From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 19 23:16:24 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA10376; Thu, 19 Sep 1996 23:16:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 23:16:24 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609200316.XAA10376@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #501 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 Sep 96 23:16:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 501 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Sponsor Joins Digest (TELECOM Digest Editor) Year 2000 Computer Problem (Tad Cook) Re: Formal FCC Action Filed to Stop I-Phone (Bill Sohl) Lexis-Nexus "P-Trak" Service Official Response (Rick Adams) Re: Junk E-mailers and 'Control' Newsgroup (Mickey Ferguson) Re: Junk E-mailers and 'Control' Newsgroup (John R. Levine) Re: Junk E-mailers and 'Control' Newsgroup (Marc Schaefer) Re: ZIPs Crossing NPA Boundaries? (Mark E. Kaminsky) Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic (Dave Perrussell) Re: Increasing Phone Numbers Require New Area Codes (Scott Robert Dawson) Re: RJ12 Wiring Question (Benjamin W. Atkinson) Re: Philadelphia EXchanges, Circa 1946 (Lisa Hancock) Re: Sheath Slitter Tool Wanted (Bill Garfield) Re: Date Set For 818/626 Split (John Cropper) Internet Security Review Now Online (pluto@nso.org) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: New Sponsor Joins Digest Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 21:30:00 EDT In case you missed my message on this subject earlier in the day on Thursday, a new corporate sponsor has agreed to assist with funding the Digest at least for awhile. Zev Rubenstein and a business associate have started a new firm and will appreciate your support as much as I am grateful for theirs. Please see the details below. Their message will appear as part of the masthead or 'boilerplate' in each issue of the Digest. Please send Zev a note today letting him know you appreciate his help. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* In addition, ITU remains as a sponsor. Thanks very much for your indulgence. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Subject: Year 2000 Computer Problem Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 19:34:37 PDT From: tad@ssc.com Cyber Shock 2000: Software Calendar Problem May Have Been Overstated By Ann Saccomano, Traffic World Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Sep. 16--The buzz in computer circles is the ominous specter of the "Year 2000." At first it sounds like a tall tale from the cyber crypt: At the stroke of the double zero, computer software will experience a meltdown of monumental proportions as software coding embedded with the yearly date erases all data. The principal culprit is the COBOL programming language, the first business application to gain a foothold in the market. COBOL reads only the last two digits of a given year. Thus, when Jan. 1, 2000, arrives, the computer will read the data as "00" and assume it's time to start the year -- and the computer files -- with a clean slate. "It's mostly a problem with mainframes because they represent the older systems. There wasn't much packaged software put on mainframes and whatever was available was usually heavily customized. That's why you hear so much about the Year 2000 problem among older companies," said Jan Sapapas, vice president for manufacturing and distribution logistics for J.D. Edwards & Co., a business software developer. Just how much it will cost to fix the problem is a question mark. A scan of industry trade publications and consultants shows estimates that range from $2 million to $40 million, depending on the size of the system. Computerworld magazine has placed the nationwide cost at between $50 billion and $75 billion. The firms that will really take a hit, Sapapas said, are those in banking and financial services, where software for interest rate calculations are rife with date coding. Among transportation companies, the problem is not so dire. "It's a problem within internal systems, but most of the carriers are already dealing with the issue in some way," said Doug Anderson of the American Trucking Associations. Anderson chairs the ANSI ASC X12 transportation committee to establish electronic data interchange standards within the industry. Anderson said he knows of one carrier that has assigned one information systems person, out of an MIS staff of 10, to work on the problem full- time. "He won't finish in two years." Not everyone is buying the gloom- and-doom scenarios. Pam Kelley, director of information systems at Roadway Express, is skeptical about the extent of the problem. "There's a lot of hype within the computer industry about it. We don't think it's as big a deal as we're being told," she said. Roadway has already done an assessment of the impact the Year 2000 will have on its information systems, Kelley said, and is now drafting plan to deal with it. Instead of nailing down every date, Roadway is more concerned with handling the big problems. An internal memo that crops up with the wrong date isn't likely to traumatize anyone. "We feel we're out front of the eight ball. What we want to make sure is we don't spend time fixing programs where it's not a problem," Kelley said. ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Formal FCC Action Filed to Stop I-Phone Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 04:01:04 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises Last March, Pat TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > This is a special bulletin received Friday morning regards the > squabble between the telephone companies and the I-Phone people; > the ones who use the software which allows voice communication > via the Internet. The war has started! It appears the carriers are > serious about getting rid of this Internet feature. A formal > complaint has been filed with the Federal Communications Commission. Anyone have any idea what is happening with the action that ACTA filed with the FCC in an attempt to stop Internet Phone? Last I recall, ACTA was holding an annual meeting somewhere (Arizona?) at which this was supposed to be a topic leading to a collective position by ACTA. What was the result of that meeting? Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, that's a *very good* question. I have heard nothing further on it for quite awhile now. Perhaps if our regular reader/correspondent Jeff Buckingham sees this he will respond. He was/is part of the organization which filed the complaint although he stated that he himself was opposed to the action. PAT[ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 11:03:33 CDT From: Rick Adams Subject: Lexis-Nexus "P-Trak" Service Official Response For Lexis-Nexus's official response, look at: http://www.lexis-nexis.com/lncc/about/ptrak.html It appears that much of the information about their P-Trak (not P-Trax) service disseminated on the Internet was erroneous, though they did give out SSN's for a while. Rick Adams -- radams@winternet.com -- http://www.winternet.com/~radams/ ------------------------------ From: Mickey Ferguson Subject: Re: Junk E-mailers and 'Control' Newsgroup Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:52:17 -0700 Organization: Stac, Inc. Dave Keeny wrote: >> Registrations were last tallied at Wed Sep 18 08:44:49 EDT 1996 >> [STOP IT IMMEDIATELY!] had 05308 registrations. >> [MORE! SEND ME MORE!] had 00031 registrations. > 99.4% of respondants want the junk e-mail to stop. What a surprise. And of those 31 wanting more, how many of them were from people who either were too stupid to understand the question, or from people who had left their keyboards unlocked and unattended? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Sep 96 21:23 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Junk E-mailers and 'Control' Newsgroup Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > An interesting, if unscientific data point: on the web page > http://infobot.hartley.on.ca/dspam.html you can sign up for > *more* junk e-mail, or remove your address from their mailing list. Yeah, and I hear that if you are so foolish as to put your name on either of those lists, you'll get lots more spam. 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 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 22:35:51 +0200 From: schaefer@vulcan.alphanet.ch (Marc SCHAEFER) Subject: Re: Junk E-mailers and 'Control' Newsgroup > It looks like one or more junk e-mailers may be generating their > mailing lists by filtering addresses from cancelled messages in the > 'control' newsgroup: Our policy at ALPHANET NF (Not for profit telecom research) is to warn the user, the postmaster and possibly the service provider's postmaster, and if the junk mail continues without any action from the service provider (even if the e-mail address From: is different), to CUT completely the feed from them (ie, trash ALL incoming e-mail from their domain, and possibly their service provider's domain). All trashed messages are sent back to the user, the postmaster and possibly the postmaster at the service provider. We continue this policy by exchanging 'black lists' with a few friends at remote domains, and by threatening trashing in all those domains. This is easily done with a few scripts (or could be done directly from sendmail). We are getting less and less junk e-mail; this is quite efficient. And for the moment no complaint for loss connectivity (after all, most of the trash sites sending junk e-mail and having no postmaster to contact, or unresponsive postmasters are probably bad service providers anyway). ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Sep 96 15:56:25 PDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Re: ZIPs Crossing NPA Boundaries? A most unusual (for me) occurrence: two messages on the same topic, sent by two different people, apparently crashed in mail processing. I do implement my own locking on files duirng mail delivery, and I have audit mechanisms to locate lost messages, who sent them, etc. That's what makes this all so strange. According to my audit records, I received this at 7:31 pm Thursday night, ostensibly from Valkenaar. A log showing the execution of my filter-rules says it arrived from him addressed to comp-dcom-telecom@somewhere. The filter-rules has no record of the other item sent by Mark Kaminsky at all. It was sent through a script to remove an extra blank line in the header, sent to the autoreply, and then after seizing and locking my mail spool it was dropped in there. I cannot see where the autoreply responded to either name, probably because it got confused by seeing both names. It may be that these two items crashed before they ever got to me. Please note the addresses for both writers is clipper.robadome.com and perhaps they converged there into one file. Both writers just responded to news rather than writing me directly. Anyway, here is the way it looks: Maybe you can figure it out! :) PAT] From: dougv@clipper.robadome.com (D. Douglas Valkenaar) Subject: Re: ZIPs Crossing NPA Boundaries? Date: 19 Sep 1996 From: kaminsky@clipper.robadome.com (Mark E. Kaminsky) Subject: Re: ZIPs Crossing NPA Boundaries? Date: 16 Sep 1996 22:01:31 GMT Organization: Siemens Rolm Communications Inc. Reply-To: kaminsky@best.com In article , dchapman@epix.net writes: > A colleague of mine has stated that the only time ZIPs cross into > neighboring area codes are in very rural areas, where there is minimal > effect. > Dave --- dchapman@epix.net > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Carl Moore keeps track of this sort of > thing in detail so he could probably tell you a lot more, however > the codes used in the one mprovement

lan instituted by the > post office in the late 1950's typically cover much smaller geographic > areas than telephone area codes and I think it is rare -- if it occurs > at all -- that a ZIP code would be in parts of two area codes. PAT] It does happen, though: I live in 415 :-(soon to be 650)-:, although the people across the street are in 408, and those two houses down (on another streetname; the street does a 90 degree turn at my house) are also in 408. I would bet that all of us are in the same 9 digit zip code, since we're all on the same carrier route. It's not rural at all: Sunnyvale is a city of over 120,000 people; I think it's the most populous city between San Jose and its smaller neighbor to the north (San Francisco, of course). I'm not clear on the entire length of the 408-415 boundary, but it does not follow the boundary between Sunnyvale (nominally 408) and Mountain View (nominally 415), although I don't know of any Mountain View addresses which are in 408. My memory of the map used by the PUC to describe the coming split of 415 suggests that when 415 splits, there will be many more of these cases, as the split goes through Daly City and other cities on its way across the peninsula. I don't often have anything to contribute to this group, but I do enjoy reading it. Pat, keep up the good work! Mark -- .sig stolen from Doug Sewell (doug@cc.ysu.edu): -- Nothing is foolproof. Fools are too ingenious. Douglas Valkenaar (408) 492-6119 doug.valkenaar@siemensrolm.com PhoneMail Development [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the positive note. I will try to keep up the good work but there are times I get *so frustrated* with things here. I have not had two incoming peices of mail arrive at apparently the very same instant and crash like this before. So whoever said what, thank you. I guess I need some mail filtering soft- ware for the 1990's instead of using the stuff I wrote in 1986. :) The more I go back and look at the raw data though, the more I think this occurred at clipper.robadome.com on the way to me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: diamond@interserf.net (Dave Perrussell) Subject: Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 01:02:38 GMT Organization: The BBS Corner Rob Carlson wrote: > Found on nj.events, thought your readers might be interested in this. > ACCESS TO CYBERSPACE BECOMES MORE AFFORDABLE FOR > NEW JERSEY CONSUMERS > Residential ISDN Rates Reduced 14 to 80 Percent > for Bell Atlantic-New Jersey Customers > NEWARK, N.J. - High-speed access to cyberspace from home soon will be > more affordable and easy to get for New Jersey consumers. > Interim pricing plans for monthly residential ISDN service in New > Jersey include five packages ranging from $31 a month for 20 hours of > B-channel use to $108 monthly for 500 hours of B-channel use for > voice, data or video transmission. ISDN provides two B channels that > each transmit data at 64 kilobits per second (Kbps). > For those who need an ISDN data connection 24 hours a day, seven days > a week, an unlimited ISDN usage package now costs $239 monthly. > Consumers who plan to use ISDN for only a few hours a month can buy > measured service for $23.50 monthly plus a local usage fee of 1 cent > per minute per channel. Why does ISDN **STILL** cost so much? I don't see this as much of a "reduction" in rates. Does ISDN cost the phone company (i.e. Bell Atlantic) more than a regular POTS line? If so, how much does it REALLY cost? I heard in California that PacBell was charging rates less than $30 a month for unlimited ISDN usage. A far cry from the $239 that Bell Atlantic is charging. Any info on this would be appreciated. Dave Perrussel Webmaster - The BBS Corner http://www.vni.net/thedirectory ------------------------------ From: srdawson@interlog.com (Scott Robert Dawson) Subject: Re: Increasing Phone Numbers Require New Area Codes Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 01:55:25 GMT Organization: InterLog Internet Services Reply-To: srdawson@interlog.com tad@ssc.com wrote, quoting another article: > Texas started with five area codes: 214 for Dallas and Northeast > Texas; 817 for Fort Worth and North Texas; 713 for Houston and > Southeast Texas; 512 for Central Texas and South Texas, and 905 for El > Paso and West Texas. > The first change for Texas came in 1962, when West Texas was split > between 905 for El Paso and West Texas and 806 for Amarillo and the > Panhandle. In 1983, the area around metropolitan Houston was split off... This quoted article says that 905 was used in Texas itself, not Mexico, and seems to imply that it is still in use around El Paso! However, my phone number begins 905-842, and I can look around my neighbourhood and authoritatively state that El Paso, the Rio Grande and Mexico are nowhere in sight ... on the other hand, downtown Toronto is only a modest commuter-train ride away. Isn't El Paso in 915? ------------------------------ From: Benjamin W. Atkinson Subject: Re: RJ12 Wiring Question Date: 18 Sep 1996 16:15:04 GMT Organization: Reynolds & Reynolds Andy Rowan wrote: > I'm wiring up some jacks in my house for two lines, but I've gotten > conflicting answers on which way the wires should go. For the black > and yellow, which is tip and which is ring? Or in other words, does > the black correspond to the green, or does the yellow correspond to > the green, in terms of polarity? Robert Milton wrote: > Green is Tip and red is Ring. Yellow would be considered as T1 and black > as R1. On some very old systems you tied yellow to green to make the > ringer work on the phone. This would a very old phone. I hope this > helps. Michael Stanford wrote: > Yellow = Ring, Black = Tip. Okay, it's time for a source. Is there an authoritative document, preferably on-line, that has the answer? Ben Atkinson The Reynolds & Reynolds Co. Programmer/Analyst P.O. Box 1005 Dayton, OH 45401-1005 e-mail: ben.atkinson@reyrey.com voice: +1 (513) 443-2434 fax: +1 (513) 443-2489 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well you see, both are correct. The original question asked about black/yellow which are used for the second line, while red/green are used for the first line. If you have a third line then it would be blue/white. If you have only two lines but a six conductor/three pair cord then blue/white can be used for things like an exclusion key, or to light the dial on a Princess Phone (if they still make those), etc. The rule is as follows: Green/red = line one (or the wires to use on single line phone) Yellow/black = line two (or special purpose on one line phone) White/blue = line three (or special purpose on one/two line phone) If you have a single device being used for some special purpose on a multi-line arrangement (for example, an answering machine picks up one of several lines) then the yellow black pair would be used for A/A1 supervision. Its all relative, as long as you stay consistent in the colors, etc throughout. In a modular jack, the wires and pairs are as follows: Two outermost pins are 1&6 for blue/white line three. (often missing) 2&5 for yellow/black line two. Two innermost pins are 3&4 for green/red line one. That's why when you buy an answering machine or a cordless phone at Radio Shack the clerk tells you it will 'only work on your first line', because they are too cheap to include a two pair/four wire modular cord with whatever you bought. Look closely; the modular cord with the answering machine or cordless phone or whatever will only have two wires attached to the two innermost pins. Now the answering machine does not know the difference; if you get in the little box mounted on the wall and swap the r/g for the b/y at that point your new device will now start working on line two only. Make sure its an even swap though! ... don't go cross connecting the CO lines by accident. I have a case here where I have two modular boxes side by side, each with two lines coming in. The additional box is only there because in it the r/g and b/y are swapped so that a modem which only works on 'line one' (literally, in the back of the modem just two pins both in the center) can work on my line two which it thinks is line one. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: Philadelphia EXchanges, Circa 1946 Date: 19 Sep 1996 18:06:56 GMT Organization: Philadelphia City Paper's City Net Per Mark's post ... In Phila, City Hall continues to be served by MUnicipal 6, now referred to 686. In the 1970s, this was a centrex with a 24 position 608 switchboard in City Hall. The operator's number if you didn't know the direct extension or for non-dialable extensions was MU 6-9700; after the bicentennial it became MU 6-1776. The City Govt had a lot of phones. In the 1970s, quite a few were five digit extension numbers, which were not diable directly from the outside, but dialable from other City Govt lines. Not too long ago the system was revised, and the five digit extensions were converted to a new exchange 685 (which makes sense.) A visit to Phila's main library (Logan Square) only a few years ago found plain 500 sets with the MUnicipal 6 number card still service. I'm told "most" such phones are replaced now with touch-tone models. The city also had, in addition to the Bell System provided centrex, a private network with old AE (model 40?) phones, known as PAX "Philadelphia Automated Exchange". At Phila Intl Airport, signs are posted to this day saying "In Case of Fire Dial ... on any city automatic telephone". The signs refer to the old system, but I suspect a reader today would assume it was any City Govt phone. In addition, there were sub-networks for police street corner call boxes (for the days before radios) and the fire department. The Fire Dept used a telegraph system as well, based on the street corner call boxes -- a pull on a box sent a numeric code to the fire dept dispatcher. I know in my mother's neighborhood in the NE those corner call boxes have been removed, I don't know about other sections of the city. False Alarms were a terrible problem. BTW, until just after WW II, Philadelphia had a competing local telephone company, Keystone, which served business customers. It's claim was that it provided business with flat rate calling, while Bell was message rate to businesses, and the Keystone system would be business calls only. Keystone was absorbed into the Bell System. To this day "KTC" manholes are all over downtown. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ummm ... the /P/ did not stand for 'Philadelphia'. It means 'Private' as in

rivate utomatic echange. The difference between a PAX and PBX if they are still making the former is they have no connections to outside trunk lines. They are, quite literally, private intercom systems. The Chicago Police Department has one or did have. By the way, I just finished eating a bagel with Philadelphia Cream Cheese. Delicious! PAT] ------------------------------ From: bubba@|NoSpam|insync.net (Bill Garfield) Subject: Re: Sheath Slitter Tool Wanted Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 17:14:00 GMT Organization: Associated Technical Consultants On Wed, 18 Sep 1996 21:24:03 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom Tim White wrote: > I am trying to locate the manufacturer or retailer of a sheath slitter > tool that we used when I worked for US WEST. The tool was silver in > color and had a razor blade type cutting blade in the middle. One > could hold this tool on both ends and draw it down on the cable to > open up the sheath(s). Then one could turn the blade perpendicular to > the tool and wring the sheath around the circumference of the cable. Harris Dracon Tool # 10204-000 Seems to fit the exact functional description though the main body of the tool is now a white, high-impact plastic with a silver-metal cable guide that slides in & out to accomodate various cable sizes up to perhaps 100 pr. The blade is in the center as you describe and can be rotated 90 degrees. I find it works extremely well. ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com Subject: Re: Date Set For 818/626 Split Date: 18 Sep 1996 20:56:31 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 18, 1996 11:12:20 in article , 'Lauren Weinstein ' wrote: > John Cropper's statement is correct. As of all recent reports, > fighting is still going on regarding the boundaries of the proposed > 818/626 split. Not so, if you read the post closely ... I reported the data as coming not directly from PacBell, but from faxback archives of *other* LECs. The fight still rages, but two LECs (USWest and BellSouth) are reporting the previously mentioned dates (6/14/97 and 1/17/98), based on information *given to them* by PacBell sometime in late June or early July. (My earliest reliable cross-reporting date is 7/7/96, from USWest). All inquiries directed at PacBell (by myself) to this point have been met by silence on the issue, presumably due to the pending courtroom decision. They will not say directly, but HAVE ALREADY TOLD OTHER LECs THE DATES, who in turn have released the data ... > The administrative law judge had already made a > determination which would have allowed the major portion of the San > Fernando Valley that is part of the city of L.A. to maintain long-time > code 818 (with a reasonbly clean split line approximately along > municipal boundaries). However, the various East Valley areas of > Glendale and their environs, which would have gotten 626 under the > plan, have protested, instead proposing a rather convoluted boundary > that would enable them to keep 818 instead, and cause the rest of the > valley to be split essentially arbitrarily. At last word, a decision > was due about now, but there's no way to know at this point whether > the delays will force a push back of the various split dates. Perhaps the public should be taken OUT of the decision-making process, and things returned to the way they were PRIOR to 1995. All this in-fighting while codes continue to exhaust is a sheer waste of time. Congratulations to Patrick Townson & * John Cropper, NiS / NexComm Telecom Digest on their 15th * PO Box 277 anniversary of public service. * Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 ************************************** Inside NJ: 6o9.637.9434 Check out Telecom Digest Online! * Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/ * Fax : 6o9.637.943o telecom-archives/ * email: psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: pluto Subject: Internet Security Review Now Online Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 19:53:45 -0400 Reply-To: pluto@nso.org Organization: -nso- Internet Security Review is now available on the web. Check out: http://www.isr.net They offer free of charge Usenet newsgroups, anonymous remailing, and more. ------------------------------ 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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 #501 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Sep 20 00:25:13 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA17778; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 00:25:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 00:25:13 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609200425.AAA17778@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #502 TELECOM Digest Fri, 20 Sep 96 00:24:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 502 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Archives CDROM Ordering Details (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Help Me Replace my Watson Card With Something More Modern? (Geo Swan) Re: RJ12 Wiring Question (Jay Hennigan) Re: RJ12 Wiring Question (Eric Elder) Re: New Surcharge for Number Portability (Lionel Moser) Re: Reporting Email Chain Letters (Tad Cook) Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) (Bob Goudreau) Why Would Someone Send Junk E-mail With Return Receipt Requested? (D Wade) Cyber Promotions Apparently Off The Air (John R. Levine) Re: Database of Area Codes and Country Codes to Time Zones? (M. Stanford) Help Needed With Vomax 2000 (Craig Wiesner) Re: Positive ID Service From Southwestern Bell (Bryan K. Douglas) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Telecom Archives CDROM