags of mail to the FCC for the last couple of decades. > ** ISP Link offers an attractive alternative for the largest ISPs and > online service providers. Luring such customers away from Centrex will > reduce the traffic problems which the sudden growth of the ISP industry > produced last year. (ISP Link connects to the trunk side of Bell's > switching equipment, and so bypasses the Line Concentrator Modules > which caused all the difficulty with high volume Centrex use. For > details, see http://http://www/isp-bell/ib.html This in a way supports the idea that there ARE technical solutions available to deal with the supposed increased usage caused by Internet users, but the phone companies are apparently reluctant to talk about them unless and until they perceive it is to their benefit to do so. It would be interesting to know just what other solutions the telcos might come up with if they were absolutely convinced that they couldn't use this issue for political leverage. Jack ------------------------------ From: Ian Angus Subject: Correction: Re: Bell Canada ISP Dispute Nearly Over? Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 12:33:36 -0400 Organization: Angus TeleManagement Group In my article on the Bell Canada-ISP dispute, I gave an incorrect URL for the site where we posted information on the dispute. It should be: http://www.angustel.ca/isp-bell My apologies for the error. IAN ANGUS ianangus@angustel.ca Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca 8 Old Kingston Road tel: 905-686-5050 ext 222 Ajax ON L1T 2Z7 Canada fax: 905-686-2655 ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? Date: 5 Sep 1996 11:02:50 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) writes: > Has anyone, ever, gotten any help from the FCC? We've heard lots of > reports (including my own) of the FCC's inaction. Has anyone ever > been called back by someone from the FCC, or received a written > response to a written inquiry? Yes it does work, in March of this year I filed an informal complaint when I was charged for calling an 800 number from a hotel phone, it was not so much the charges, but being told by the hotel people it was a telephone company charge, which in fact it was not. It took about 5 months to get a reply and by then the problem has bee resolved on its own between myself at the parent company of the hotel which changed their policy as they had gotten a lot of complaints. The complaint did get a life of its own though. PacBell and the PUC also got involved and each one replied, with the PUC asking for more information. It appears they must not be able to read since I included both written and copies of the room charges. Just last week I got copies of a letter from the hotel company to the FCC which explained their side, saying they credited the charges back to me and no longer charge for this. The strange part of the letter was their saying it costs more to supply telephone service to a hotel room then it does to my phone, which I suppose is true, but this hotal chain is mainly for business people, with data phone in each room and a lot of other free stuff. Until this year they never did charge for local calls or incoming fax, this has now changed. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II and Macintosh computers. ------------------------------ From: Bob@BCI.NBN.com (Bob Schwartz) Subject: Re: Complaining to the FCC: Does it Help? Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 09:35:14 +1200 Organization: BCI In past years I have filed many informal complaints with the FCC, and won all of them. I even got a thank you from them! First, it may help to understand what happens when a complaint is filed: A number is assigned to it and a copy of your letter is sent to the offending party/carrier. The carrier has to reply within a certain number of days from when they recieved notice from the FCC unless they ask for more time. The reply comes in the form of a letter to you from the carrier with a copy to the FCC. You have some limited time period to reply. Eventually the FCC writes you saying that the carrier has responded and that you may file a formal complaint if you want to. THE CONTENT OF THE CARRIER'S RESPONSE MAY NOT BE REVIEWED BY FCC STAFF very carefully. One advantage to taking this route is that you get outside of the "normal" customer service channels. Such complaints are often "fielded" by the president's office. Your issue may have been hung-up (pun) by a person whose job depended on their not understanding you or on not responding to you. An informal complaint generally gets your issue out of limbo. I have also filed a Formal Complaint with the FCC with the help of an attorney. I won the formal complaint but it took much longer than the one year limitation the FCC has/had to clear complaints. (All the while interest was compounding, as ordered.) I have also made a request for declaratory ruling. In the last ten years the FCC seems to have lost much of it's reverence. About ten years ago Sprint got way out of control and introduced the industry to a new low standard of "accuracy". After many many complaints were filed the FCC "chided" Sprint but did not issue sanctions. Next came a monumental wave of slamming (from many carriers), along with thousands of complaints and the FCC ultimately allowed the industry to police itself with self imposed standards. We all know how successful that was in long-run. Now there are some penalties asessed for stuff like slamming but they seem to be low enough to make slamming be worthwhile. This creates more complaints and the machinery slows to a near halt. I should note that I am not an attorney and that all of my complaints were filed on behalf of clients and under my company name, only after repeated attempts and escalations to solve issues were made directly with the offending party. The Bill Correctors complaint/decision established guidelines for recieving credit for unanswered calls ;) . Anyone can file a complaint whether they have recieved monetary damages or not. BOB ------------------------------ From: mbl@mail.msen.com (Matthew B Landry) Subject: Re: The DEMA Web Site: The Spammer's Secret Clubhouse Date: 5 Sep 1996 18:41:14 GMT Organization: Flunkies for the Mike Conspiracy Our Beloved Moderator wrote: > all means, just because those people send out jillions of pieces of > unsolicited email every day and spam every newsgroup they can find, > that is no reason for anyone to go and wreck their secret clubhouse. Sarcasm duly noted. I believe the point of asking people not to "wreck their secret clubhouse" was simply that if we did so, they'd find a new "clubhouse" and it would be secret again. At least the way things are now, we can sit back and watch them, while they're deluded into thinking that their discussions are still closed off. Matthew Landry [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone else also responded on this thread early Thursday morning and unfortunatly the item got lost in processing; otherwise I would run it here also. If the person will write again, I'll be glad to include it in this thread. PAT] ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Privatizing The Big Lie Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 17:52:49 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises dave@hptnoa02.grenoble.hp.com (dave) wrote: > In article The Old Bear > writes: >> A more rational approach would be to restructure the basic local loop >> between subscriber premises and the frame at the telco central office >> to digital facilities (over existing phyical media) and to grab >> digitized data (internet, video, home security, etc) there, at the CO >> end of the local loop, BEFORE it enters the switched portion of the >> network. Such digital data then would be handled on appropriate >> non-switched and routed facilities, while voice telephony, digitized >> between the customer premises and the central office, would be delivered >> to the telco switch and continue to be handled via the more appropriate >> switched network. > Instead of adding active equipment to the frame would it not be better > to do it on the line units of the switch. Is this not how > X.25 coming over the D or B channels is handled on 5ESS ISDN Line > units? The packet protocol is terminated on the line card which > avoids occupying valuable synchronous switching resources in the > connection modules. Does it not make economic sense to do a similar > thing with IP PPP/SLIP coming into a line unit on B channels. An IP > packet exchange processor could terminate the PPP/SLIP and forward IP > packets to an IP router function on suitably dimensioned digital > facilities. The packet protocol could be done today using an existing X.25 packet connection. It may not be that elegant, but it should work. In essence, you would simply use an X.25 packet call to an ISP and once that was established you'd have a virtual connection to the ISP. You'd just need a terminal adapter that accepted the ppp input data and then broke it up into X.25 packets. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: Tim Ottinger Subject: Re: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 13:49:11 -0500 Organization: CSC Reply-To: tottinge@csci.csc.com > Some of your readers may be able to help me. I'm looking for a good > simple (if possible!) description of connection oriented and > connectionless data transfer. I believe in connectionless each packet > contains all the information it needs to traverse the network, where > as with connection oriented means that a 'logical' connection must be > first set up, data transfered and then the connection torn down. Really > I'm looking for some good examples I can latch on to. I can't quite > grasp how a 'logical' connection is set up. How do the packets get > routed? To be blunt, connectionless is "send and pray" and connection-mode is guaranteed delivery or you'll know about it. Or that's the way you should think about it, anyway. Basically, your telephone is connection-oriented. You connect up front, and you get 'uh-huh' every few minutes while you're talking. When the other person hangs up, you get a click and a buzz. A radio is connectionless. If nobody's listening, nobody hears you. If someone's listening, there's not a guarantee they heard everything you transmitted (they could drop out early, or drop in late). Did that help? Tim Ottinger, Sr Tech tottinge@csci.csc.com CSC Communications Industry Services 217-351-8508x2420 TRIS Division -- Cellular Billing and Support Fax 217-351-2640 ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #463 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 17:52:23 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA15813; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:52:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:52:23 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609052152.RAA15813@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #464 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 17:52:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 464 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 4th Int'l Conf on Spoken Language Processing (Jim Polikoff) Attempted Slam by AT&T (Ross E. Mitchell) SWBT Splitting 214 (Guy J. Sherr) Re: Florida Leads Fights Against Phone Card Fraud (mexitech@netcom.com) Fran on the Way to the Carolinas (TELECOM Digest Editor) Ameritech Says Cellular PINs Being Phased Out (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Cellular Phones: Analog v. Digital? (Andrew C. Green) Re: Positive ID Service From Southwestern Bell (David Richards) Re: Help Me Replace my Watson Card With Something More Modern? (S Plichta) Re: North America Dialing (John Cropper) Re: Mitel SX-2000 Light Provisioning (Bill Garfield) Re: GTE Says Continuous Internet Connection Desirable (Matt Holdrege) Re: 48 V PC Power Supply (Glenn Wells) Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions (Marty Brenneis) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: polikoff@asel.udel.edu (Jim Polikoff) Subject: 4th Int'l Conf on Spoken Language Processing Date: 5 Sep 1996 12:46:01 -0400 Organization: AI duPont Institute ICSLP 96 -- Update and Reminder Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing ****** October 3-6, 1996 Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel Philadelphia, PA, USA ****** ICSLP 96 offers a strong and diverse program covering all aspects of spoken language processing. ICSLP 96 presents an opportunity to keep up with the latest research and developments as well as network among other speech professionals. Registration information, as well as other information about the conference, can be found on our WWW site at http://www.asel.udel.edu/icslp/. This site provides registration forms, information about hotel accomodations, airfare information, and general information about Philadelphia as well as listings of the full contents of the technical program. _____________________Registration Information______________________________ Full registration includes: Admission to technical sessions, Reception, Banquet, Proceedings (printed & CD-ROM) Limited registration includes: Admission to technical sessions, Reception, Proceedings on CD-ROM Early Registration fees: Member* Non-Member Student Full $425 $525 $250 Limited $300 $400 $150 Late registration: After July 1, add $60 After August 9, add $100 Additional Tickets: Banquet $60 Reception $50 Additional Proceedings: Printed $125 CD-ROM $15 * Sponsoring and Cooperating Organizations: University of Delaware Alfred I. duPont Institute The Acoustical Society of America The Acoustical Society of Japan American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Australian Speech Science and Technology Association European Speech Communication Association IEEE Signal Processing Society Incorporated Canadian Acoustical Association International Phonetic Association Linguistic Society of America ICSLP 96 Contact Information ---------------------------- ICSLP 96 Applied Science & Engineering Laboratories A.I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE USA 19899 E-mail: ICSLP96@asel.udel.edu URL: http://www.asel.udel.edu/icslp/ Phone: +1-302-651-6830 TDD: +1-302-651-6834 Fax: +1-302-651-6895 ------------------------------ From: rem@world.std.com (Ross E Mitchell) Subject: Attempted Slam by AT&T Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:46:48 GMT Yesterday, I got a call that went something like this: AT&T: Hello, Mr. Mitchell. This is AT&T. I'm calling to give you a billing update. I want to let you know that from now on your AT&T bill will be a part of your local phone bill. Many customers were complaining about having to pay separate bills, so we've decided to have it put on your NYNEX bill. And, furthermore, because of the cost savings to us, we're going to give you a 20% discount on your next bills. ME: That's very interesting. AT&T: (after verifying my address to make sure the records were correct) I'll just transfer you over to our quality control people so they can make sure you're not inadvertently switched to another carrier, OK? ME: But, I'm not an AT&T customer. AT&T: ...click... ------Wow------ I hadn't expected the boiler room approach from AT&T. And the hang-up was instantaneous and premeditated; he didn't want me to get any further with his management. I'm sorry I didn't play along until I had "quality control" on the line. Unless they were in on the scam, they might have been able to weed out a bad apple. Regards, Ross ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 09:45:01 -0500 From: Guy J. Sherr Organization: Engineering Subject: SWBT Splitting 214 Local news announcements in Dallas and Fort Worth have been made. Southwestern Bell is splitting NPA 214 into NPA's 214 and 972. Chiefly, telephones in Dallas proper keep their 214 area code. Phones outside the city itself will be taking on area code 972. The split is effective 9/14. THERE IS NO PERMISSIVE DIALING PERIOD AS THE 214 NPA IS COMPLETELY EXHAUSTED. ------------------------------ From: mexitech@netcom.com (Patrick) Subject: Re: Florida Leads Fights Against Phone Card Fraud Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 20:38:32 GMT Tad Cook (tad@cascadia.ssc.com) wrote: > TALLAHASSEE--Sep. 4--The proliferation of pre-paid telephone cards has > made dialing from a pay phone as easy as the swipe of a magnetic > stripe. > With pre-paid phone cards, a customer pays a fee for a card that > enables the caller to use a pay phone for a limited amount of > time. Companies that issue the cards purchase time from phone > companies and resell it at a profit. > Occasionally, though, customers have found themselves holding > worthless cards. And in the hands of criminals, according to the > U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, the cards are another means of > masking calls and covering trails. > "There are countless renegade companies that have no intention of > cooperating with any state regulation," said Kelly Pennington, a > special agent with the DEA in Miami. "Without some punitive action, > there is no incentive for those companies that are not complying to > start complying." > The PSC says "the large disparity" suggests there are many companies > avoiding regulation of any kind -- or taxation -- by the state. This is such a crock. Beginning with DEA, they believe every business is hiding some kind of drug deals. These guy's are mostly cowboys and now they want to jump into more regulation and whining about pay phones. Ridiculous. The second thing is, when is it new information that all governments want more money. That pay phone, and every thing about it is taxed unto death. It is just another attempt at grabbing the money. In real life, show me a company that isn't paying the taxes as stated for the operations they are doing and I will show you four "burro-crats" that aren't doing their jobs correctly. There is just about no industry in the world easier to get your taxes from than the utility service business. The audit trail is ad naseum! This is just another reporter, sitting around drinking a few with the local DEA and some low level official burro-crat making up an assenine story for the masses. It is a total crock. With cards such as Mondex and VISA CASH call, this is real money; don't these people keep up with technology? It was used at the Atlanta games and I don't see Georgia whining. AT&T, Nortel's Millenium, all of these have smart card interfaces. Is Florida going to say to their telecom industry, no, we only want rotary pay phones at Disneyworld. Yea, you betcha bucko! And lastly, this story reminds me of Capt. Midnight, back in the mid 80's it was claimed anybody could go down to Radio Shack and buy what was needed to attack HBO's satellite transponder. Every newspaper in the country carried the fall out. Like you could by a Klystron from Radio Shack. I was working in satellite at the time, and my boss asked me over lunch who I thought could acquire the technology. I even got the city right within four hours. Although not the name. Patrick mexitech@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 17:00:00 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Fran on the Way to the Carolinas News on the television this afternoon is that the latest display of fury by Mother Nature in the form of Hurricane Fran is on the way to the coast of the Carolinas and is due to hit between about two a.m. and five a.m. Friday morning. Hopefully our readers in that part of the country will survive intact and write to us over the weekend with reports of damage to the telecommunications network. The resulting high winds and heavy rain are expected to also cause some havoc into areas of Virgina as well, but not nearly to the extent expected along the Carolina coast. FEMA is already on location; presumably restoration of damaged telecommunications services will commence early on. I'll publish what information I get on it over the weekend. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 17:20:00 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Ameritech Says Cellular PINs Being Phased Out Ameritech has been on television all day today (Thursday) talking about their new cellular security technology. They claim that starting in October (and being phased out from that point through the end of the year) subscribers will no longer be required nor encouraged to use personal identification numbers (PINs) when they make cellular calls. They're not saying *what* they have in mind to replace PIN's; only that their new system will be greatly superior. They mention that 'PINs may still be needed in some parts of the USA when our customers are roaming outside our own five state territory, but they'll be obsolete around here.' What do you suppose they have planned? PAT ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 09:44:32 -0500 From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Re: Cellular Phones: Analog v. Digital? JSeder@syntel.com writes: > The better phones store 100+ numbers, have a directory lookup function, > lock up, have authentication firmware (not yet used by the providers), If you are referring to new anti-cloning measures here, by coincidence there was an item on the news (NBC-TV 5) last night saying that Ameritech is announcing new security measures coming soon which will eliminate the need for a PIN number, something they only just _started_ within the past year. The details were sketchy, but based on what they said about not requiring new phones in order to implement the new security measures, I get the idea there's some tracking of individual phone characteristics or "fingerprints" involved. > I hope this is helpful and not too inaccurate. It has been said that > the fastest way to get good information on the Internet is to post bad > information. Let's see if that rule applies. Were that the case, someone would have shot me a long time ago. :-) Andrew C. Green (312) 266-4431 Datalogics, Inc. 441 W. Huron Internet: acg@dlogics.com Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: dr@ripco.com (David Richards) Subject: Re: Positive ID Service From Southwestern Bell Organization: Ripco Internet BBS, Chicago Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 22:01:51 GMT In article , David Gadbois wrote: > Southwestern Bell has a service called "Positive ID" that lets you set > up access control lists so that only calls from certain numbers or > with a password are completed to a given trunk or number (the glossy > brochure isn't clear on this). It also can give you audit reports of > incoming calls. > This service seems like a good cheap way to restrict access to dial-in > modems. Does anyone have anything good/bad/ugly to say about it? How > does it interact with other features, especially call forwarding? > What are the risks involved versus other access restriction methods > such as Caller Line ID, dial-back systems, smart cards, or plain > vanilla passwords? It is Calling-Line ID, with the phone company doing Call Screening for you, the major advantage of this would be to prevent false denials caused by the CID information on the phone line being corrupted by line noise. Caller-ID is little better than the Internet 'identd' protocol as a means of screening, in that it only protects against casual attacks. There are several known methods of causing the telephone system to forward false CID information. ------------------------------ From: Scott Plichta Organization: Endeavor Technologies, Inc. Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 19:13:59 +0000 Subject: RE: Help Me Replace my Watson Card With Something More Modern? Reply-To: splichta@dca.net Good luck. I have been looking, but the software doesn't seem to be there! In case anyone has read about the new Sportster and would offer that as a suggestion: I bought the new Sportster Vi (voice internal) 33.6 modem. It comes with software which promises all that you have mentioned. First of all, it doesn't work under Windows NT and I haven't heard good things about it under Win95. The software is QuickLink Message Center by Smith Micro and is a serious liability to an, unfortunately , shaky product. The Sportster is having alot of problems, especially in the 32 bit world, and USR is way to overwhelmed to address the concerns through tech support. For anyone needing validation, look at the USRobotics Forum on CompuServe and try to find a positive message! They also claim to support distinctive ring, but it has no documentation and isn't supported by the QuickLink software. I have the Zoom V34i sitting here waiting to be installed as it has excellent support for distinctive ring (in the documentation), but the one I have doesn't have the voice support. Good luck. I hope you rsearch is more successful than mine has been! There are expensive Dialogic based solutions, but I think it is overkill (and, for me, overbudget). Please fill me in on any private responses that may be helpful. Scott Plichta Endeavor Technologies, Inc. Exton, PA 19341 ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com Subject: Re: North America Dialing Date: 4 Sep 1996 01:08:08 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 03, 1996 12:25:48 in article , 'effect@worldaccess.nl (Feico Nater)' wrote: > This must be a simple question to you North-Americans, but not to me. > My question is: how do you dial a number in North America? There is a "general rule", but it has many exceptions, depending on your location, and regional company. Dialing info for each NPA is being incorporated into the monthly NPA spreadsheet I distribute. When the data is completely compiled (later this month), I'll try extracting it, and see if I can make an 80-column version of it available as a post. John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: bubba@insync.net (Bill Garfield) Subject: Re: Mitel SX-2000 Light Provisioning Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 03:05:18 GMT Organization: Associated Technical Consultants In article woof@telecnnct.com (Andy Spitzer) writes: > A T1 connection from Bell Atlantic to our Mitel SX-2000 Light carries > DID trunks. Whenever an outside caller dials one of our DID numbers, > the cadence of the audible ring tone that the PBX generates is not the > USA normal "2 seconds of RING, followed by 4 seconds of SILENCE", but > instead is approximately of the form: > 1 second of RING > short gap of SILENCE > 1 second of RING > 3 seconds of SILENCE > The company that installed and provisions the PBX has spoken with > Mitel, and insists there is no way to change this cadence to 2 seconds > of RING, 4 seconds of silence. Your service organization is correct. There is no way to change this. MITEL "ringback tone" returned to the caller over the DID trunk uses a unique "European" cadence, ... Ring..Ring ..... Ring..Ring ... etc. It is well documented that certain low cost modems and fax machines of marginal design look only at the tone "cadencing" and not the actual tone frequencies, thereby misinterpreting MITEL D-I-D ringback as BUSY. This is a design defect of the modem or fax machine if it misinterprets the MITEL ricgback cadence as busy. As a point of information, the Rockwell predictive dialers in use by many telemarketing agencies will also misinterpret MITEL DID ringback as BUSY, resulting in the MITEL end-user complaining of incessant one-ringer/hangup calls, often at 10-20 minute intervals throughout the business day, often for weeks on end. Your LEC should be able to trace this through their Call Annoyance Bureau, though it takes patience on everyone's part. In the MITEL SMDR logs these specific calls will be noticeable by their duration, typically five seconds, and the ring duration field containing only * * * To provide -temporary- relief for the end user, build a class of service with a seven-second "DELAY RING" timer, and an 18-second CFNA timer. Then place the TARGETED set in a broadcast group (Superset key appearance on another set). Then edit the Multiline Set *Group* assignment form for the targeted extension and make the PRIME appearance a DELAY RING. Be sure to then visit the Change Attribute form to assign the "special" class of service to the set. Pain in the neck, I know, but it puts the fire out, especially when its happening in the executive wing. Been there, Done that. Bill Garfield MITEL-Certified SX2000S/SG COAM (self-maintained) ------------------------------ From: holdrege@eisner.decus.org (Matt Holdrege) Subject: Re: GTE Says Continuous Internet Connection Desirable Organization: DECUServe Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 20:33:00 GMT In article , billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) writes: > If residential ISDN was affordably priced, then a D channel virtual > connection (X.25 packet) could be left up for indefinete time periods > without incurring usage costs except for incoming and outgoing email. > The X.25 connection wouldn't likly be cost effective for WEB access > (in either direction), but it could provide that instant email > reception at low cost. Telco's would love for us to use the D channel for things like email. That would leave the interoffice PSTN facilities untouched. We may see this type of usage next year. > Most internet traffic does not traverse the telco switched network > except in the local Intra-switch arena. Few people make long distance > calls for internet access and those that do pay long distance rates > for the time they are connected. I dial a local exchange number for > access to my ISP so the only resources being used is one intra-switch > connection. That's identical to what a teenager uses for a two hour > connection to their friend(s). It's the local inter-office trunks that are being ties up and it costs LEC's big bucks to add more trunks and more ports to their switches. > I live in a town with 20,000 plus population. At any one time I > really doubt that there is any more than a couple of hundred switch > connections used for internet access. That's in sharp contrast to the > volume of voice calls. Let's see. A couple hundred users divided by 24 ... let's say 8 T1's running to a POP in a nearby town. Maybe the AOL, or MSN (or whatever) POP is on a switch 50 miles away. So the Internet is taking up 8 T1's, 16 T1 switch ports, and repeaters along the way. That's a lot of hardware. It's also a lot to maintain and keep track of. Most importantly, it's a huge investment that the phone company didn't plan on making. The PSTN was built on the fact that on average, phone calls last three minutes. The Internet blows that out of the water. The RBOC's and GTE are run by bean counters. When the bean counters made their long range budget plans, they didn't have a clue of what impact the internet would have on their network. Now they don't have the budget to upgrade all those interoffice trunks. ------------------------------ From: GWells@kudonet.com (Glenn Wells) Subject: Re: 48 V PC Power Supply Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 18:52:06 GMT Organization: KudoNet On-Line Services In article Jeff Regan writes: > I am looking for a PC Power Supply that operates off of 48V DC Central > Office Battery instead of standard 120/208 VAC. IE: Instead of > plugging your PC into a standard electrical outlet, or UPS, run it off > a string of batteries. > It would need to generate all the required PC voltages (+/- 12V and > +5V I believe) with their respective current requirements (ie: what- > ever those are for a standard 230W power supply.) > It would also need to be a drop in replacement for the regular PC power > supply into a standard minitower or tower case. Why put a DC/DCconverter in your pc? Why not install a DC/AC inverter (48vdc / 115vac) and keep your regular AC supply. It will also reduce the noise associated with the DC/DC converter. Glenn Wells ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 19:13:26 PDT From: Marty Brenneis Subject: Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions JSeder@syntel.com wrote: > If someone in Boston dials my San Francisco cellular number, both they > AND I pay long distance charges (in addition to my $.75 airtime charge). > But -- someone in Boston can dial 617-633-7626, and at the tone dial > my San Francisco cellular number, and NEITHER of us will pay long > distance charges -- I pay the airtime charge, and that's it. Call your > Cellular One rep to get additional local access numbers. There is a new scam in Los Angeles, CA with the A side carrier. (LA Cellular) If the roamer has Follow Me Roaming (FMR) turned on you cannot access their phone thru the roamer port. You must call their home number and let the system route the call from their home. This means that if I am there with a friend and wish to call them, I must pay LD and air charges to home, then they must pay LD and air charges back to LA. I tested the system and found that if we turned off the FMR, the local roam port would work. The B carrier in LA (Airtouch) does not do this sort of game. The roam port always works. In San Francisco on the B carrier the roam ports even work for local phones. This means that friends in Santa Rosa can place a local call to the roam port and reach my phone rather than paying the toll charges to San Francisco where my cell number terminates. On a positive note for LA cellular I saw an ad that says they do not charge for cellphone to cellphone calling within their system. Marty 'The Droid' Brenneis droid@well.com Industrial Magician droid@kerner.com (415)258-2105 ~~~ KAE7616 - 462.700 - 162.2 ~~~ KC6YYP ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #464 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 18:57:03 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id SAA21630; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 18:57:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 18:57:03 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609052257.SAA21630@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #465 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 18:57:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 465 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Germany Censors Dutch Website WWW.XS4ALL.NL (Felipe Rodriquez) Companies Dump Macs as Loyalists Lose Faith (Tad Cook) AOL Fed Up With Spam; Slaton 'Repents' (Tad Cook) ISDN D Channel For Low Bandwidth Net Acccess (Eric Smith) US-Mexican Data Communications (Steve Collins) Re: North America Dialing (Steve Hayes) Re: Another Assault on Privacy (Barry Margolin) Re: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer (Lars Poulsen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: felipe@xs4all.nl Subject: Germany Censors Dutch Website WWW.XS4ALL.NL Date: 5 Sep 1996 18:20:22 GMT Organization: XS4ALL, networking for the masses Contact: Felipe Rodriquez (felipe@xs4all.nl) XS4ALL Internet BV (http://www.xs4all.nl) Postbus 1848 1000BV Amsterdam Fax: +31-20-6274498 GERMANY CENSORS DUTCH WEBSITE WWW.XS4ALL.NL, WITH 3100 WEBPAGES German internet providers, joined in the Internet Content Taskforce (ICTF), started censoring the Dutch website www.xs4all.nl, containing 3100 personal and commercial homepages. This act of censorship is caused by the webpage of a magazine that is banned in Germany, Radikal (http://www.xs4all.nl/ ~tank/radikal/). A German prosecutor sent the following message to the ICTF (http://www.anwalt.de/ictf/p960901e.htm): "Under the following addresses in Internet: http://www.serve.com/spg/154/ http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/radikal//154/ and using the link on page: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/angela1/radilink.htm one can call up the entire edition of the pamphlet entitled "Radikal Nr. 154". Parts of this pamphlet justify preliminary suspicion of promoting a terrorist organization under ' 129a, Par.3 of the German Criminal Code, public condoning of criminal activities penalizable under ' 140 no.2 of the German Criminal Code and preliminary suspicion of inciting to criminal activity under ' 130a Par.1 of the German Criminal Code. The Public Prosecutor General at the Federal Court of Justice has therefore initiated a criminal investigatory procedure against the parties disseminating this pamphlet. You are herewith informed that you may possibly make yourself subject to criminal prosecution for aiding and abetting criminal activities if you continue to allow these pages to be called up via your access points and network crosspoints." Providers in Germany are already blocking packets to and from the host www.xs4all.nl. The 3100 websites on this server include the Kurdistan Information Network (http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/kurdish/htdocs/), the very popular Internet Charts (http://www.xs4all.nl/~jojo/) and the world famous Chip Directory (http://www.xs4all.nl/~ganswijk/chipdir/). XS4ALL has not received any request from the German Government regarding the homepage of Radikal. Without any prior contact the German prosecutor decided that the XS4ALL website needs to be blocked for German Internet Users. XS4ALL is awaiting legal advice, and will investigate if legal procedures against the German government are possible. Censorship on Internet usually has the opposite effect. Internet users consider it a sport to publish censored materials. Many users have already published the Radikal website on other Internet hosts. Here are some of the URL's: http://burn.ucsd.edu/%7Eats/RADIKAL/ http://www.jca.or.jp/~taratta/mirror/radikal/ http://www.serve.com/~spg/ http://huizen.dds.nl/~radikal http://www.canucksoup.net/radikal/index.html http://www.ecn.org/radikal http://www.well.com/~declan/mirrors/ http://www.connix.com/~harry/radikal/index.htm http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/radikal/index.htm Xs4all Internet will rotate the IP-numbering of the website www.xs4all.nl to ensure that it's 3100 userpages will all remain available for any internet-user. Felipe Rodriquez - XS4ALL Internet - finger felipe@xs4all.nl for http://xs4all.nl/~felipe/ - Managing Director - pub pgp-key 1024/A07C02F9 pgp Key fingerprint = 32 36 C3 D9 02 42 79 C6 D1 9F 63 EB A7 30 8B 1A ------------------------------ Subject: Companies Dump Macs as Loyalists Lose Faith Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 14:37:29 PDT From: tad@ssc.com Companies Dump Macintosh Computers as Loyalists Lose Faith By ALEX MARKELS The Wall Street Journal "Buy a PC. They're cheaper. And the Mac is going to