Ordering Details Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 18:42:16 -0700 From: TELECOM Digest Editor People have been asking how to order the Telecom Archives CDROM by mail order. Not everyone has been able to find it in a store as of yet. If you can find it in a store, you will save on the shipping charges, however it might simply be easier for you to order it direct from the publisher, so details are given below. The Telecom Archives is a fifteen year collection of the stuff which has appeared in TELECOM Digest since 1981 along with a few hundred other files of telecom related material. There are a lot of technical files, historical files, etc. Everything that was there through the end of 1995 is included. The cost is $39.95. Please buy a copy, as the royalties will help me a lot. Also, if sales are good, there will be an update with the 1996 material on it at some future point. ============================================================================ shipping information: ============================================================================ Shipping is $5 in the USA, Canada, and Mexico for First Class. Overseas is $9 PER ORDER. There is an additional $3 COD charge (USA Only). UPS Blue Label (2nd day) [USA Only] is $10 PER ORDER, UPS Red Label (next day) [USA Only] is $15 PER ORDER. Federal Express (next day) [USA Only] is $20 PER ORDER. For overseas courier rates, please email us. Ordering Information: You can order by sending a check or money order to Walnut Creek CDROM Suite E 4041 Pike Lane Concord CA 94520 USA 1 800 786-9907 (Toll Free Sales) [open 24HRS] +1 510 674-0783 (Sales-International) +1 510 603-1234 (tech support) [M-F 9AM - 5PM, PST] +1 510 674-0821 (FAX) orders@cdrom.com (For placing an order) info@cdrom.com (For requesting more information or for customer service questions) support@cdrom.com (For technical questions and technical support) majordomo@cdrom.com (Info Robot-automated product information and support) We accept Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover, and Diner's Club. ALL credit card orders MUST include a phone or fax number. COD shipping is available for $8.00 in the US only, NO COD shipping to P O Boxes. Checks and Money Orders payable in US funds, can be sent along with ordering information to our normal business address. California residents please add sales tax. Shipping and handling is $5 (per ORDER, not per disc) for US, Canada, and Mexico, and $9 for overseas (AIRMAIL) shipping. Please allow 14 working days ( 3 weeks ) for overseas orders to arrive. Most orders arrive in 1-2 weeks. -------------------- Therefore, unless you want next day delivery by FedEx which would make it quite expensive you would send $39.95 plus $5 to Walnut Creek at thier address above, or authorize them to charge your credit card, etc. As noted also, customers outside the USA need to pay additional shipping costs. Write to Walnut Creek at the addresses above. If you can find it in a retail outlet then you save shipping and handling charges. In any event, please buy one today! PAT -------------------- The Telecom Archives remains a free resource for the Internet and is available using anonymous ftp massis.lcs.mit.edu. ------------------------------ From: gswan@io.org (George Swan) Subject: Re: Help Me Replace my Watson Card With Something More Modern? Date: 19 Sep 1996 13:52:16 -0400 Organization: Internex Online (shell.io.org), Toronto, Ontario, Canada About two and a half weeks ago I asked the group for advice concerning replacing my watson card. The Watson was an older DSP based answering machine card, it stored your incoming and outgoing messages on your PCs hard drive, and it could also be made to operate as a modem. It was too old to support caller-id, and the modem only ran at 1200 baud. The virtual rolodeck software that came with it allowed one to record messages, and then schedule the computer make a call and play the messages at a later time. I got twelve responses (thanks!) Four people offered to buy my Watson. I hadn't given it any thought prior to my message, but I've decided to hold on to it now. Two people mentioned the Delrina Talkworks software. I phoned Delrina and the sales-droid says that the software does support caller-id, but not the ability to schedule outgoing messages. Several people mentioned Dialogic boards, which I gather are expensive and not intended for the home market. Places to find more info on these boards would be appreciated. Thanks again to everyone who responded to my original message. If I learn more, I'll post a further summary to the moderator for submission to the group. Cordially, Geo Swan, 416 362 7641 ------------------------------ From: jay@west.net (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: RJ12 Wiring Question Date: 19 Sep 1996 18:20:27 -0700 Organization: West.Net Communications Andy Rowan (rowan@ocean.rutgers.edu) wrote: > I'm wiring up some jacks in my house for two lines, but I've gotten > conflicting answers on which way the wires should go. For the black > and yellow, which is tip and which is ring? Or in other words, does > the black correspond to the green, or does the yellow correspond to > the green, in terms of polarity? A two-line jack is actually called an RJ-14. The RJ numbers are often erroneously used to refer to the physical hardware. They do not, but to the term "Registered Jack" which describes the hardware and how it is wired. An RJ-12 is also a four-contact, six position miniature jack, but it is wired for a single line with A-lead control for old style key system compatibility. > I know that most new phones don't really care, but I have some old > Western Electric touchtone phones that won't dial if the polarity is > reversed. I know I can just figure out by trial and error to get it > to work, but I'd rather not wind up with the house and the phone both > wired backwards, so I wanted to know what the standard says. Line 1 Tip -> Green Ring -> Red Line 2 Tip -> Black Ring -> Yellow This is at the jack. Note that if you use a common telco-style modular cord to a second jack, the color codes will be reversed at the second jack. A close examination of the colors as terminated in the modular plugs will reveal why. -- Jay Hennigan jay@west.net -- WestNet: Internet service to Santa Barbara, Ventura and the world. 805-892-2133 805-289-1000 805-578-2121 "Witch parking only. Violators will be toad." ------------------------------ From: Eric Elder Subject: Re: RJ12 Wiring Question Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 16:30:17 -0700 Organization: AT&T Paradyne Reply-To: eelder@mailhost.is.paradyne.com Andy Rowan wrote: > Hi, > I'm wiring up some jacks in my house for two lines, but I've gotten > conflicting answers on which way the wires should go. For the black > and yellow, which is tip and which is ring? Or in other words, does I don't know the colors but pinouts are as folows: 1-h/w handshake transmit (optional) 2-transmit 3-transmit ground 4-receive ground 5-receive 6-hardware handshake receive (optional) _______________ | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | | | | | | | | | |__ __| _ |_______| front view [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think he was talking about a telephone set, not a modem connection. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 17:12:00 -0400 From: Lionel Moser Subject: Re: New Surcharge for Number Portability I have some questins about local number portability. In Volume 16, Issue 491, Message 3 of 11, an article from {Wall Street Journal} was quoted. The last quoted part read: > Today, the switches that route calls through the nation's telephone > network know instantly where to send them. The first three digits > identify a switch operated by the local phone company in a particular > area code. That system must change to accommodate customers who want > to buy service from a new local carrier while keeping their existing > numbers, rather than be assigned new ones. > The likely solution is a collection of centralized databases containing > all phone numbers in a given region or state. When someone makes a > call, the signal will zip first to a database to determine where the > call should go. If these databases are to be queried on every local call before routing the call, isn't there in fact a fixed cost associated with every local subscriber, whether the subscriber's number has been ported or not? > The extra costs lie in creating these databases and upgrading > network software to use them. If the actual work done by a switch on a local call is substantially increased, it seems reasonable to conclude that the capacity of that switch to process local calls is decreased. If all calls originating in an RBOC's switches require a database query before being routed -- since the originating switch has no way of knowing whether the called number is ported or not - there is an immediate need for the RBOC to increase the amount of switching equipment, say by X%. That X% is for the existing network and for all new network. An RBOC switch supporting N lines (before portability) would support fewer than N lines after portability, regardless how many of these N lines were ported. Does the RBOC have to install more switching capacity to handle the same number of lines? Do they need additional trunking capacity to handle the database queries? Is the cost of a single database node for a local calling area larger than the upgrade cost of the hundreds or thousands of switches that must query it on every local call? It might be true if these database switches are tremendously expensive, but it doesn't seem like an obvious conclusion. Is it just software that needs to be upgraded, or lots of hardware. as well? Lionel Moser ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Reporting Email Chain Letters Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 01:54:32 GMT From: tad@ssc.com Michael Chance wrote: > The U.S. Postmaster General has ruled that, if they ask you to send > anything (including the dollar) via the U.S. Postal Service, then it falls > under the "illegal chain letter" laws/regulations. > I check out the USPS Web page, and while it has info on the traditional > forms of chain letters, it doesn't say where to refer e-mail chain letters > for investigation. Anyone know? I've been calling the US Postal Inspection Service office in the area where the spam originates (check the last mailing address on the chain letter), telling them about the chain letter, and offering to fax it to them. I'll bet I could probably do the same with my local postal inspector's office and save the toll call. They always act interested, and some have told me that they watch the mail coming to the addresses on the letter. Sometimes I have to remind them that although I did not receive the chain letter via the postal mail, that the person sending it wants me to send them money via the mail. One time I found a SPAM that was soliciting money for investment in some sort of offshore gambling operation. The postal address was in Canada. I thought it looked fishy, so I called the office of the RCMP (the Mounties) in the town where the postal address was. I talked to a detective who called me back a couple of months later to tell me what happened. Sure enough, the address was a mail drop. The detective went in and flashed his badge, and got the name of the box renter. It turned out to be a 16 year old with a computer. I don't recall what happened, but I expect mom and dad were quite concerned about this. The RCMP shut down his operation. There was no company, no offshore gaming ... just a kid collecting money in the mail. I encourage everyone to take an active position on Make Money Fast spam. The more people make noise about this the greater chance that something will be done. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com Seattle, WA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tad, that letter has been around long before computers. I remember Dave Rhodes and that letter in snailmail back in the 1970's. It would come to my post office box along with lots of other 'opportunity seekers' junk mail quite frequently. You and all the postal inspectors are not going to get rid of it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:54:04 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) writes: > Yes, but cellular phone use is banned in airplanes even when they are > on the ground in the airport. >That's< what I don't understand. If > you're stuck in a plane, on the ground, waiting 90 minutes to take > off, it would be especially convenient to be able to call the pople > planning on picking you up. But you can't, at least not with your > cell phone. Hmm, the last several flights I've been on (using American Airlines and Midway), you *have* been allowed to use cellphones on the plane before takeoff. Right before departure, the crew does caution people to stop using electronic devices (including cellphones). Of course, once the plane has attained cruising altitude and other electronic devices are permitted again (laptops, Walkmans, etc.), you still can't use cellphones due to the cell-swamping problem. But that's an FCC rule, isn't it? Whereas using your phone on the ground or during takeoff/landing is something that the FAA needs to care about, for safety reasons. Airlines and captains appear to have a lot of discretion in this matter, so perhaps you've just run into airlines or pilots who impose a "no cellphones, period" rule instead of just banning them during instrument-critical periods such as takeoff. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 12:27:35 -0600 From: djw@physics.lanl.gov (Dave Wade) Subject: Why Would Someone Send Me Junk E-mail With Return Receipt Requested? I've been reading your "fun" statements about Junk e-mail. I regularly receive one or two junk e-mails a day. I remember when one a year was alot. Then, one a month, one a week, and now I believe that it is possible to be overwhelmed. And that; plus what seems to me to be a new aberration, is why I am sending you this note. The first attachment is an unsolicited e-mail I received. Normally I would have thrown it away, and that would be all. However, the second attachment was the next letter in my mailbox. I am the postmaster for this particular subnet; and that's probably why I got the second letter. What's going on here? This appears to be a junk e-mail going out with a "Return receipt requested" to a garbage e-address. Why would someone do that? What information would this tell them? --836_4a04-6e4d_1cf7-2ca8_7b13 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: 1NJhXV/3Y+0A4MhbTzmWlw== Content-Description: Mailbox X-Sun-Data-Type: mail-message > From distrdm@mail.axess.com Thu Sep 19 04:07:43 1996 Return-Path: Received: from mail.axess.com by physics.lanl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08526; Thu, 19 Sep 96 03:54:32 MDT Received: from caligiuri.axess.com (caligiuri.axess.com [204.19.207.210]) by m ail.axess.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA17189; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 17:30:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199609152130.RAA17189@mail.axess.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "RGL Distribution" To: distrdm@axess.com Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 15:37:32 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Business on a disk Return-Receipt-To: "RGL Distribution" Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Content-Length: 450 Status: RO (Message deleted by PAT because it was ignorant) (Second header follows) Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: hXkvO+J7dumFr+iUI4bt5g== Content-Description: Mailbox X-Sun-Data-Type: mail-message From Mailer-Daemon Thu Sep 19 04:07:47 1996 Return-Path: Received: from mailhost.lanl.gov by physics.lanl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08552; Thu, 19 Sep 96 04:07:47 MDT Received: from localhost (localhost) by mailhost.lanl.gov (8.7.5/8.7.3) with internal id EAA10305; Thu, 19 Sep 1996 04:09:24 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 04:09:24 -0600 (MDT) From: Mail Delivery Subsystem Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-Id: <199609191009.EAA10305@mailhost.lanl.gov> To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="EAA10305.843127764/mailhost.lanl.gov" Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) Content-Length: 2662 Status: RO The original message was received at Thu, 19 Sep 1996 04:09:22 -0600 (MDT) from aerie.lanl.gov [128.165.51.75] ----- The following addresses have delivery notifications ----- (unrecoverable error) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mail.axess.com.: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 ... User unknown --EAA10305.843127764/mailhost.lanl.gov Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; mailhost.lanl.gov Received-From-MTA: DNS; aerie.lanl.gov Arrival-Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 04:09:22 -0600 (MDT) Final-Recipient: RFC822; mail.axess.com@mail.axess.com Action: failed Status: 5.2.0 Remote-MTA: DNS; mail.axess.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 ... User unknown Last-Attempt-Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 04:09:24 -0600 (MDT) --EAA10305.843127764/mailhost.lanl.gov Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: Mailer-Daemon@aerie.lanl.gov Received: from physics.lanl.gov (aerie.lanl.gov [128.165.51.75]) by mailhost.lanl.gov (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA10301 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 1996 04:09:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: by physics.lanl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08547; Thu, 19 Sep 96 03:54:32 MDT Date: Thu, 19 Sep 96 03:54:32 MDT From: Mailer-Daemon@aerie.lanl.gov (Mail Delivery Subsystem) Subject: Returned mail: Return receipt Message-Id: <9609190954.AA08547@physics.lanl.gov> To: "RGL Distribution", ----- Transcript of session follows ----- <<< HELO mail.axess.com <<< MAIL From: <<< RCPT To: <<< DATA <<< QUIT ----- Message header follows ----- Return-Path: Received: from mail.axess.com by physics.lanl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08526; Thu, 19 Sep 96 03:54:32 MDT Received: from caligiuri.axess.com (caligiuri.axess.com [204.19.207.210]) by mail.axess.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA17189; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 17:30:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199609152130.RAA17189@mail.axess.