disappear." This bit of advice, from one computer shopper to another more trouble for the already-battered Apple Computer Inc. The shopper who dispensed the advice is Jeffrey Bade, a computer specialist at Dow Chemical Co., Midland, Mich., and, more to the point, a decade-long devotee of Apple's Macintosh computer. Mr. Bade bought his first Mac while in college in 1984, subsequently became a Mac programmer and sang the machine's praises far and wide. "I was a real evangelist," he says. But when Dow Chemical pulled the plugs on its nearly 9,000 Macs last spring, Mr. Bade gave in, explaining: "It's just not worth fighting for anymore." Frustrated with a product that is no longer state-of-the-art, onetime Macintosh zealots like Mr. Bade are losing their religion. And as their employers seek to cut costs by limiting the computer systems they support, many of these devotees have stopped defending the computers they once persuaded their companies to buy. The result: Corporate users are dumping the Mac in droves. In March, Northern Telecom Ltd. said it would replace 30,000 Macs with "Wintel" machines, computers equipped with Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system and Intel Corp. microprocessors. Eli Lilly & Co. is weeding out 7,000 Macs. Ernst & Young will purge about 2,000 Macs by the fall, and Monsanto Co. will drop that many within a year. Numerous others, including big users like Pacific Telesis Group and KPMG Peat Marwick, are now reviewing their buying plans. It is an ironic turn of events for Apple, which used to brag about how Macintosh became popular in corporate offices only after fans sneaked the computers through the back door. Although business sales account for only about a third of Apple's revenue -- and thus are less important to the company than to rivals like Compaq Computer Corp. -- Apple's unit-based market share among large and medium-size U.S. businesses has fallen by about 50 percent since the third quarter of 1995, International Data Corp. reports. "We are obviously not happy" about corporate defections, admits Steven Angelo, a vice president for strategic marketing at Apple, which is based in Cupertino, Calif. But Mr. Angelo says that the Macintosh still has fervent corporate fans, especially among those who use it for graphics applications. Indeed, when Northern Telecom first announced its switch to Windows, "some people had a Big Mac Attack," says Bill Conner, an executive vice president who oversees computer networking there. Nevertheless, the Macs are going. Mac fans at Lilly also complained. "But we said, `Hey, you can't blame us for delays in their systems or the fact that if you walk into any computer store most of the software is for Windows, or for (Apple's) falling market share or their debt being downgraded," says Edward B. Tunstall, Lilly's chief information officer. "That shut people up pretty fast." The Mac's famously easy-to-operate system has long been a major selling point with corporate buyers, who consider the costs of training and supporting users. But with both Windows 95 and its more powerful cousin, Windows NT, employing a Mac-like screen format, Apple has lost much of its user-friendly edge. "Once NT came out (with the Windows 95 user interface), that was it," says Seth Gersch, chief administrative officer at Montgomery Securities Inc. in San Francisco, which recently dumped 1,100 Apple computers. An Apple enthusiast from the beginning, Mr. Gersch once persuaded his company to use Macs for its brokerage applications, arguing to his bosses that the Mac was like a Ferrari while International Business Machines Corp.'s PC was a Ford Model-T. "Now, it's the reverse," he says. Corporate users say the Macintosh crashes more often than Windows NT. Even worse, while programs for Wintel machines proliferate, software for the Macintosh has become less plentiful. Darren Starr, a computer consultant and self-proclaimed Mac fanatic who was among the first to install Apple computer networks in Silicon Valley businesses, says his eroding enchantment with the Mac ended altogether last month when the manufacturer of a key computer program for the Mac told him it would no longer sell or support the product. "I used to say that it didn't matter if there were more programs available for Windows machines, as long as there was at least one of what I needed running on the Mac," he says. "But now there isn't even that." At Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, the venture-capital firm that financed Netscape Communications Corp., a conversion from Apple to Windows systems will be finished by next spring. Kleiner partner Kevin Compton, who spent years advising businesses to use the Mac, knew the tide had turned when he recently asked his children what computers they wanted in their bedrooms. "They said they wanted the same ones they had at school. So I asked them, `Which Mac is that?"' Mr. Compton recalls. "They said, `No, Dad, we use Windows."' It doesn't help Apple salesmen knocking on corporate doors that other high-profile Mac users are throwing in the towel. Stewart Alsop, a longtime Mac booster and widely published computer columnist, wrote his first story on a Windows computer in July. In giving up the Mac, he wrote in InfoWorld magazine, "the plain truth is that I am ... giving up what amounts to very little." Even Mike Boich has called it quits. In 1985, as Apple's original "evangelist," Mr. Boich set out to pique the interest of software developers. Now, "I'm sitting here typing on my Thinkpad," an IBM laptop, he says. "If I want the coolest applications the day they're released, or if I go surfing the Internet to download software, invariably it's Windows stuff that's available." Today, Mr. Boich is president and chief executive officer of Rendition Inc., Mountain View, Calif., which makes graphics chips for Intel-based computers. An evangelist-turned-pragmatist, he and his new company have declined to make comparable chips for Apple machines. As for his former disciples in corporations, he says, "I would imagine it's not a good career move to buy more Macs." ------------------------------ Subject: AOL Fed Up With Spam; Slaton 'Repents' Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 14:44:18 PDT From: tad@ssc.com AOL fed up with `spam'; On-line service to block junk e-mail By Janet Rae-Dupree Mercury News Staff Writer America Online Inc.'s users are fed up with junk e-mail and they're not going to tolerate it anymore. So the nation's largest on-line service announced Wednesday it will block messages from Internet sites that flood subscriber mailboxes with missives hawking everything from get-rich-quick schemes to fad diet plans. The bulk-mailed messages are known as "spams," a name based on the Monty Python comedy troupe routine about mindless offerings. "Spamming" has been a cyberspace issue for at least three years as new Internet users discovered their electronic mailbox was no more immune to unwanted advertising than their regular "snail mail" postal box. Compuserve and Prodigy, two of the nation's other major on-line services, already have begun blocking some bulk mail messages. But America Online is the first to wage open warfare on "spammers." Until now, the Internet community has tried vigilante spam justice; angry users fed up with junk mail have spammed back at the companies or individuals who provide a home base for the commercial bulk mailers or resorted to other, sometimes more drastic, electronic measures. "Receiving unsolicited junk e-mail is the No. 1 complaint we hear from our members," said Steve Case, AOL chairman and chief executive. "As the leader in this new medium, we believe the time has come ... to protect the interests of our members by limiting this annoying and inappropriate use of the medium." Oddly enough, cyberspace's self-proclaimed "Spam King" applauded AOL's decision. "I'm repentant. I've got religion. I see the light now and I'm done with the old way of spamming," said Jeff Slaton, who just last year bragged that for $425 he would broadcast any message any time to millions of people's e-mail accounts, whether they wanted it or not. "I think AOL is right on target," Slaton said. "The Internet is the Wild West with no laws and regulations and it's time now for the community, and that includes me, to start abiding by some code of conduct to avoid inevitable chaos." But Slaton does plan to send out one last spam from his new server, lightningbolt.com, on behalf of his new advertising company, IQ Internet. This last bulk message, scheduled to roll out in the next few weeks, will offer recipients a choice: Receive no further bulk-mail messages at all, designate what sort of advertising they would be interested in reading or give Slaton's company permission to send anything and everything. Readers who don't respond probably will get additional messages from Slaton's company, but he hasn't yet decided how to handle silent recipients. "There will be no need for AOL or anyone else to block us because we will be sending wanted mail," he said. The concept would be similar, he said, to the "no-mail" list maintained by the Direct Marketing Association, whose members honor written requests from people who do not want their postal box filled with paper junk mail. Internet sites to be blocked by AOL, however, cannot be rejected so easily. AOL did not release an exhaustive list of the sites it would block but included five examples of outfits that have "refused to work with AOL or have ignored requests to do so" -- cyberpromo.com , honeys.com , answerme.com , netfree.com and servint.com . Cyber Promotions Inc. of Philadelphia, which owns three of the domains, filed suit against American Online in April claiming that AOL's demands that it stop sending bulk mail was interfering with its business. "Maybe one of the reasons for their action is that AOL sees us as a competitive threat," Cyber Promotions President Sanford Wallace said. "Unlike the pop-up screens that AOL forces all its members to see before they can get into their accounts, we're a little more responsible in our position." AOL acknowledged that its plan is not perfect, because bulk mailers can quickly and inexpensively switch to new domain names. So AOL also plans to create a new feature that will let users filter out unwanted messages themselves. The only option now is either to click "ignore" on unwanted messages, delete them or forward them to AOL's terms-of-service department as part of a complaint. David Phillips, associate general counsel at AOL, said the company believes its 6 million subscribers will be pleased by the decision to block specific sites. "Could it potentially restrict a legitimate e-mail? Yes. Is that the price that members appear willing to pay to put a limit on the number of junk e-mails that they receive? I think overwhelmingly that's the case," he said. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 14:18:32 PDT From: Eric Smith Subject: ISDN D Channel For Low Bandwidth Net Access Bill Sohl wrote: > If residential ISDN was affordably priced, then a D channel virtual > connection (X.25 packet) could be left up for indefinete time periods > without incurring usage costs except for incoming and outgoing email. > The X.25 connection wouldn't likly be cost effective for WEB access > (in either direction), but it could provide that instant email > reception at low cost. This is a great idea. My on-demand ISDN currently brings up a B channel periodically for DNS serial number checks and various other things. I'd really like to keep occasional low-volume traffic on the D channel. This would also be useful for pinging my server. Presumably it would also have lower latency than dialing and circuit-switched B channel call, negotiating PPP, and authenticating. Ideally I think I would want to use PPP multilink, configured to keep the D channel link open at all times and bring up B channels on demand. Unfortunately the equipment I am using (Telebit NetBlazer LS) doesn't currently support use of the D channel for anything but signalling. Anyone know if the Bit Surfer Pro, Courier I-Modem, or Waverunner support D channel data? Cheers, Eric ------------------------------ From: stevec@epcorp.com (Steve Collins) Subject: US-Mexican Data Communications Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 13:44:19 GMT Organization: Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. Reply-To: stevec@epcorp.com Anyone have any tips on doing data comm between the US and Mexico? I probably would consider combining voice and data. Presently I have a small m-wave shot across the border. But I need to put in a more cohesive strategy as I move more production "south of the border". The favor of an email reply is requested. Any and all replies will in turn be replied to. If your name is not included in the body of the text, you are included on an informational basis. Steven Collins | Voice: (513) 629-2485 Data Communications Mgr. | Pager: (513) 629-2486 Eagle-Picher Industries | Fax: (513) 721-7126 Cincinnati, Ohio | 45202 USA | EMail: SteveC@epcorp.com ------------------------------ Date: 04 Sep 96 07:00:58 EDT From: Steve Hayes <100112.606@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: North America Dialing Feico, As someone who lives in Britain but works a lot with the North American phone system, perhaps I can clarify some of the questions you've raised. First point to keep in mind is that, while European countries have dominant phone companies who have established pretty firm country-wide standards, things in North America are much less consistent. There are big variations between different phone companies, between states (state governments set many of the regulations) and even from one area to another for historical reasons. Second point is that traditionally, North American area codes cover large geographical areas. This means that calls from one number to another in the same area code may well be long distance. In contrast, British area codes (and Netherlands ones too, I expect) are geographically quite small and long distance charges depend only on the area codes of the calling and called parties. With area code splits in North America, some are now geographically small (as 212 always was) but there are still plenty of big ones around. A North American phone number consists of three chunks: a three digit area code, a three digit office code and a four digit subscriber number. I'll write this as (AAA) BBB-CCCC. The first digits of the area and office codes are never 0 or 1. At one time, the second digit of the area code was always 0 or 1 and the second digit of the office code was never 0 or 1 but this no longer applies. The charge for a call is based on distance, not on area codes. The distance is determined by looking at both the area code (AAA) and the office code (BBB) using the famous V&H tables. In many cases of course all the office codes in a distant area code will fall into the same distance charging band and will be charged at the same rate. Local calls to numbers in the same area code can always be dialed as seven digits (BBB-CCCC). In some cases where local numbers used to be shorter, they were padded out to seven digits by adding "absorb" digits at the start and locally you may still be able to dial the original shorter number. It used to be common with step-by-step. Does anyone know if this still happens? In many areas (depending on regulations, etc.) long distance calls must be dialed as 1+10 digits (1-AAA-BBB-CCCC), even if the called number is in the same area code as the caller. This alerts the caller to the fact that there may be a toll charge. In other areas, this is not required and long distance calls in the same area code can be dialed as seven digits only (BBB-CCCC). 1+7 digit dialing is no longer permitted. In some cases, a caller's local calling area will extend into one or more different area codes. Sometimes the system is set up to allow calls to these numbers to be dialed as ten digits only (AAA-BBB-CCCC). This can be done where AAA is not used as an office code in the caller's own area code (or perhaps where a call to that office code in the caller's own area code would be long distance and would have to be dialed as 1+10 digits -- does anyone know if there are cases of this?). Even where it can be done this way, it may not be and 1+10 digits may be required. There used to be a variation of this scheme known as "Community Dialing" where local calls to the nearby area code could be dialed as seven digits because either the office code was not used in the caller's own area code or it would be long distance and would have to be dialed as 1+. Does anyone know if there are still places where this is allowed? Except in these special cases, calls to a different area code must always be dialed as 1+10 digits. The system uses the 1+ to know to expect a ten digit number to follow. There has been a recent argument here in TELECOM Digest about whether local calls should be allowed to be dialed as 1+10 digits. There is no agreement about this. In some areas, these calls go through and are charged (or not charged) as local calls. In other areas, they may be disallowed or even charged as toll calls. In the preceding, I didn't point out that 1+ calls can also be dialed as 0+ (0-AAA-BBB-CCCC) to allow them to be charged to a calling card, collect/reverse charge or third party. There is no special procedure for dialing calls between countries within the NANP (country code 1). They will usually be dialed as 1+10 digits but some may even be local. The international access code to dial outside the NANP is 011 (or 010 for calling cards, etc.) So far as what is meant by "long-distance": it is a call which isn't "local". The simplest definition of a local call is that it is one which costs no more than a call to your neighbour. In many North American areas, unlimited local calls are included in the basic line rental charge (which tends to be higher than here in Britain where we pay high local call rates). In other areas there may be a small per-call or per-minute charge. In many cases, residential lines get unlimited local calls while business lines are charged for them. Local calling areas vary widely in size and shape. They are typically 8-15 miles (13-25 km) in radius but some are much larger. In many cases the user has a choice of paying a higher line rental in exchange for a larger local call area or lower local call charges. There may also be a grey area between local and long distance with extended or message-unit charging areas. This varies a great deal from place to place and is very confusing. Anyway, I hope that this doesn't leave you more confused than before. The basic rule is that, if it's possible, there will be somewhere where they do it that way! Steve Hayes, Swansea, UK, 100112.606@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Another Assault on Privacy Date: 3 Sep 1996 11:57:44 -0400 Organization: BBN Planet, Cambridge, MA In article , Babu Mengelepouti wrote: > Georgia H.B. 1630, enacted May, 1996: ... > The law makes it a crime to transmit any data that "uses any > individual name ... to falsely identify the person." The use of vanity > e-mail addresses or pseudonyms on computer networks is common practice, > and