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "RGL Distribution" To: distrdm@axess.com Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 15:37:32 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Business on a disk Return-Receipt-To: "RGL Distribution" Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) --EAA10305.843127764/mailhost.lanl.gov-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 13:41:17 EDT From: John R Levine Subject: Cyber Promotions Apparently Off the Air I see that attempts to ping cyberpromo.com via both Sprint and Alternet fall into a routing black hole, and a usually reliable source suggests that one of their upstream providers has made a small improvement to their network routing tables. This month it appears that a lot of people (including me) are now fed up enough with spam that we've just blocked all traffic from chronically annoying hosts and sites. For example, this let me stop any incoming spam from Moneyworld long before BBN finally pulled the plug. With luck this will hit spam-friendly ISPs in their pocketbooks as their users flee to more responsibly managed providers that aren't blocked all over the place. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Trumansburg NY Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies" and Information Superhighwayman wanna-be PS to Interramp users: if you try and send me an e-mail response or look at one of my web pages, and it doesn't connect, now you know why. But there are lots of other ISPs who'd welcome your business. ------------------------------ From: Michael Stanford Subject: Re: Database of Area Codes and Country Codes to Time Zones? Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 21:12:22 -0400 Chris Sells writes: > I'm looking for a database of area codes and country codes to time > zones so I can tell someone what time it is where they're about to > call. Anyone know of such a database?=20 There is one in our on screen phone, "PhoneKits," (try www.algocomm.com). It has a database of thousands of cities around the world and seven different kinds of daylight savings time. When you choose a number to dial you can see the time, date and city name at the location you are about to call. It works on incoming calls too, if they bear caller ID. Michael Stanford ------------------------------ From: Craig Wiesner Subject: Help Wanted on Vomax 2000 Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 09:44:17 -0500 Organization: WKMN Training Greetings, I have a Vomax 2000 system (which is an external modem that can receive and store faxes and voice messages) which I bought from Macronix a few years ago. The software that I used to use to retrieve the faxes from the Vomax does not work properly with Windows 95. Does anyone know where I can get either the Macintosh software (I can move the modem over to my Mac) or newer ComitFax software than the version I have (Version 1.05)? Unfortunately, the company that Macronix spun off the Vomax line to is unable to help at the moment. Thanks! Craig Wiesner - WKMN Training craig@wkmn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Sep 96 10:03:15 CDT From: bkdougla@rockdal.aud.alcatel.com (Bryan K. Douglas) Subject: Re: Positive ID Service From Southwestern Bell On 18-Sep-96, dr@ripco.com writes: > You will leave an audit trail, but there are literally thousands of > unsecured phone lines available. You can just cruise around with three > to five old cordless phone handsets until you catch a dialtone. Our Moderator writes: > Am I wrong, David? As a practical matter, how far can one really > tamper with the switch via those ports without getting caught? PAT] Am I missing something here? It seems to me that the difference between criminal activity and citizenship is in attitude. Criminals engage in inappropriate behavior when they think they will not get caught. Citizenship is *defined* by appropriate behavior based on their society's norms. Bryan Douglas [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for a great closing thought to this issue of the Digest another week. Over the weekend in your mail look for a couple interesting history files prepared by our resident historian Mark Cuccia. I'll be busy much of Friday but will try to get them out to the net over the weekend, and I assume we will meet here again early next week. 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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 #502 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Sep 23 11:54:22 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA21149; Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:54:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:54:22 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609231554.LAA21149@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #503 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 Sep 96 11:54:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 503 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson PRIVACY Forum Radio; Lexis-Nexis P-TRAK Interview/Update (Lauren Weinstein) Detailed Update Regarding Lexis-Nexis P-TRAK Database (Lauren Weinstein) The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name (Vincent Kuo) Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street (Tad Cook) Ameritech, AT&T Blame Each Other for Billing Problem (Tad Cook) Excel Telecommunications Offer To School (Irene Simmons) Does Brand Loyalty Exist in Long Distance Phone Services? (Siyoung Chung) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: PRIVACY Forum Radio; Lexis-Nexis P-TRAK Interview/Update Date: Sun, 22 Sep 96 23:24:29 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein Greetings. In the message following this one, I've provided a detailed update on the current Lexis-Nexis "P-TRAK" personal information database furor, based on my own research. Since the situation has been changing very rapidly, this represents the most up-to-date information I'm aware of regarding both the service and your options for dealing with it if you so choose. With concerns over databases and personal information running at such a high level, this seems like the appropriate time to announce the first program from the PRIVACY Forum's new effort: "PRIVACY Forum Radio". As longtime readers of the forum know, one of my major concerns is getting the word out to people that privacy really matters, and that there are actions they can take to help protect themselves, *before* troubles arise. Whether related to computer, telecommunications, or database privacy issues, or the less esoteric aspects of privacy in our personal lives, to be forewarned is critical. PRIVACY Forum Radio will be an ongoing production of the PRIVACY Forum. It initially will include audio interviews, discussions, and other programs conducted with all manner of persons involved in the privacy, security, and related areas. Participants will include persons from business, industry, government, concerned organizations, and other individuals. Both the well-known "movers and shakers" and the unknown folks affected by privacy problems will be featured. All aspects of privacy in our personal, commercial, and public lives will be topics for various guests. Initial programs will be prerecorded, but shortly we'll begin live broadcasts offering listeners the ability to call in by phone, or send in e-mail queries, to directly participate in the discussions. The primary distribution medium for these PRIVACY Forum Radio materials is the Internet, via the Xing "Streamworks" system. Versions of the shows, including live programs, will be available for access by listeners at network connection rates as low as 14.4 Kbps per second. Some materials will also be made available at higher rates for those with the appropriate capabilities. In the very near future, we also plan to make some items available with accompanying video ("PRIVACY Forum TV"), using the same system. These shows are also available, by arrangement, for conventional radio syndication. Since my primary goal is to try get the word out about these issues as widely as possible, PRIVACY Forum Radio is also making available short (e.g. 60 second) "Privacy Bites", suitable for use by regular broadcast radio stations who want to help their listeners not only become aware of privacy risks, but to learn what they can do about them. Inquiries regarding any of these materials should be directed by e-mail to privacy-radio@vortex.com, or by voice to (818) 225-2800. The first special program from PRIVACY Forum Radio is an interview I conducted a few days ago with Lexis-Nexis Corporate Counsel Steven Emmert, on the subject of concerns over the "P-TRAK" database, and on the topics of personal information and databases in general. It provides fascinating insight into views of privacy from the "database industry" side of the fence. To hear this program, follow the PRIVACY Forum (and PRIVACY Forum Radio) links from http://www.vortex.com Links are present within the PRIVACY Forum Radio area explaining the technical details of hearing the interview and other materials, and for downloading the (free) Streamworks software for your system that you'll need if you don't have it already. This is an exciting step in the evolution of the PRIVACY Forum, one that I'm hoping will be a major stride towards helping people worldwide deal with the ever-encroaching loss of privacy that has become part and parcel of our modern societies. Please direct any questions about accessing or obtaining PRIVACY Forum Radio materials to the e-mail address or phone number mentioned above. Thanks much! --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Subject: Detailed Update Regarding Lexis-Nexis "P-TRAK" Database Date: Sun, 22 Sep 96 23:25:42 PDT From: Lauren Weinstein Greetings. This is going to be a long message, but I urge you to read it in its entirely. As many of you are no doubt aware, considerable controversy has been raging around the Internet, and now in the mainstream press, concerning the Lexis-Nexis "P-TRAK" personal information database. Since the transmission of P-TRAK related messages here in the PRIVACY Forum early this month, various information, some accurate, some inaccurate, has been widely disseminated. In some cases, I've seen versions of the original PRIVACY Forum items in excerpted and usually unattributed form, sometimes having been modified or addended in manners that significantly alter the original content. Concern over P-TRAK has mushroomed around the country, perhaps especially due to Lexis-Nexis' high visibility. Many people are concerned about their personal information, however innocuous some might consider it to be, residing in publicly accessible databases. They want some measure of control over their personal data. It is this concern that has brought this story to national prominence. Lexis-Nexis has put forth an official statement concerning P-TRAK (accessible via http://www.lexis-nexis.com) which is accurate as far as it goes -- but in my opinion leaves out some *very* important points which people should be aware of and that I'll describe in detail below. Adding to the confusion is the fact that over the last couple of weeks the mechanisms available for people to request removal from the P-TRAK database have been changing, largely due to the high volume of requests that Lexis-Nexis has been receiving. Callers to various Lexis-Nexis numbers were at times told conflicting or apparently inaccurate information, and the exact mechanisms for requesting removal, and what such a request really meant in practice, has been in a state of flux. Early deletion requests were taken by operators, then by voicemail systems, and then later callers were told all requests had to be by mail or fax. Most callers were asked for their Social Security numbers. Some were told that it was essentially useless to request removal, since they could easily pop right back on the database again later. Questions about how to verify removal persisted. Given all this, I decided to take it upon myself to go directly to the source, and had a number of detailed conversations with the Lexis-Nexis Corporate Counsel, Steven Emmert. Since Lexis-Nexis was in the process of making decisions on some of these issues, I held off this update until now to give Mr. Emmert time to get me the latest information, which he has done. As described in the previous message, I'm also pleased to announce that PRIVACY Forum Radio is presenting a detailed audio interview with Mr. Emmert, via the PRIVACY Forum web page (access via http://www.vortex.com). Mr. Emmert and yours truly discuss both the details of the P-TRAK controversy and some of the more philosophical aspects of personal information databases. If you're at all concerned about these topics, you will probably find the interview quite interesting. Where do the P-TRAK issues stand right now? First off, it should be noted that Lexis-Nexis is a reseller of the data in P-TRAK, not the collector. They don't verify or otherwise amend the original information. The information itself is the so-called "credit header" data which FTC and other decisions ruled were not covered under the FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act) and could be openly disseminated. This includes name, address, phone number, Social Security number, and other related data. Lexis-Nexis obtains this info from one of the big credit data agencies (published reports have suggested that this is Transunion). Lexis-Nexis receives this data, which includes more than 300 million records, on a monthly basis. While Lexis-Nexis notes that their marketing focus is to government, law enforcement, and the legal profession, it's important to realize that the P-TRAK database is not *restricted* in any way to ensure that only persons in those categories are using the data. Anyone who wants to the pay the appropriate fee can obtain search data. This is a crucial problem in the database industry -- the almost total lack of even rudimentary "need to know" requirements before gaining access to information that many persons consider (obviously erroneously in many cases!) to be private. Lexis-Nexis points out that you cannot view Social Security numbers through P-TRAK. This is true. When the database was originally established in June of this year, SS#'s were available for viewing, but in short order concerns led to their display being terminated. So, you can't derive a SS# from someone's name via P-TRAK. HOWEVER--this does not mean that SS#'s are not in the P-TRAK database. In fact, they are there, and if you already have an SS# you can use it to search in P-TRAK for all of the other data associated with that number (e.g., name, address, phone number, and so forth). Lexis-Nexis considers the SS# to be the only reliable personal identifier, and in fact has told me that when a person requests removal from the P-TRAK database (more on this below) the best chance of actually getting removed exists when that person provides their SS#. Name and address are considered less desirable for this purpose, due to name duplications, name or address changes, etc. This is the reason that callers asking to be removed have typically been asked for their SS#'s. To Lexis-Nexis' credit, it should be noted that they have competitors (some on the Internet) who don't restrict SS# information at all, and don't offer any opportunity to be removed from their databases either. Still, it's important to understand that SS#s *are* in the P-TRAK database, and that you still can search *by* SS# in that database. Information available for direct view in P-TRAK includes name, maiden name (if any), current address, up to two previous addresses, phone number, and year/month of birth. Mother's maiden name is not included. The source of phone numbers is of particular interest. Lexis-Nexis in their statements has likened all this data to the telephone company "white pages", pointing out that it is all based on publicly available information. But the definition of "publicly available" is very broad--much broader than most people realize. Phone numbers in P-TRAK are *not* derived from telephone company (e.g. white pages) information. They are obtained from a variety of other sources, notably data provided by businesses that have conducted transactions or other business with a person, to whom that person may have provided their phone number. As such, unlisted (non-published) phone numbers *can* appear in P-TRAK, since an unlisted designation only affects phone company records, not all the other places where you have provided a number, probably with the expectation that the number would not be provided to commercial databases! There are no legal restrictions on the dissemination of such phone numbers, even though many persons keep their phone numbers unlisted for quite valid and serious reasons. OK, let's say you've decided that you consider the information in P-TRAK to be significant to you, and you want your record deleted. First off, be aware that it could take up to 60 days for a deletion to occur. This is due to the 30 day cycle on the database source; the deletion request needs to be present long enough for a complete cycle to process. Can you verify (for free) that a deletion has taken place? No, not easily; you need to pay for a regular P-TRAK search. Previously there was a contact person for verification of deletions, but due to the high volume of requests that option is apparently no longer being offered. Will you stay off the list once a deletion request has been processed? Maybe. It would seem to depend strongly on how much information you provided with your original request. If you provided a SS#, you probably have a better chance of not finding yourself with a new record in a future cycle due to non-identical name or address information appearing for you in a future load of incoming data. Do you want to provide your SS# with your request for deletion? That's a personal decision of course. What if perchance you don't currently have a record in P-TRAK? Will your deletion request be held until a record does come in? No, it will not. If you don't have a matching record at the time your deletion request is processed, that request will be flushed, and if a record for you appears in future data that record will enter the P-TRAK database. There is no mechanism present for a "permanent" deletion request that would deal with such situations. As noted above, the methods for requesting deletion have changed over the last two weeks. In fact, they've even changed in the few days since the recording of the interview with Steven Emmert (a different fax number and the re-establishment of voice requests on a new number). So be sure to use the information