safeguards user privacy in sending and obtaining information online. > The law is certain to inhibit people from obtaining sensitive information > online. For example, an abused woman may be afraid to seek out online > information or help if she is forced to reveal her true identity. From the brief quote above, it doesn't seem like this law would prohibit use of pseudonyms or anonymous posting. It sounds to me like it's intended to prohibit people from identifying themselves as *someone else*, i.e. forging a posting from Bill Clinton or your boss. I'm not sure that a new statute is necessary for this, though; it seems like existing fraud laws should handle these situations well enough. > The law also makes it a crime to "use[] any ... trade name, > registered trademark, [or] logo" that would "falsely state or imply that > [the user] has permission or is legally authorized to use [it]." Since > the statute contains no standard for determining when a user has "falsely > implied" permission, it could prohibit web links to sites with trade names > or logos. Making a link to a site doesn't necessarily "use" the trademark, unless the text of the link contains the trademarked name. For instance, if the link says "Click here to go to another site" it doesn't use the trademark; on the other hand, if it says "Click here to go to the Sun Microsystems web page" it might imply permission. A disclaimor of association with Sun Microsystems might be sufficient to avoid the above clause; if the page has links to lots of sites a blanket disclaimor should be sufficient (this is commonly used in print media to avoid trademark problems). Barry Margolin BBN Planet, Cambridge, MA barmar@bbnplanet.com - Phone (617) 873-3126 - Fax (617) 873-6351 (BBN customers, please call (800) 632-7638 option 1 for support) ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer Date: 5 Sep 1996 15:37:40 -0700 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article John Holland writes: > I'm looking for a ... description of connection oriented and > connectionless data transfer. I believe in connectionless each packet > contains all the information it needs to traverse the network, where > as with connection oriented means that a 'logical' connection must be > first set up, data transfered and then the connection torn down. Really > I'm looking for some good examples I can latch on to. I can't quite > grasp how a 'logical' connection is set up. How do the packets get > routed? Here are some samples of connection oriented networks: - X.25 - Frame Relay - Telephone - Telex And some examples of connectionless (packet) networks: - Internet - NetWare - Ethernet (with bridged-together segments) - and to some degree ATM Bear in mind, that in all networks, useful work is generally performed by two stations (end nodes) passing some amount of data back and forth, which software on those stations will see as: - establishing a logical connection - sending and receiving data on that connection - releasing the connection. The logical connection may be the opening of a file, or it may be a handshake with another program. It may even be a terminal logging in to a server computer. The difference between the connection-oriented network and the connectionless network is in whether all the network components between the two end nodes are aware of the connection, or not. In a connection oriented network, the connection request from the originating end node ("system A") is processed by software in the network switch closest to system A (let's call it "switch B"). This switch then creates in its own working memory a connection control block, and figures out which path through the network the data will take. It then reserves resources on that channel to carry the connection, and passes the call request to the next switch ("switch C") which also creates a connection block and finds the next switch in the chain. Eventually, the connection request is passed from "switch Y" to the destination end node ("system Z"). Now, when data is being passed from system A to system Z, each switch can easily track the data and pass it on. If a switch becomes in-operational, the connection will have to be re-established. In a connectionless network, system A knows that data leaving the local area needs to be passed to switch B; switch B receives the message, but is not particularly aware that this packet has special significance to the end nodes as a connection request packet ... it is just data addressed to system Z. Switch B consults its map of the network, and determines that the best current path to system Z goes via switch C. And so on. If a link or a switch becomes in-operational, the network repairs itself as soon as switches learn about the failed components and find an alternate route. In a richly connected net, this will usually allow the connection to survive. Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@RNS.COM RNS / Meret Communications Phone: +1-805-562-3158 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Internets: designed and built while you wait ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #465 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 21:58:27 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id VAA09872; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 21:58:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 21:58:27 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609060158.VAA09872@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #466 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 21:58:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 466 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson WUTCO Telex in the Late 1950's and Early 60's (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: North America Dialing (Linc Madison) Re: 414 NPA Residents Prefer Split to Overlay (James E. Bellaire) Re: MCI Advertising as ISDN ISP, But Doesn't Have it Yet (E. Castleman) Re: Technical Question on GSM (Henry Baker) Re: Technical Question on GSM (E. Robinson) Re: 800/888 Calls From Jails/Prisons (Bob Knoll) Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud (John Cropper) Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud (Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud (Robert Bulmash) Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud (Tom Olin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 18:26:50 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: WUTCO Telex in the Late 1950's and Early 60's I recently had a chance to look at some scattered 1950's and 60's back issues of the Western Union Technical Review at a local area library. This technical journal came out about four times a year. Individual issues weren't as large as the Bell System Technical Journal (now the AT&T Technical Journal) nor the Bell Laboratories Record (now AT&T Technology). And both of the Bell/AT&T journals had more issues per year than did the Western Union Technical Review. Incidently, does anyone know what will happen to the two AT&T journals, now that Lucent (formerly Western Electric, including Bell Labs) will be splitting off? The articles in the Western Union Technical Review weren't as 'theoretical' as the Bell journals, as the Western Union articles were more related to electronic telecommunications technology itself, rather than chemistry, physics or math theory. There were articles on Western Union's telegraphic facsimile service, private-line switched teletype networks for major corporations, data processing and communications, etc. By the later 1950's issues, there were articles devoted to a new public switched telegraphic service from Western Union ... Telex. While automated public switched Telex service had been available in Europe and other parts of the world going back to the 1930's, it was not introduced in North America until the mid-to-late 1950's. AT&T (Bell) did have TWX service in the continental USA since 1931, but it was (until mid-1962) a *manually* switched public teletype service, handled by cordboard operators. Around 1956, CN Telegraphs (a division of Canadian National Railways) introduced public switched/dial Telex service. Two years later, in 1958, the Western Union Telegraph Company began Telex service in the USA. The first WUTCO Telex exchange was in the New York City area. It was basically a step-by-step tributary exchange off of the CNT Montreal step-by-step Telex exchange. Around 1960, WUTCO had established more Telex exchanges in the continental USA, and increased traffic due to the popularity of the service caused WUTCO to do some reconfiguration of their US Telex network switch homing and hierarchy. A 1962 article on the Telex network in WU Technical Review was about the new model 32 teletypewriter machine being introduced in Telex service. Teletype Corporation (a subsidiary of the AT&T/Bell's Western Electric) manufactured these machines. The article also describes how Western Union's Telex service was fully integrated with the Canadian Telex network for 'seamless' transmission of messages, and also that the US Telex network had gateways with Mexico's Telex network. Further articles in the 1960's began to cover data processing and computers. There were some articles on ASCII code. One article on ASCII and the Teletype Corp. model 33 and 35 machines (the ones used by 8-level 110-speed TWX service) mentioned that some Western Union private teletype networks might be using ASCII code with model 33/35 machines, but that the basic public Telex network would continue to use 5-level Baudot at 66-speed. There is an article in a mid-1960's issue regarding Western Union's new computer-enhanced Telex service, to later be known as Infomaster. This was a store-and-forward system which could receive and store Telex messages for later retransmission, transmit a message to multiple parties, etc. One of the features of this new WUTCO computer system was to be able for a Telex subscriber to send a message to an AT&T TWX subscriber! When the computer received instructions that the number to deliver the message text to was a TWX subscriber, it would punch out the entire text on 5-level paper tape. An attendent would tear the tape off of the tape punch, and then retransmit the tape, originating the message over a '3-row' (Baudot 5-level) older TWX machine (those TWX machines which used their own geographic *telephone* area codes). The Telex originated message to a TWX subscriber could also go to a '4-row' (ASCII 8-level) TWX machine, as the WUTCO attendent would retransmit their received 5-level Telex tape over a '3-row' TWX machine, but was able to dial the '4-row' TWX customer which had a special 4-row 'N10' TWX area code. While this method of tearing off a physical punched tape and then manually retransmitting it might seem primitive, WUTCO's new computer system did allow such formatting for the customer to indicate various types and formats of messages and a capability to transmit from Telex to TWX. In many ways, this could be the beginning of 'email' service, as there was some form of effort made to interconnecting two differently owned (and competing) networks, each with its own different character sets. And even though TWX did have a 5-level code (the older '3-row' TWX), some of its symbols characters weren't the same as 5-level code for symbols characters used in Telex. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.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: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: North America Dialing Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 09:54:48 -0700 Organization: Best Internet Communications In article , effect@worldaccess.nl (Feico Nater) wrote: > This must be a simple question to you North-Americans, but not to me. > My question is: how do you dial a number in North America? > First, let me explain how this is in my country. > In my country, the Netherlands, everyone has two numbers: an area code > and a subscriber's number. An area code is (since last year) three or > four digits, and its first digit is zero. A subscriber's number is > (since last year) seven or six digits, and its first digit is never > zero. Together, area code and subscriber's number have ten digits. > Area codes are non-conflicting. That means that, if 023 is a valid > area code, there are no four-digit area codes which begin with 023. > This is unlike Britain where area codes may be conflicting, and the > first digit of the subscriber's number gives more information. Your description of UK area codes is incorrect. They are also non- conflicting. The only previously-existing examples of conflicts were situations where, for example, 0234 was the neighborhood for a medium- sized town, and 02345 was an immediately adjacent small town. However, in Britain today, all area codes are either four digits (0171) or five digits (01222). The total number of digits is 11, if you include the initial zero. > Area codes are published including the initial zero, but officially, > this zero does not belong to the area code. When calling from abroad, > this zero must not be dialed. That is because the zero is not actually part of the area code, from the technical point of view. It is simply an indicator that an area code follows. > So far the situation in the Netherlands. Now for North America. > An area code is three digits, and a (what do you call it?) is seven > digits. The middle digit of an area code is 0 or 1 (I don't know > why). It used to be true that the middle digit of an area code was always 0 or 1, and the second digit of a seven-digit local number was *never* 0 or 1. The reason was that this allowed switches to tell by looking at the first three significant digits whether the call was in the same area code or a distant one. The reasons for this system have origins in major technical differences in the way that signalling and switching are performed in the North American telephone network, compared with the European network. > What exactly does 'long distance' mean? Is it the same as a call to > another area? In the old days (pre-1984), "long distance" meant any call outside the immediate local area. In many areas, all local calls were included in the basic monthly charge, so a "long distance" call was any that incurred a per-minute charge. (Many areas now have charges for local calls, including sometimes on a per-minute basis.) In the post-1984 era (1984 is the date of the breakup of the AT&T monopoly, not a reference to George Orwell), "long distance" has gotten somewhat more confusing. The United States is divided into "LATAs" (Local Access and Transport Areas). A toll call within the same LATA -- similar to a toll call to an adjacent local region in the Netherlands -- is handled by the local telephone company (although this monopoly is now being relaxed in many areas). Any call outside your LATA must be handled by a long-distance company (AT&T, MCI, Sprint, LDDS, etc.), although the local telephone companies (Pacific Bell, BellSouth, Ameritech, NYNEX, etc.) are now approaching the point of being allowed to sell "long distance" (outside of the subscriber's LATA). > To dial to another area, one dials all ten digits, preceded by 1. Is > that always right? So the first digit of a subscriber's number is > never 1. Correct? To dial to the same area, one dials just the seven > digits. Is that right? Someone told me that if the first three > digits of the subscriber's number are equal, it is sufficient to dial > only the last four digits. Is that correct? And if so, how does the CO > know whether you are going to dial four or seven digits? Calling from the USA to any point in the North American Numbering Plan (USA, Canada, and several Caribbean countries and territories) the dialing sequence proceeds as follows: (1) optional special codes, such as *67/*82 to suppress/enable transmission of your number to the other person's Caller ID box, *70 to disable call waiting, etc. (2) optional carrier code, if you want to use a long-distance company other than your default carrier. For example, 10288 for AT&T, 10222 for MCI. (3) '1' if the call is direct-dialed, '0' if the call is operator-assisted (collect/reverse charges, person-to-person, charge to a telephone calling card, or bill to a third number). In either case, you dial the destination number as below. (4) the three-digit area code and seven-digit local number. It used to be possible to dial just 1+NNX-XXXX for a long-distance call within your own area code, but this dialing sequence is now prohibited, because there could be a conflict between 1-334-2345 and 1-334-234-5678. (334 is now the area code for half of the state of Alabama, but the rest of the example is fictional.) > How does one dial from Canada to USA vice versa? Is it just as if they > are one country? Dialing from the US to Canada is as shown above. Dialing from Canada to the US and to the Caribbean is very similar, but you omit step 2, and some of the codes in step 1 may be different. Dialing from points in the Caribbean part of the NANP may differ from island to island, but in all cases a distinction is made between dialing within the NANP and dialing outside. > What is the price of a phone call? One significant difference between the way calls are priced in the US and the way they are often priced in Europe is that the price is always quoted in cents per fixed time unit, rather than seconds per fixed cost unit. In most cases, the time unit is one minute, but some companies bill in units of one-tenth minute (6 seconds). The price also depends dramatically on whether or not the call crosses a state line. It may be much more expensive to call a community 500 km away in the same state than to call something 5000 km away on the other side of the country, but it varies from state to state. The price also depends on the time of day and on the discount plan you choose from your long-distance company, and on the volume of calls you make. To some extent, the cost often depends on distance, with "rate bands" of, for example, 0-11 miles, 12-25 miles, 25-100, 100-500, 500-1000, 1000-3000, and 3000+. The prices to Alaska, Hawaii, Canada, and the Caribbean may be handled differently, with their own rate schedules and international tariffs (except AK and HI), even though they are not dialed like other int'l calls. The price of one minute of long-distance during peak day rates is generally around $0.25 to $0.35; in off-peak, it is generally about $0.10 to $0.15, but those are only "ballpark" estimates. Rates to Caribbean countries may be around $1/minute, which is often more expensive than calling to the Netherlands. Many long-distance companies offer special discount plans to callers who make many international calls, though. Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Sep 96 13:23 EST From: James E. Bellaire Organization: Twin Kings Subject: Re: 414 NPA Residents Prefer Split to Overlay Tad Cook forwarded: > Since 1995, 30 new area codes have been added in the United States as > explosive growth in telecommunications has mandated the need for more > and more phone numbers. Of those 30 new area codes, 28 opted for the > geographic split. The latest estimates show that Wisconsin will run > out of phone numbers by the first quarter of 1998. Actually some of those 28 opted for an overlay and the courts forced the geographic splits. Complaints by cellular and potential competitive phone companies spawned the court's decisions. > On one side is Ameritech, MCI Corp. and other traditional phone > companies that want the 414 calling area split because they believe > that is what their customers want. > On the other side are pager and cellular companies -- though not > Ameritech's cellular unit -- who are in favor of an overlay. That's > because with a geographic split, cell phone users would have to come > into a store and have their phones reprogrammed. Overlays must not be discriminating against cellular anymore if Ameritech wants them. Amazing how the phone company changes its position when it suits them. Maybe Ameritech managers should go into politics ... :) > Among residential customers, 69 percent said they preferred a > geographic split while 26 percent supported the overlay plan. Among > business customers, 77 percent preferred the geographic split while 20 > percent were in favor of an overlay plan. In both cases, the rest were > undecided. Nice to see that customers are actually understanding the difference. > Atlanta-based BellSouth Cellular Corp., which has pushed for the > overlay, said the survey was biased in favor of the geographic > split. The company operates the Cellular One franchise in southern > Wisconsin. The same BellSouth / Cell One that operates in Chicago and refused an overlay? Nice to see that both cell operators can't make up their minds. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com WebPage available 23.5 hrs a day http://user.holli.com/~bellaire [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Jim, your error here is that it is not BellSouth ... it is Southwestern Bell which d/b/a/ Cellular One in the Chicago market in competition to Ameritech. They are the 'A' carrier here in competition to Ameritech. When you go down to St. Louis however, then it is flipped around: Ameritech becomes the 'A' carrier competing against Southwestern Bell Mobility, the 'landline' or 'B' carrier. The BellSouth people are on the other side of the continent essentially. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ecastle@mindspring.com Subject: Re: MCI Advertising as ISDN ISP, But Doesn't Have it Yet Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:20:44 GMT Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc. Reply-To: ecastle@mindspring.com JHamilton@Bridge.BellSouth.Com (Justin Hamilton) wrote: > To order internetMCI Access please call 1-800-550-0927. > So I did, and the rep, whose name I didn't get (sorry), told me that > they did not support ISDN and, although they will, she did not know > when. > Why do companies like MCI do this? I used to work for MCI, and must say that it's difficult for such a large communications company to offer a service like ISDN Internet access though a mass market channel. It's not an excuse, but a partial explanation of why such conflicting messages are sent. I know MCI has intended to offer ISDN service for quite a while, and perhaps it was rolled out before the customer service reps could be trained appropriately. Or perhaps it still isn't available but they're getting your attention ... > Oh well ... > If anyone has any good ISDN ISP's they can recommend, I would > appreciate it much ... 8) I find it interesting that you are a MindSpring customer and looking for information regarding ISDN ISPs. If you're in Birmingham, MindSpring currently offers 64kbps ISDN service, and will offer 128 shortly. If you're not in Birmingham, you should be aware that in two weeks, MindSpring will begin offering ISDN access in nearly 300 POPs nationwide. I'd expect that you are quite familiar with such MindSpring service facts, since you're a member of B.U.G. and even include the #1 Ranking pitch in your signature! Just making sure ... ;> Elizabeth Castleman MindSpring Enterprises, Inc. http://www.mindspring.com 404.815.0770 ------------------------------ From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) Subject: Re: Technical Question on GSM Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 16:53:01 GMT In article , alkamman@slip.net wrote: > When we use the GSM phone with a GSM card the GSM network does only > record the GSM card data or also the serial number of the telephone we > are using? > In other words: > Does the network notice that I am using my GSM card on my friend's > Siemens instead of on my own Philips? According to a report I found on the internet: "Overview of the Global System for Mobile Communications", (jscourias@neumann.uwaterloo.ca), GSM has several databases, including "HLR" (Home Location Register), "VLR" (Visitor Location Register), "EIR" (Equipment Identity Register) and "IMEI" (International Mobile Equipment Identity). "An IMEI is marked as invalid if it has been reported as stolen or is not type approved". So, I would say that the network _does_ notice which phone you use your SIM card on, but whether it "records" it or not in any kind of a permanent record is probably up to the service provider. ------------------------------ Date: 05 Sep 96 18:03:11 EDT From: erobinson <76004.1762@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Technical Question on GSM No reason for the GSM network to care what phone you use. So, no it doesn't pay attention to your phone, and can't know whether you are using the one you bought orginally, or another one. Some of the better GSM phones offer an optional password to prevent use of the phone in case another GSM sim is used, until the proper password is given when the new sim is mounted in the phone. This means that if your phone is stolen, it can't be used by someone else with another GSM account. -er ------------------------------ From: BKnoll123@aol.com Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 15:38:42 -0400 Subject: Re: 800/888 Calls From Jails/Prisons Please excuse my ignorance as to the difference between a jail and a prison. Is there a legal difference, or is it a matter of semantics? My question: If someone is arrested (and allowed to make one call?), would a toll free number work from the place that a person is first taken to by the police? The scenario would be if either a bail bond company or an attorney had a toll free number. I invite all responses, even direct ones to me. (no spam, and hold the mustard please.) BKnoll123@aol.com Bob Knoll [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A 'jail' is a place where persons who are awaiting trial are held and persons who have been convicted of minor crimes -- generally in violation of local ordinances or petty misdemeanor crimes are confined. Confinement is for not more than one year and typically a much shorter period of time. In Illinois for example, a misdemeanor crime cannot have more than one year in confinement and (the more serious) felony crime cannot have less than one year plus one day in confinement. A 'prison' on the other hand is a place for the confinement of persons on a longer term basis -- one or more years -- and generally involves state-level or federal-level crimes. The terms 'prison', 'penitentiary' and 'correctional center' are used interchangeably with the second term going back to the 18th century when it was assumed after a period of time the person confined would become penitent and the third term being an invention of the last half of this century by the federal government in an effort to play games with words and show that the person confined had eventually been corrected in his behavior. All those terms including 'jail' get blurred together sometimes, but a jail is typically for short term confinement and a prison is for long term confinement. As far as police officers are concerned, once you have been arrested you become a 'prisoner'; they make no distinction as to the facility where you will be confined, tortured, sexually assualted and otherwise left to rot. Why should they worry about it? A 'free' phone call is defined as a call *you* do not have to pay for. No one ever said the government has to pay for it either. Your parents or a friend (no doubt some other scumbag like yourself) can pay for it. The administrative phones at the police station are capable of calling an 800 number I am sure; but like toilet facilities for prisoners at the local police station they are as often as not 'out of order' and unable to be used. So they are not going to deprive you of your liberal-judge-at-the-Supreme-Court rights; certainly you can make your phone call when you get to the jail; no doubt they also have a restroom you can use. The fact that you may be in police custody several hours or an entire day "... because NCIC is down, and it may be several more hours before we get your prints back ..." is not relevant. No one is denying you anything. They just have to follow administrivia. Remember, the Supreme Court outlawed police officers torturing people (although it still happens a lot in Chicago and Skokie to name but two examples) but one thing the court did not outlaw was administrivia! So to anwer your question, yes the police station phones can call 800 numbers if you are allowed to use one. PAT] ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud Date: 05 Sep 1996 17:44:48 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Aug 30, 1996 13:14:43 in article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to 'Jim Hurley ': >> [TELECOM Digest Editior's Note: Quite a routine, isn't it? "Even though >> we commit a crime (in this case, fraud) the court cannot touch us because >> we have tariffs ...". And I can tell you right now if you ever think you >> are going to get in touch with Robin Loyed, you can forget it. He does >> not accept phone calls, in fact he dodges them. > How about calling Whoopi Goldberg? :) Errr, Jim, Whoopi is spokesperson for MCI, not Sprint ... You want "The Dime Lady", AKA Candice Bergen... :-) John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 10:37:00 EDT From: joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud Organization: Excelsior Computer Services >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: >> The only advice I can give you is that if you -- and other users of >> Sprint -- do not have a *total, complete freeze* on all accounts payable >> the company alleges are due to them, then you should have. Do not pay > I tried this, but my Sprint bills are billed through my local telco, > and my telco sent me a disconnect notice. I can't afford to have my > business number disconnected. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is good news for you. Your local > telephone service *can not be disconnected* for failure to pay the > long distance portion (when the long distance carrier is another > company). That is an FCC regulation going back to earlier this year > or maybe last year. It was ruled that was primarily as a way to Yes. I read that here several months ago. But, nonetheless, I did receive a disconnect notice from Bell Atlantic, even after I told them the charges were in dispute. They told me that after 30 days, it didn't matter, and that if Sprint didn't tell Ball Atlantic that they would refund the money, I was liable for it. Future inquiries I sent were ignored, and I came within one day of having my service cut off. I had told Bell Atlantic that as soon as they sent me a fax stating clearly that I was required to pay disputed charges, I would pay them. They ignored my request. I finally reached someone fairly high up, who understood my point, and, basically, agreed to do me a favor. The matter is still pending. The bottom line is, sadly, the law is irrelevent here unless you have the resources to sue ex-post-facto. In the short run, if you fight the big LD carriers, you'll lose your service. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: prvtctzn@aol.com (Prvt Ctzn) Subject: Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud Date: 05 Sep 1996 10:52:36 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: People have tried to sue famous people > for advertising endorsements they made on behalf of companies but those > cases always lose. The courts say the famous person was simply being > employed to make those claims, etc. PAT] About three years ago Lloyd Bridges (Mike Nelson of Sea Hunt) was sued for his promotion of an an investment firm named `Olde' . I believe he had to pay up. Robert Bulmash Private Citizen, Inc. http://webmill.com/prvtctzn/home ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 08:56:22 -0400 From: Tom Olin Subject: Re: Another Victim of Sprint's Free Friday Fraud Reply-To: tro@partech.com > How about calling Whoopi Goldberg? :) At the least, this would be interesting, since she pitches for MCI. Tom Olin Telephone: +1 315 738 0600 ext. 638 PAR Government Systems Corporation FAX: +1 315 738 8304 8383 Seneca Turnpike E-mail: tom_olin@partech.com New Hartford, NY 13413-4991 WWW: http://www.partech.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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #466 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 23:01:19 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA16928; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 23:01:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 23:01:19 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609060301.XAA16928@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #467 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 23:01:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 467 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: How to Determine Current LD Provider (John Cropper) Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions (Yigal Arens) Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes (grendel6@ix.netcom.com) Re: SWBT Splitting 214 (John Cropper) Re: BellSouth to Appeal FCC Interconnection Order (The Old Bear) Re: Telecommunications Dictionaries on the Web (Stephen Geis) Re: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer (Jack Perdue) Re: Channel Bank With ACD? (Joe Polito) Re: TCI Adds Phone, Net, Security Services (mexitech@netcom.com) Re: Interesting Patent Question (Dan J. Declerck) Re: DFW Dialing (was End of Permissive Dialing in 954) (John R. Levine) Re: DFW Dialing (was End of Permissive Dialing in 954) (Al Varney) Re: Privatizing The Big Lie (Al Varney) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: How to Determine Current LD Provider Date: 5 Sep 1996 22:06:21 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 04, 1996 17:31:53 in article , 'bob@cis.ysu.edu (Bob Hogue)' wrote: > I understand that the local provider can be requested (in writing, I > believe?) not to switch LD providers without consent, but I think this > dial-up service would be good as a periodic double-check. You can do what is called a "PIC code freeze" with a simple telephone call to most LECs. This supposedly prevents unauthorized changes of your LD provider without written consent, but some unscrupulous providers (coughHEARTLINEcough) have had cases of their agents actually *forging* signatures to slam customers. The 700-555-4141 (or 1212) number Pat provided is the best method, and I recommend (and have personally done) both. John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) Subject: Re: Confusing Cellular Promotions Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:32:43 -0700 Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute Marty Brenneis wrote: > On a positive note for LA cellular I saw an ad that says they do not > charge for cellphone to cellphone calling within their system. I'm quite sure this is not the case. I'm an LA Cellular subscriber, so I would have noticed ... LA Cellular did have a promotion a while back, where for a one time fee of about $30 you could get twelve months of up to 240 minutes a month free airtime on cellular-to-cellular calls. This required a new contract, or a renewal. This promotion ended after a relatively short time. I was told by an LA Cellular rep -- who may or may not have been well-informed -- that they figured they were losing money on it. I do know that at the time, my wife bought a cell phone, we both picked up that deal, and the bills for both our phones combined are now roughly half(!) what the bill was for my phone alone before. Obviously, most of the calls I was making and receiving before that were to her. Yigal Arens USC/ISI arens@isi.edu http://www.isi.edu/sims/arens ------------------------------ From: grendel6@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: The Path a Roaming Call Takes Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 00:52:27 GMT Organization: Netcom In comp.dcom.telecom (a few days back), I asked why: Comcast/Metrophone (Philadelphia Metro "A" side carrier) charges LD on *any* out of the area roaming call. For example, if I am in Baltimore (where I frequently travel) and I call a Baltimore local number, I pay: .99 / minute roaming charge A N D long distance from Baltimore to Philadelphia WHYZAT ? ... and Roamer1@pobox.com (known to his friends as SCline@usit.net) said: > If you are in Baltimore and call BALTIMORE (not Philadelphia). This > makes no sense at all, since your call is NOT going from C1/SBC's > Balto-DC switch, to Comcast in Philly, back to Baltimore in any way. > The call goes directly from C1 Balto's switch to the number you are > calling (if local.) > It is possible that Comcast is "surcharging" roaming calls, in lieu of > a daily fee, but I doubt that's the case. Or the "toll" charge is > actually an interconnect fee imposed by C1/Balto-DC, showing up as > "toll." Why this would appear on the "local" portion of your bill, > rather than with roamer charges, is not clear to me. ... to which I say: That's interesting. I merely assumed that the items showing up in the "toll" column of my bill (in the "roaming" section, though) *were* toll charges (understandably, I'd think) and I never checked the rates to see if the amounts look like proper LD charges (though that's clearly not a science, either). If they're some kind of weirdo "access" or "interconnect" charge, that would make sense, but it would have been nice of Comcast to *tell* me, since it's nowhere in their literature or my contract. Does anyone know of someone who resells in the Philadelphia metro market who's worth switching to ? Listening to PAT rave on about Frontier is -- almost -- enough to get me to move to Ameritech-land. Being able to switch without a cancellation fee would be a plus. Bill ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: SWBT Splitting 214 Date: 6 Sep 1996 01:14:08 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 05, 1996 09:45:01 in article , 'Guy J. Sherr ' wrote: > Local news announcements in Dallas and Fort Worth have been made. > Southwestern Bell is splitting NPA 214 into NPA's 214 and 972. Chiefly, > telephones in Dallas proper keep their 214 area code. Phones outside > the city itself will be taking on area code 972. > The split is effective 9/14. THERE IS NO PERMISSIVE DIALING PERIOD AS > THE 214 NPA IS COMPLETELY EXHAUSTED. Well, yes and no ... The traditional "permissive dialing period" in the case of 214 will be used solely as "pre-recorded re-direction to 972". That is if you have a soon-to-be 972 number, anyone dialing your 214 number after 9/14 will get a recording telling them to re-dial using 972. 214 still has about 60,000 numbers scattered throughout, and will exhaust those within the quarter after the cutaway. After that, they will begin reassigning prefixes, probably as early as November 1, on a selective basis. The "really bad news" is that 972 will probably exhaust (going into the split with nearly 500 of the 770+ prefixes), as early as 3Q99 (about a year before 847 is due to exhaust). 214 may last until 4Q2002, if that ... John Cropper NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 609.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 609.637.9430 email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 20:25:43 GMT From: The Old Bear Subject: Re: BellSouth to Appeal FCC Interconnection Order On Fri, 30 Aug 1996 Mike King quoted BellSouth: > "BellSouth has concluded that the FCC has gone far beyond the intent of > Congress with this massive order, which displaces private negotiations > and usurps the states' authority to bring competition to the local > marketplace. > "For this reason, BellSouth will appeal the FCC's August interconnection > order and will ask the court for an expedited hearing. We do so for the > following reasons: > -- The states should be in charge of the framework for establishing local > telephone competition by overseeing the negotiations of competitors in > their communities. But the FCC has imposed an elaborate set of federal > rules on the states without any regard to local needs and conditions. > The FCC has vastly exceeded its jurisdiction, as well as the intent > of Congress, in implementing Section 251 of the Communications Act of > 1996. This kind of goes in the opposite direction of what the Federal court recently determined concerning the regulatory powers of the state in Massachusetts. (Even though that matter was video dial-tone, the question of state regulation vs. federal deregulation was the same.) Please see the following press release: --------begin included text--------- New Telecom Company First Competitor To Challenge Nynex, Cablevision in Boston RCN Launches Unique Integration of Residential Voice, Video, Internet Services BOSTON, Aug. 13 /PRNewswire/ -- In the first true challenge to phone and cable monopolies in Boston, RCN, Inc. announced today it has begun offering competitive local and long-distance telephone service, video programming and Internet access to residents in the greater metropolitan Boston area. RCN, which last week announced a plan to merge with C-TEC Corporation (Nasdaq: CTEX, CTEXB) of Princeton, is utilizing the extensive fiber-optic network of MFS Communications Company, Inc. (MFS) (Nasdaq: MFST) as its primary distribution vehicle. RCN will offer a wide array of telecommunications services in major metropolitan areas to residents of multiple dwelling units such as apartment, cooperative and condominium complexes, as well as hospitals, hotels and universities. Earlier this month, RCN announced a similar service offering in New York City and a national rollout of urban telecommunications systems, initially focused on Northeastern metropolitan areas. "We're launching our service in Boston and New York City, and rolling it out to other Northeastern cities, because phone and cable rates in this area are higher, and customer service is poorer, than in any other region in the country," said Boston native David C. McCourt, chairman and CEO of C-TEC. "These residents have, for decades, been captive customers of the incumbent phone and cable monopolies," McCourt continued. "Our package of high-quality, innovative services at lower costs, combined with superior customer care, will make us a strong competitor in the emerging market for integrated communications services. Many companies are talking about offering these services at some future date, but we're actually doing it and we're already serving customers right here in Boston." By the end of this month, the company will be providing telephone, video and data services in approximately two dozen buildings in the downtown Boston area. In addition, approximately 250,000 additional subscribers live within one mile of the MFS network utilized by RCN that extends from the downtown area to Cambridge and surrounding suburbs. "The important alliance we're developing with RCN will be beneficial to both our companies as well as residential customers in major urban markets," said James Q. Crowe, chairman and CEO of MFS. "We're pleased that RCN will be able to use bandwidth on our advanced fiber network to provide a broad range of services to customers." RCN is offering subscribers video programming at rates below those of Cablevision, local telephone rates that are below those of Nynex and long-distance rates that are below those of the major long-distance carriers. In addition, the company will be offering substantial discounts, up to 33 percent, for those video customers who also subscribe to the local phone service. The company also announced the opening of a high-tech corporate office at 419 Boylston Street in Boston, where potential customers can sample the services and experience RCN's vision of the future of communications. FCC Order, Court Ruling Favorable to RCN The company's announcement comes in the wake of two recent favorable rulings by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a ruling by the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts. The FCC's recently announced interconnection and number portability orders will facilitate competition in the local phone market and "will be of great benefit to the urban residential customers RCN is serving," said McCourt. "The orders are significant because it will allow us to more easily negotiate fair and equitable access agreements with local exchange carriers in major metropolitan areas throughout the country and allow customers to keep their telephone number when they switch to RCN," McCourt said. The decision late last month by the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts concurs with RCN's position that the FCC has jurisdiction over RCN's video dialtone (VDT) service. The ruling resolves the uncertainty which Cablevision had raised as to RCN's authority to offer competitive video services in Boston. The Court denied the Massachusetts Cable Television Commission jurisdiction over RCN's provision of video programming and rejected Cablevision's motion for leave to intervene in the case, stating that the state proceeding "threatens to hamper or destroy a technology which, if successfully implemented, offers consumers a viable and attractive alternative to the existing cable television system monopoly." "We are gratified that the Court ruled in our favor and saw through Cablevision's attempt to prevent the citizens of Boston from realizing the benefits of competition for video programming," McCourt said. MFS is a leading provider of communication services to business and government. The company currently has service in operation or under development in 52 metropolitan areas worldwide. C-TEC Corporation, headquartered in Princeton, N.J., is a diversified, international telecommunications and high-technology company with interests in local telephone, long-distance telephone, cable television and engineering and communication services. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 10:29:47 +0200 From: Stephen Geis Subject: Re: Telecommunications Dictionaries on the Web Florian Damas asked: > Are there any good telecommunications dictionaries on the Web > in English with the translations of the terms in French? The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) maintains a multi-lingual Terminology database (TERMITE). TERMITE contains all the terms which appeared in ITU printed glossaries since 1980, as well as more recent entries relating to the different activities of the Union (in all some 56000 entries). Entries are in English, French, Spanish and Russian. For the moment, the database is available only through a gopher query interface, but a true Web interface will be operational in the near future. Termite is the last item on page http://www.itu.ch/special/itu-databases.html (gopher URL is gopher://info2.itu.ch:70/11/.1/Termite) Stephen GEIS Information Services Department International Telecommunication Union (ITU) e-mail: stephen.geis@itu.int [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One similar thing I should mention -- although it is an interactive glossary only, and in English only -- is the GLOSSARY command in the Telecom Archives Email Information Service. Like SEARCH and AREACODE, the two other interactive search commands, GLOSSARY sent to the Telecom Archives in email will return the meaning of the acronym or abbreviation you submitted. Most people use the Telecom Archives Email Information Service only to get back issues of the Digest and some of the files available, however the above three commands SEARCH, AREACODE and GLOSSARY, all with following provide a good way to get a very quick answer to inquiries in those areas. If you are not familiar with TAEIS, you might like to get a copy of the help file and look at all the things you can obtain via email from the archives including of course all the back issues for the past fifteen years. If you send a blank letter (no subject, no text) to the address tel-archives@massis.lcs.mit.edu you'll get back a help file, but to insure it read your name/address correctly and to get a more compre- hensive selection of files the first time around, I suggest you send a letter to the same address but include these commands in UPPER or lower -- but not Mixed -- case: REPLY yourname@site HELP INFO INDEX END and if you want to try the others I mentioned, include commands such as: GLOSSARY COCOT GLOSSARY ISDN AREACODE 414 SEARCH "some string you wish to find" that last one will dump hundreds of entries on you if you are not selective (it looks at article titles and author names since 1989) so be selective. Watch for the results in your email a few seconds to a couple minutes later. Address: tel-archives@massis.lcs.mit.edu PAT] ------------------------------ From: jkp2866@tam2000.tamu.edu (Jack Perdue) Subject: Re: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 18:17:26 GMT Organization: Silicon Slick's Software Supplies and Support Services John Holland wrote: > Some of your readers may be able to help me. I'm looking for a good > simple (if possible!) description of connection oriented and > connectionless data transfer. I believe in connectionless each packet > contains all the information it needs to traverse the network, where > as with connection oriented means that a 'logical' connection must be > first set up, data transfered and then the connection torn down. Really > I'm looking for some good examples I can latch on to. I can't quite > grasp how a 'logical' connection is set up. How do the packets get > routed? My networks prof used an analogy (when describing UDP vs. TCP over IP). Connectionless (UDP) is like the postal service. You put a letter in your mail box (with an address) and hope that the post office will deliver it correctly. Then, the recepient writes a reply and sends it to you, again hoping the mail service will deliver it. The conversation starts and stops whenever one of the two parties sends the other a letter. Connection oriented (TCP) is like a telephone call. You dial a number and a connection must be established between the two parties before a conversation can take place. The conversation ends when one of the parties hangs up. Probably simpler than what you were looking for, but HIHs, jack jkp2866@cs.tamu.edu ------------------------------ From: Joe Polito Subject: Re: Channel Bank With ACD? Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 22:24:13 -0400 Organization: Watson Communications Reply-To: jpolito@watsoncomm.com System Administrator wrote: > I'm looking for a cheap/simple/easy way to bring in a voice T1 to a modem > bank, and do some basic hunting or LRU (least-recently-used) ACD features. > Right now, US West charges $4/line/mo for busy hunting, or $6/line/mo for > busy/no-answer hunting, and they don't offer an LRU type of hunt. I > already have to buy a channel bank to break out the T1 into analog lines > to go to the modem bank, and I though there might be some more intelligent > channel banks that could do busy/busy-no-answer/LRU hunting. > I know that these types of features are available on modem racks like the > USR Total Control, but as an ISP, I can't afford equipment like that and > still remain competitive and solvent. An intelligent channel bank like > this, if the price is right, could let me still use low-cost modems but > avoid some problems common to a non-intelligent modem pool. You may want to look into a used digital telephone system. The system could be less expensive than a channel bank in the long run. Some mid size systems can support up to seven or eight T1's and allow the features that you are looking for in hunting. (By the way the feature is called UCD "uniform call distribution".) One of the system that we provide is the Toshiba DK280 system. It can hold up (7) T1's, provide for UCD, break channels down to SLT and Digital telephones. It of course can also be your telephone system for Admin, Customer Service, Etc. Good Luck, Joe Polito Watson Communications ------------------------------ From: mexitech@netcom.com (Patrick) Subject: Re: TCI Adds Phone, Net, Security Services Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 10:40:57 GMT Tad Cook (tad@cascadia.ssc.com) quoted the Tulsa World: > Aug. 29--"Pick a deal." Any deal. That's how TCI Cablevision of Tulsa > general manager Rick Comfort describes the many services, including > Internet access, the cable company will be able to provide customers > in the future once it completes the five-year replacement of its > network. So what is new? I used to sell cable franchises years ago for TCI and we had two programs that always worked: Rent a citizen and promise them technology. That got us into the bidding, but keeping us there was a reality check; every system has to pay for itself. There is nothing in life that is free: as the old hippie saying goes: Ass, grass or gas, nobody rides for free! So far all the huha over cable getting into the business has not produced one tangible, viable system. Even when tests were conducted in very upscale neighborhoods. > The company is currently upgrading its cable system throughout the > Tulsa area, enabling it to offer high-speed computer-modem service, > telephone service and home security along with traditional cable > television. They are probably in danger of losing their franchise (36 channels and had to promise the city council something. That has happened all over the country lately. Wireless will eat their lunch for them, no problem bucko! > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The above is just another example of > the *dumb* stories newspapers run about the Internet. I am sure the > reporter thinks she wrote a great article and is quite pleased with > herself. PAT] Amen, I am willing to bet 90% of the article was done by search engine, cut and paste and the editor is too ignorant to know how it is done. Patrick mexitech@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: declrckd@cig.mot.com (Dan J. Declerck) Subject: Re: Interesting Patent Question Date: 05 Sep 1996 14:44:59 GMT Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group JOHN M ELLIOTT (stellcom@ix.netcom.com) wrote: > I manufacture a product which uses voice mail to retrieve lost items. > My competitor has an almost identical product which uses voice mail > He claims he is getting a patent on his product because voice mail > use is unique for this service (retrieving lost items). I say you > can't patent interactivity. Any comments? Yes, you can ... IBM has a patent on the method for scheduling a meeting between disjoint sets of schedules. DEC has a patent for context sensitive help. Dan DeClerck EMAIL: declrckd@cig.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 96 10:55:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: DFW Dialing (was End of Permissive Dialing in 954) Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > John R. Levine stated: [in response to a lame plan to require 1+ for toll and forbid it for non-toll] >> Yuck. It's really convenient that here in the more enlightened part >> of the country, we can dial eleven digits on any call, local, toll, or >> whatever. ... > You guys from New York, Chicago, and California easily forget that in > *most* of the country, there is *still* flat-rate local calling. Heck, I don't need *asterisks* to remember that, we have flat rate local calling right here in upstate New York and I still really like our dialing plan that doesn't make a distinction between local calls (which indeed cross two different telcos) and toll calls because I JUST WANT THE DAMNED CALLS TO GO THROUGH, EVEN IF THEY'RE GOING TO COST ME 15 WHOLE CENTS. Thanks, I feel better now. > If I'm making a toll-call, I want to know. On the other hand, I *don't* > want to make long distance calls, and I will *never* dial 1+ because > 1+ would be *required* for toll. Hmmn, it never occurred to me that there are people who don't think their friends are worth a 15 cent toll call. But now I stand corrected. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - Stanford econ prof "John Levine is stealing Unix accounts intended for space aliens to post in Usenet news groups." -- Usenet telecom moderator ... ------------------------------ From: news@ssbunews.ih.lucent.com Subject: Re: DFW Dialing (was End of Permissive Dialing in 954) Date: 03 Sep 1996 15:43:41 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies In article , John R Levine wrote: > When DDD was young, I can see that making a toll call by mistake would > have been a problem, since there was a three-minute minimum and a > domestic call across the country could cost something like $1.50 back > when you could buy a reasonable lunch for that amount. But now, a > one-minute domestic toll call costs me at most 12 cents, for which I > can buy almost 1/4 of a package of M&M's. What's the big deal? On November 10, 1976 (the 25th anniversary of DDD), the mayor of Englewood, NJ once again called the mayor of Alameda, California, just as prior mayors had done on November 10, 1951 with the first coast-to-coast DDD call. But times had changed -- in 1976, Englewood had a woman mayor. Another change was in the call itself. In 1951, that three-minute call cost $2 and took 18 seconds to set up (vs. 30+ seconds for an operator-dialed call). In 1976, it cost 52 cents and took eight seconds to set up. In 1996, it costs about 35 cents and takes one or two seconds to set up (and many seconds less to dial via DTMF). Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ From: news@ssbunews.ih.lucent.com Subject: Re: Privatizing The Big Lie Date: 03 Sep 1996 16:38:28 GMT Organization: AT&T In article , dave wrote: > In article The Old Bear > writes: >> A more rational approach would be to restructure the basic local loop >> between subscriber premises and the frame at the telco central office >> to digital facilities (over existing phyical media) and to grab >> digitized data (internet, video, home security, etc) there, at the CO >> end of the local loop, BEFORE it enters the switched portion of the >> network. > Instead of adding active equipment to the frame would it not be better > to do it on the line units of the switch. Is this not how > X.25 coming over the D or B channels is handled on 5ESS ISDN Line > units? The packet protocol is terminated on the line card which > avoids occupying valuable synchronous switching resources in the > connection modules. On the 5ESS switch, the B- and D-channels are split out via the ISDN BRI line unit (8/card) or the standard 48-channel T1 trunk card for PRI. In either case, the D-channel bit stream is directed to a packet handler, which can then split the X.25 packet data from the Q.931 call-related and maintenance commands. Several dozen BRIs (or a dozen or so PRIs) can be supported by a packet handler. These packet streams are on an interface separate from the switching matrix of the switch. B-channel X.25 packet requires a request (via D-channel or internal provisioning) which in effect sets up a call/connection to an available packet handler -- from then on, the B-channel packets are interpreted by the packet handler. Most other digital switches do seem to take the approach of splitting X.25 and Q.931 packets at the BRI line card level. They then route the X.25 packet traffic (usually after some multiplexing of other X.25 streams) via the switch fabric to a packet handler that handles ONLY X.25 traffic. > Does it not make economic sense to do a similar thing with IP > PPP/SLIP coming into a line unit on B channels. An IP packet exchange > processor could terminate the PPP/SLIP and forward IP packets to an IP > router function on suitably dimensioned digital facilities. Of course, you would then be connected to only one fixed IP provider, and might have problems ever upgrading to whatever protocol replaces PPP/SLIP. Always trade-offs ... Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #467 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 5 23:50:05 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA22398; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 23:50:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 23:50:05 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609060350.XAA22398@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #468 TELECOM Digest Thu, 5 Sep 96 23:50:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 468 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Capacity and Flat Rate (Tim Gorman) Re: Capacity and Flat Rate (Eric Florack) Re: Cellular Roaming (Babu Mengelepouti) Re: 1-800 Charge From Payphone? (Stanley Cline) Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? (Robert McMillin) Re: Companies Dump Macs as Loyalists Lose Faith (Steven Lichter) Canadian Local Calling Areas Web Page (Ray Chow) Comm. SW for TelRad Dig. BX 8 / 18 KSU (emt@holli.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Gorman Subject: Re: Capacity and Flat Rate Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 21:57:17 -0500 >> This is where the common sense starts to lead you astray. Capital >> investment is not expense. It doesn't get paid off in less than a >> year. You must earn on the investment, you must place sufficient >> earnings in depreciation to replace the investment when it is >> obsolete, and you need to earn a contribution to net revenue. The >> modems that are installed are not $140 USR Sportster modems either. >> They are industrial grade design intended for 24x7 operation for >> decades with zero downtime -- and they are much more expensive. > Fine. You're still talking about a massive amount of cash that will > easily meet those requirements. But don't forget all of the associated costs of capital (cash) that must be considered. >> This is yet another case where common sense will lead one astray. You >> are speaking as if the telecommunications market is a zero sum game. > It is when the government is regulating it ... particularly the more > liberal among us who tend to view *everything* financial as a zero sum > game. We obviously disagree here. I don't believe this is a zero sum game at all. Government intervention just skews cost allocations, it doesn't change the bottom line. >> It is not. While the telco's will certainly see some areas where they >> lose market share they will also find other areas where they will pick >> up market share. And this does not even factor in the growth antici- >> pated from a competitive market. > The traditional telcos will see little if any growth, if any, until > they are able to undercut a world-acecss system, time unlimited, for > $20/mo. There are a few who are offering ISP services for that kind > of money; Frontier is one such. Many people consider that we are headed into an era of severe blocking on that world-wide access system within the next year. It is already apparent today in certain areas. >> You should also try Internet phone sometime. While usable for some >> things it's quality and even usability is hardly ubiquituous. It will >> be quite some time before investment in sufficient data packet >> infrastructure, be it frame relay, ATM, or something different exists >> in sufficient capacity to make "droves" leaving the present >> infrastructure anything more than a pipedream. > Oh, but I have! > Ya know, we heard complaints about quality of connection back when MCI > started. Remember? Noisy connections, crosstalk, etc. Yet look where > that is today. They grew at the rate they did, despite these problems, > because of a /*slightly*/ cheaper price than the vaunted AT&T. They grew at the rate they did because they invested heavily in their infrastructure. The larger carriers are only now beginning to see the payback on the infrastructure they installed. This infrastructure is what enabled them to offer a quality service without all of the noisy connections, uncompleted calls, etc. If they had NOT upgraded, they would have never been able to play in the market. > Now, consider, please, the reaction when you're able to call all over > the world, for $20/mo. You don't think folks are going to allow for > some problems at that price? I've tried it too. It is most definitely not ready for prime time. I am most definitely not taking out my current phone line and relying on Internet phone. I sincerely doubt if it will be significantly better for more than two years. Using infrastructure designed for packet data for carrying short-holding time, point-to-point, delay vunerable audio is not going to be commercially successful for some time yet to come -- regardless of the price. >> The fact is that all this complaining about modems sucking up >> capacity is utter nonsense, on several levels. The telco would >> be involved no matter what the traffic on the wire is, no matter >> what format it is. Matter of fact, I suggest that capacity >> problems would be far WORSE, if not for the modem. Modems convey >> information far faster than voice, after all. And the information >> would need to be transmitted in /some/ form. Or are you suggesting >> we'd all be using the USPS? >> Wire? You mean the local loop? Do you really think this discussion is >> about the local loop? > Isn't that what the argument about capacity always ends up getting to? > Capacity at the LEC? This has nothing to do with the wire.That's your common sense leading you astray again. It has to do with the network fabric ports available in your line terminating module, the number of network fabric ports available in the trunk modules, the number of facilities between central office nodes, and usage patterns. > The point of discussion is cost allocation. If a local network between > two central offices need 100 trunks (using typical assumptions for > voice traffic) and growth in long holding time data calls necessitates > an increase in the number of trunks to say, 200, then why should the > users making the long holding time data calls not pay for the > additional infrastructure they cause to be placed? Why should the > cost of this infrastructure be placed on those only making voice > calls? > This is an odd argument; Wasn't so long ago we heard from the AT&T folks > that we should be subsidizing the long distance services by way of the > local bills. When it meant that the consumer was going to pay more, this > was supposedly a valid argument. Now suddenly, because the telco isn't > being allowed to raise prices, it's suddenly not a valid argument. > Hmmmm. What you heard was the hollering about the local bills going up as local service lost the subsidies it had traditionally been getting from long distance service. AT&T has never hollered that local service should subsidize toll, they have hollered about the exact opposite scenario! There remains a significant amount of subsidy to be undone. Most local commission have done what they could to hold down local service costs by keeping intraLATA toll rates artificially high and subsidizing local service. This is the last great subsidy that is going to have to be undone as local service competition hits the markets. Those areas that haven't been working on this over the past couple of years are going to hear a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth from subscribers as their local bill goes even higher. >> Again, your common sense is misleading you. The discussion concerning >> modems has nothing to do with channel bandwidth but, instead, how long >> that bandwidth is tied up to a specific call and not available for >> other use. > Bandwidth is a function of time, no? Mind, I'm talking about bandwidth > at the switch level, which is what you're seemingly basing your billing > structure on ... Yes, bandwidth is a function of time. But keep in mind that a central office is not a dynamic bandwidth allocating type of node. It is basically a point-to-point reconfiguration switch dedicating fixed bandwidth paths. It doesn't matter whether you are sending any data down that point-to-point dedicated path, it is still tied up and unavailable for any other use. You wind up with exactly the same considerations in a frame relay switch where guaranteed bandwidths are sold. >> Suffice it to say that the "data" providers in this country do not >> have the infrastructure available to handle today's voice traffic with >> the same grade of service available in today's voice network. > Again, neither did MCI and such a few years back. Yet, look at the > growth of them. Again, *price* is the issue. When the internet providers start putting in the infrastructure needed to handle significant amounts of voice traffic with a quality high enough to satisfy a most customers it is doubtful if $20 per month, flat rate, call anywhere, anytime service will be available. >>> I'm sorry, but I find it hard indeed to work up any sympathy for >>> telco's cries of 'foul'. >> Your common sense has lead you into developing a strawman that doesn't >> even resemble what is being discussed. This is not a cry of foul from >> the telco's. It is a recognition of a need for equitable cost allocation. >> Expecting my grandmother to pay the freight for your 24 hour long data >> call is what is foul. More and more state commissions are becoming >> aware of this and are making inquiries of the industry as to how it >> can be handled. As I pointed out before, if it were free then local >> calls would be free, toll calls would be free, there wouldn't be any >> coin phones, and no need for 800 service. That just isn't the case. > So, rate equity is what you're arguing for? It is also what several state PUC's that I know of are also looking for. Right down to investigating if "idle" modem data calls can be identified by the central office switch and automatically disconnected. > (mumble) > Tell me, Tim ... when my prices get jacked up (by nearly triple, based > on my normal use) to cover the supposed cost of my longer calls, are > your grandfather's rates going to be /lowered/, or will the extra > money simply end up in someone's pocket? You are still caught in your zero sum game. Having those who tie up point-to-point paths for 24 hours pay the freight for their usage doesn't lessen in any manner the infrastructure necessary to serve my grandparents service needs. So there is nothing that would drive my grandparents rates to be lowered. The only thing that would drive that to happen would be if a totally usage based billing scheme was to be introduced. Personally, I suspect the PUC's are going to have to begin moving in that direction sooner or later in order to "unhide" cost skewing we see today. Tim Gorman - SBC (I speak only for myself) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 10:28:08 PDT From: Eric_Florack@mc.xerox.com (Florack,Eric) Subject: Re: Capacity and Flat Rate >>> This is where the common sense starts to lead you astray. Capital >>> investment is not expense. It doesn't get paid off in less than a >>> year. You must earn on the investment, you must place sufficient >>> earnings in depreciation to replace the investment when it is >>> obsolete, and you need to earn a contribution to net revenue. The >>> modems that are installed are not $140 USR Sportster modems either. >>> They are industrial grade design intended for 24x7 operation for >>> decades with zero downtime -- and they are much more expensive. >> Fine. You're still talking about a massive amount of cash that will >> easily meet those requirements. > Ah, but you're arguing that *everyone* who uses the network pay for > this "massive amount of cash," rather than the folks that are > driving the network away from the old provisioning model. No. It's clear that these should have been addressed under seperate cover, because the issues are now confused. My fault. I'll strive for better clarity in future. That said: In this situation, I'm suggesting that even based on the take from just the people who are currently paying for ANI, (and for the purpose of the discussion, I suggested a 50% use/50% rate) that the numbers were more than enough to pay off the investment within a year ... even excluding the fees beng paid by local governments for use of the same bloody system. >>> This is yet another case where common sense will lead one astray. You >>> are speaking as if the telecommunications market is a zero sum game. >> It is when the government is regulating it ... particularly the more >> liberal among us who tend to view *everything* financial as a zero sum >> game. > Oh, you mean its those *darn liberals* who want to assign the increased > costs to the high volume users, rather than spread them around to > everyone! Geeze, I thought you'd be blaming liberals if you were > arguing in favor of pay-as-you-go for increased usage! You can't have this both ways, Tad. If we're talking about a regulated service, thena regulated service it needs be. If there were real competition at the LEC level, I'd not have a problem with any pay-as-you-go scenario, since competition would bring down the price to a managable level, by removing the zero sum philosphy. But, since we decidedly do /not/ have such competition, yet, and since we're still operating under that zero sum game, regardless of what the folks like Frontier will tell you ... >>> It is not. While the telco's will certainly see some areas where they >>> lose market share they will also find other areas where they will pick >>> up market share. And this does not even factor in the growth >>> anticipated from a competitive market. >> The traditional telcos will see little if any growth, if any, until >> they are able to undercut a world-acecss system, time unlimited, for >> $20/mo. There are a few who are offering ISP services for that kind >> of money; Frontier is one such. > But we're talking about the pricing of the local loop here ... the last > mile that the ISPs depend on to get to their customers! Yes, we are. Tell me, when people move away from the traditional telcos and over to newer 'non-traditional' dialtone how will the traditionals be 'growing'? I thought this was a zero sum game? >> The point of discussion is cost allocation. If a local network between >> two central offices need 100 trunks (using typical assumptions for >> voice traffic) and growth in long holding time data calls necessitates >> an increase in the number of trunks to say, 200, then why should the >> users making the long holding time data calls not pay for the >> additional infrastructure they cause to be placed? Why should the >> cost of this infrastructure be placed on those only making voice >> calls? > This is an odd argument; Wasn't so long ago we heard from the AT&T folks > that we should be subsidizing the long distance services by way of the > local bills. When it meant that the consumer was going to pay more, this > was supposedly a valid argument. Now suddenly, because the telco isn't > being allowed to raise prices, it's suddenly not a valid argument. > Hmmmm. I think there is some serious confusion here. It was the other way around. AT&T long distance subsidized local service, not the reverse. I stand gladly corrected. Clear error on my part, and had I checked my own typing, I'd have caught it. Alas, I did not. Long day ... That said, there's one more point to be made; the long-time calls alone are not the problem; it's the combo of the long time calls, and the short timers. Fact is, that one of the things we suppsoed;y pay for is reliablity; even if we're not making a call, the telco has the ability to get the call through. Cost distribution based on realiability, not on actual phone use ... IE: with some reserve designed into the system, is a long standing practice. So why is data traffic imposed upon to take the brunt of the overage? Fact is, Telco under-designed, and should now pay the cost. /E ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 01:06:40 GMT From: Babu Mengelepouti Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming > One of the questions I couldn't get a coherent answer to, though, was > how roaming is billed with long distance charges. For example, suppose > I am in Albuquerque and use my cellphone as a roamer, making two outbound > calls -- one to San Francisco and the other to Albuquerque. Will I pay > long distance charges on one, the other, or both calls? The salesman I > spoke to from CellularOne seemed quite certain that I would pay long > distance on the call to Albuquerque, but not on the call back home to > San Francisco, even though the San Francisco call is the one that uses > real long distance facilities; except for authentication and billing, > no part of my call within Albuquerque will touch any long distance lines. You are right, the salesman is stupid. You are physically located in Albuquerque, so if you want to call Jeff Slaton (who coincidentally lives there), you will pay "only" your roaming airtime rate. Make sure that the roaming rate is for *all* areas of the US and not just for their "other markets in California." The roaming seems less expensive than usual; ATTWS charges 75 cents per minute for roaming within the "northwest network" for phones out of their Pacific Northwest markets for example, but 99 cents per minute outside of the "northwest network." Often, if you're roaming on a carrier other than your home carrier, they will charge up to $3.00 per day "access fee." For instance, if I take an ATTWS phone to Las Vegas, I'd pay 99 cents per minute for airtime (plus long distance, of course), but since ATTWS is the A carrier there I would pay no surcharge. On the other hand, if I were to take an ATTWS phone to Omaha, where the A carrier is Airtouch, the roaming rate would be 99 cents per minute plus $3.00 per day "access fee." You should call *611 and verify whether there is a daily access fee when you enter a foreign market. > The other question I couldn't get a coherent answer to is whether the > digital service is in a completely different frequency band from the > traditional analogue service, and what the transmission characteristics > of the two are. I know that the sound quality of a digital call that is > breaking up is very different from the sound of an analogue call breaking > up, but does one signal fare better with hilly terrain or downtown > buildings or basements or other impediments? The digital service they are selling isn't. My understanding of the way that "digital" is done under AMPS/TDMA cellular systems is that they take the same amount of bandwidth that they would give to an analogue call, and put multiple calls on it (hence TDMA, or "Time Division Multiple Access). This means that your bandwidth is "comp- ressed," which always results in poorer quality voice transmission than analogue. This only aggravates an existing poor-quality transmission (i.e., if you are in an area where the service is poor, it will be *really* poor with digital). Digital doesn't mean better in this case, except for the cell carriers: it's harder to snarf esn/min pairs from digital phones (though I hear it can still be done), and they can fit more calls in the same amount of bandwidth, while charging around the same amount of money for them. I.E., free extra capacity for them/more profits. New PCS wireless phones, which should be coming on the market in most areas soon (Baltimore/Washington already has Sprint Spectrum), do in fact operate on a different frequency band from AMPS cellular phones. I understand that they are better suited for shorter-distance transmissions, but as I've never personally used one I can't really vouch for the quality. Also, we won't really know how well-suited the frequencies are until PCS are fully deployed in the rugged Northwest, or the Plains states where single cells are required to cover vast distances. ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: 1-800 Charge From Payphone? Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 00:03:20 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: scline@usit.net In comp.dcom.telecom, marks10254@aol.com (MarkS10254) wrote: [COCOTs charging for 800/888] > Is this legal? In Texas, the PUC approved a charge of up to 25 cents for calls to 800/888 numbers. (This is also the home of the "I Don't Know" LD company, etc.) North Carolina also allows a charge of up to 25c for 800 calls, but on the phone on which the sign was posted, there was no charge. In Tennessee, COCOTs canNOT charge (yet anyway) -- with new FCC regs around the corner, they may be able to soon. > WHAT REVENGE DO I TAKE? Use a "Genuine Bell" (or GTE or ALLTEL or Citizens Telecom or whoever the LEC is) phone. PAT says ... > Some COCOT owners just as a matter of public goodwill are not charging > for 800/888 calls since the public perception of those calls as 'free' A number of COCOTs around here were charging for *888* but not *800* calls. One was charging $3 _per_minute_ thinking that NPA 888 = "long distance." Two quick calls to the owner's CellularOne voicemailbox, and the Tennessee Regulatory Authority, got that fixed. Now all the payphone operators around here seem to be "clean" with 888 numbers (finally!); some, however, are overcharging for calls to NXXs added as far back as late 1994. (The NXXs aren't in the phones' rate tables, so they think they're long distance.) So here I go again, with even more complaints to the TRA, and to ALLTEL and BellSouth Mobility (because most of the prefixes involved are theirs.) Needless to say, neither ALLTEL nor BMI is happy that COCOTs demand extra money for LOCAL calls to their customers. > you pay them for the call itself or you pay them 'something extra' > for the use of their phone even though the charge for the call itself ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is the same excuse being discussed over in misc.consumers about ATM surcharges; banks claim they are charging "for the use of their ATM". IMHO, banks and (most) COCOT owners are greedy; further, some COCOT rates make no sense. Consider this: Three-minute call from COCOT in Chattanooga, TN (423-892-xxxx) to a number in Atlanta, GA (404-607-xxxx): Using coins: $1.00 Using LEC calling card and COCOT AOS: $7.30 Using 1-800-CALL-ATT with LEC calling card (bypassing COCOT LD): about $2 Using Voicenet calling card (bypassing COCOT LD): $0.525 WHY WHY WHY? Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin) Subject: Re: How Are Telegrams Sent Today? Reply-To: rlm@helen.surfcty.com Organization: Charlie Don't CERF Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 00:53:31 GMT On 29 Aug 1996 18:12:50 PDT, hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa/Jeff) said: > By the late 1970s the bulk of WU's business was wiring money. News > articles in the last few years about WU said they wanted to provide > financial services for low-income people, such as wiring money, money > orders, and the like. How much they got into is unknown. Judging by the Spanish-language advertisements I see around LA, I would say "a lot". Between them and American Express, there's probably a couple billion dollars or so shipped annually to Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and so on. Some of it's probably drug money, but by far the bulk is Juan sending money home to his family. (There was an article on this subject a couple years ago in {Forbes}.) More recently, I've seen indications that Western Union is acting as a payment agent for the local utilities. The Gas Co. in particular has been closing up payment offices at a furious clip over the last few years, and I suspect it's their poorer customers who would be suffering if it wasn't for the Western Union offices. Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: Companies Dump Macs as Loyalists Lose Faith Date: 5 Sep 1996 19:55:28 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University tad@ssc.com quotes the {Wall Street Journal}: > Companies Dump Macintosh Computers as Loyalists Lose Faith > By ALEX MARKELS > The Wall Street Journal > "Buy a PC. They're cheaper. And the Mac is going to disappear." > This bit of advice, from one computer shopper to another more trouble > for the already-battered Apple Computer Inc. I tend to agree that dealing with Apple can be very frustrating, not the computer but the companies support. You have to go through a real maze to get the right person and then you may wind up waiting for a long time for a real person to get there. The biggest problem I have found with Apple is they will upgrade to newer machines and live the older ones in a lurch. This happened with the Apple IIgs, which was the first computer to use Icons in 1986, they never really took advantage of what they had, they really could have made a nice machine. Then when they went to the Mac's, which did start in 1984, each time they went forward the new programs would not work on older machines, some of which were less then six months old. I have a PB100 which is maxed out and a lot of software will not work on it. I really had to look for a fax program and did find one that was shareware, no brouser will work on the 100 and anything that requires color stops the machine. I still use it because it does all the stuff I need. Also Apple waited to long to let the MacOS out to others. But the IBM Clones also are hard to deal with. I have an old 286 which can't be upgraded because everything is custom for it, beside why should I buy a new machine. Many companies, mostly in printing and high graphic users still use the machine as do many that need the CAD options. When I do get a new machine it will be a Mac Clone as they are a good machine and are a lot less money. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II and Macintosh computers. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Sep 96 10:05:09 GMT From: Ray Chow Subject: Canadian Local Calling Areas Web Page Reply-To: czg@inforamp.net Information about local calling areas for Canadian area codes should now be available at: http://www.freenet.hamilton.on.ca/Information/NEST/technol/communic/lca Enjoy. ray chow / canada / czg@inforamp.net / aa813@freenet.hamilton.on.ca ------------------------------ From: emt@holli.com (emt) Subject: Comm. SW for TelRad Dig. BX 8 / 18 KSU Date: 5 Sep 1996 02:17:17 GMT Organization: HolliCom Internet Services I picked up a new customer with a TelRAD Digital BX 8 /18 system. He has the software, however it is corrupted. If you have a copy, could you please email me a zip of it. Larry Electro-Mechanical Tech. 317.296.3661 ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.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: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #468 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Sep 6 10:43:10 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id KAA03177; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 10:43:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 10:43:10 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609061443.KAA03177@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #469 TELECOM Digest Fri, 6 Sep 96 10:43:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 469 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Pager Fraud From 809 NPA (Tad Cook) Telecom Conference in Bucharest, October 29-30 (Gabriela Cogorno) Critical Issues for Internet Telephony/Meeting (Gill Cable-Murphy) Re: The DEMA Web Site: The Spammer's Secret Clubhouse (Dave Keeny) Re: GTE Says Continuous Internet Connection Desirable (Jeff Spidle) Re: Ameritech Says Cellular PINs Being Phased Out (Robert Sinclair) Re: Ameritech Says Cellular PINs Being Phased Out (Richard W. Museums) Re: Connectionless/Connection Oriented Data Transfer (John De Hoog) Re: BellSouth to Appeal FCC Interconnection Order (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: AOL Fed Up With Spam; Slaton 'Repents' (Richard DeYoung) Re: Bell Atlantic and the ATT 10288 PIC (Art Kamlet) Re: Attempted Slam by AT&T (Daniel Ganek) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Pager Fraud From 809 NPA Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 00:21:04 PDT From: tad@ssc.com Possible Pager Fraud Scheme Spurs Phone Company Action By Stephen Keating, The Denver Post Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Sep. 6--While driving with her husband on Labor Day, Brenda Villella saw an unfamiliar long-distance number on her pager. Thinking it might be a colleague on vacation needing to contact her, she dialed the number on her cellular phone. "It's a recorded male voice that says, '(impotence) is nothing to be ashamed of. We can help you,"' recalled Villella, who hung up before the solicitation continued. "I was so embarrassed," she said. Thousands of pager customers across the country may have received the same page and subsequent bizarre enticement from a phone number in the Caribbean, prompting phone company officials in the United States to take action this week. AT&T yesterday blocked access to that particular number in the 809 area code, which serves Puerto Rico, the Bahamas and the Virgin Islands. "Our security people asked us to do it," said AT&T spokesman Randy Shields in Denver. "We believe that there may be an intent to defraud." US West, for which Villella works as a manager, notified its employees about the pager ploy this week after several phone-company workers received pages from the same 809 number, which is similar to area codes that serve New Jersey and South Carolina. "My co-worker and I both received the page on the same day," said Leroy Williams, a US West business analyst in Denver. "Initially, we thought it was a joke from our boss. I didn't dial it back." US West spokesman Jeff Garrett advised: "If you don't know who's calling, don't return the page." Charges for a daytime call from the continental United States to the 809 area code are at least $1 a minute, though it is unclear whether this particular call carries other toll charges as with 900-number sex lines. Officials suspect that pagers across the country are being contacted either by random or sequential dialing programs. Pager and cellular companies typically buy blocks of 10,000 sequential phone numbers. "It's sort of a shotgun approach to marketing," said Scott Forsythe, vice president of Contact Paging in Denver, which serves 50,000 customers in Southwestern states. "It's an abuse of the communications networks." The apparent scam follows a direct-marketing trend in the $4 billion paging industry, which serves 35 million people. Restaurants increasingly use pagers to notify wandering patrons when their tables are ready. PepsiCo is supplying pagers to more than 200,000 teens and young adults across the country, then beeping them once a week to call a toll-free number for music, food and merchandise offers. Phone sex solicitations by pager are a new twist, and likely illegal. "It's the first time I've heard of this kind of thing," said Rick Hagan, general manager of Pagenet, which serves 100,000 subscribers in Colorado. Both Hagan and Forsythe said they have yet to hear complaints from their subscribers about the 809 number solicitations. Phone lines that offer sex talk, astrology advice and other toll services are a billion-dollar industry, but patrons usually know what they are dialing and the charges. Soliciting someone to dial such a service without notifying them of the charges can be prosecuted as telecommunications fraud. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Anyone remember when this very same scam was being perpetrated in New York City with the 540 exchange, another premium charge exchange? That would have been five or six years ago. Everyone got up in arms about it and all over the USA companies were busy issuing memos to their employees warning them about it, not even realizing that 540 is like 976 in the sense that it cannot be dialed from outside the local area code in most cases, and that furthermore, 540 is/was unique to the 212 area code. Well, now with this latest incarnation, I'll probably over the next six or eight months get dozens of articles from well-meaning people at companies all over the USA wanting me to warn everyone. Of course unlike 540/976 this one *can* be dialed from anywhere so I guess it is worth a mention from time to time. Even though according to the press release AT&T has blocked calls to that number, I'm suire there are other carriers which have not. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 06 Sep 96 08:54:05 EDT From: TELECOMS <101574.674@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Telecom Conference in Bucharest October 29-30 Dear Mr Townson, Following Mr. Nigel Allen email I am writing to you with regards to our fourth international conference and exhibition in Telecommunications in Central and Eastern Europe and the the Baltic States to be held in Bucharest on the 29-30 of October 1996. The conference focus on Romania and its rapid progress towards telecoms liberalisation. Telecommunication Ministers, International and Regulatory Institutions and Representatives from the industry will attend to the conference. As soon as you send me your details (fax number and address) I will be sending you a program for your information. If you have any queries do not hesitate to contact me. Gabriela Cogorno PR/Marketing Executive ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 09:49:36 -0400 From: Gill Cable-Murphy Subject: Critical Issues for Internet Telephony/Meeting On behalf of Dr. Lee McKnight I am extending to you an invitation to attend the Internet Telephony Interoperability (ITI) Consortium meeting at MIT on Monday, September 9, 1996. For your information enclosed is a copy of the draft agenda. If you would like to attend, or if you have any questions concerning ITI, please contact Lee McKnight (mcknight@rpcp.mit.edu) (617-253-0995). INTERNET TELEPHONY INTEROPERABILITY CONSORTIUM MEETING DRAFT AGENDA Sept. 9 MIT Building 10-105/Bush Room Critical Issues for Internet Telephony 8:30am - Registration, coffee and continental breakfast 9am - Welcome and Introduction Dan Roos, Director, CTPID, MIT David Clark, Chair, ITI Advisory Committee, and MIT Laboratory of Computer Science 9:15am - Overview of the ITI consortium and its Role in the Internet Telephony Industry Lee McKnight, MIT Center for Technology, Policy, and Industrial Development John Wroclawski, MIT Laboratory of Computer Science 10am Compression Algorithms for Internet Applications Mike Buckley, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies 10:30am 11am coffee 11:30am Architecture Requirements for Scalable Internet Telephony Brough Turner, Director, Data Products, Natural MicroSystems Hakon Styri, Telenor AS 12pm - discussion 12:30 pm - lunch 1:30pm - Internet Telephony Applications: Future Trends John Clayton, NetPhone Harvey Kauffman, Netspeak Stuart Patterson, Voxware David Sokolic, Vocaltec (tentative) Andrew Sears, moderator 2:45pm - Internet Telephony in the Real World Mike O'Dell, Chief Scientist & VP, UUNET 3:15pm - discussion 3:30pm ITI Consortium New Members Short Presentations Southwestern Bell Technology Resources, Inc:. Bach Hoang/Telecom Italia:`Francesco Marconi, Tiziana Talevi, Luca Fantolino, etc. 4pm - coffee 4:30pm - A Spanning Layer for the Internet and Telephony: Future Challenges David Clark, MIT Laboratory of Computer Science W. Russell Neuman, Harvard University 5pm discussion 5:30pm end ------------------------------ From: Dave Keeny Subject: Re: The DEMA Web Site: The Spammer's Secret Clubhouse Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 09:16:10 +0500 Organization: Telecommunications Techniques Corporation Reply-To: keenyd@ttc.com From the DEMA site on page http://kww.com/dema/exclude.html: > "If you are an individual who doesn't want to receive any direct e-mail, > you can add your e-mail address to our EXCLUDE E-MAIL LIST by sending > e-mail to: dema@kww.com. For the subject you must use "NO DIRECT > E-MAIL." If your e-mail address is different from the location where > you are sending e-mail from, then put your e-mail address in the body > of the message, otherwise, the message area should be left blank." It remains to be seen whether this list, or others of its type, will be effective. I'm guessing it will take quite a while, if ever. Most of the bulk e-mailers, I believe, are mailing on behalf of a third party and getting paid by volume, or are simply new to the Internet and have no awareness (or care) that they are helping to tras