specified below, not the number that Mr. Emmert provided during the interview. The following is the most up-to-date information as of this writing, and comes directly from my communications with Lexis-Nexis. Here are your options: Telephone (toll free): 1-888-965-3947 Please note that this is a new number at Lexis-Nexis and is not scheduled to be working until this Monday morning (9/23) Eastern Time. It is currently scheduled to go to live operators, but if volume is very high it might be switched to voicemail. FAX (toll free): 1-800-470-4365 Again, this number is scheduled to become functional on the morning of 9/23, Eastern Time. Mail: P-TRAK, P.O. Box 933, Dayton, OH 45401 Email: p-trak@prod.lexis-nexis.com A web form for removal requests is also available at Lexis-Nexis via http://www.lexis-nexis.com. The minimum information required to request removal is full name and mailing address. As noted above, Lexis-Nexis feels that the strongest likelihood of a successful removal will occur when Social Security number is also provided. The web form (as of this writing) doesn't request SS#, and you of course should use your judgment about choosing to send your SS# in e-mail. My own recommendation would be to use the telephone or fax options. By no means is P-TRAK the most onerous database of personal information now available. But I believe the furor that has erupted demonstrates the deep-seated concerns that many people have with details of their personal lives being collected and sold merely as "information commodities", with the subject of that data having virtually no input on how it will be used, or abused. It's time for a detailed examination of what information should and should not be considered to be "public", who should have access to that data, and under what circumstances. Some database companies themselves admit that this is not an area that they can unilaterally address in any general way -- they have competitive concerns. Only through serious legislative efforts can we really begin working toward reasonable changes in the commercial database field. And we'd better get started now, unless we want the 21st century to be a time when the word "privacy" becomes nothing more than an amusing anachronism in the history books. --Lauren-- P.S. Be sure to check out my audio interview with Steven Emmert of Lexis-Nexis on PRIVACY Forum Radio if you can. Just follow the PRIVACY Forum links from http://www.vortex.com to PRIVACY Forum Radio. --LW-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 09:08:51 -0800 From: vincent_kuo@stsl.siemens.com.tw (Vincent Kuo) Subject: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name I got the ITU-T country code listing in the mailbox, and looked immediately for my country code 886 in the list. Surprisingly, the code is marked with 'Reserved' without any comments. Let me tell you the story behind this only 'reserved-for-nothing' code. The code 886 is now being used by Taiwan, which is recognized as 'the Republic of China' to those countries that still take us as a country under the pressure of Mainland China. But neither Taiwan nor the ROC is visible to the UN. The code 886 is apparently tagged as 'Reserved' simply because the ITU-T is dominated by China, who wants the world to neglect the very existance of Taiwan. Maybe someday they will take this 'reserved' code away and force us to use a long distance area code under their 86 country code. Although Taiwan is every bit an independent country, has 21 million people and plays a significant role in the world, we remain anonymous in official occasions. This is just unfair. Maybe nobody can change this, but I want you all know that, and add a footnote to the ITU-T listing: The country code 886 is now assigned to Taiwan, but marked as 'reserved' because ITU-T is dominated by China, and neither 'Taiwan' nor 'The Republic of China' can appear in the context of any UN documents. Anyone with more comments can E-mail me or call me with the 'reserved' country code: +886 3 327 6519. Vincent Kuo Software Engineer Siemens Telecommunication Systems Ltd., Taiwan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For various reasons, I am sure the ITU is not going to add the footnote or explanation you desire, and I for one agree that it is unfair. There is no reason however that each person with a copy of the list I distributed should not pencil in the note you have passed along in their individual copy should they wish to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:18:27 PDT From: tad@ssc.com Hackers Sell Illegal Phone Access On The Street LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Hackers are breaking into telephone line boxes and tapping dial tones belonging to businesses and homes, selling access on the street using a special hand-held receiver. Victims sometimes find their lines tied up for hours and receive bills for tens of thousands of dollars in fraudulent calls. The practice emerged early this year. Authorities believe several million dollars in illegal calls have been rung up since January. The Los Angeles area, with its huge immigrant population, has been a particularly fertile area for the phone fraud. The scammers have a ready population of customers looking to make cheap overseas calls. Six people caught in the act have been arrested for phone-line hacking this year in Los Angeles, Burbank, Montebello, San Francisco and Toronto, said Patsy Ramos, manager of Pacific Bell's centralized fraud bureau. As many as 15 incidents a week are now reported in California alone, Pacific Bell said. One non-profit group victimized received bills for more than $30,000 in calls to South and Central America, Europe and Egypt. The highly skilled scam artists typically are former phone company employees or others with extensive knowledge of telephones, investigators say. They target so-called "b-boxes" that serve as junctions for the phone lines of hundreds of homes and businesses in a neighborhood. The hackers open the 4-foot-tall gray boxes on the sidewalk and clip onto the phone lines with special tools, diverting a dial tone into a hand-held receiver from which customers can make calls. In a more sophisticated version, the hackers forward a dial tone to a nearby pay phone, where customers line up to make calls for a fee of $5 to $20. The thieves attract customers by passing out fliers and through word-of-mouth. The Concerned Citizens of South Central Los Angeles was hit June 15 when thieves broke into a nearby box and forwarded lines from its offices to several pay phones. Long distance and international calls totaling $11,000 were billed to the organization. Executive Director Juanita Tate said she suspected something was fishy when the 14 lines on her telephone system were tied up almost the entire day. "You would push a button and you'd hear somebody trying to dial a number and then you'd push another button and there would be a voice asking for somebody you never heard of," Tate said. Phone company officials tried to secure the box, but the bandits struck again two months later, running up nearly $20,000 in calls to places such as Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, Guyana and Honduras. "We're taking this very seriously right now and putting a lot of focus on the prevention end -- trying to secure the boxes," Ramos said. But there is currently no sure-fire way the companies can detect or prevent the crime. AT&T said it will credit victims for the fraudulent calls, but the cases must be verified by a local phone company whose equipment is being tapped. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So they are finally waking up to what was discussed in this Digest starting several years ago; that in any large, older urban/inner-city area, access to the phone lines of everyone on your block is often times as easy as getting access to the basement of an older high-rise building and patiently sorting through the wires and noting how they terminate in the head -- the big box mounted on the wall, as often as not with no cover on it, or certainly no *locked* cover -- and reading the cryptic notes written on little tags tied with string on some of the wires running in all directions. The cable serving the building serves quite a few other buildings in the area as often as not, and when it was installed many, many years ago the wires in the cable were 'multipled'; that is, they were opened at several locations along the cable-run allowing the same pair of wires to be used at one place for awhile then at some other place for awhile. That was certainly more economical than running two or three physical wire pairs all the way from the CO to every single possible place a phone might be installed, but I guess it did not occur to telco back then that someday people might be more sophisticated in the way telephone systems work. Certainly back in the days of stepper and crossbar central office switches telco did not think fraud would ever reach the point that the whole thing had to be junked and rebuilt from scratch using ESS (fraud was not the only reason for developing ESS but was a big consideration). Now I guess they need to think seriously about the vulnerabilities of the outside plant. To read what was said about this topic several years ago in this Digest, check the archives for the file 'find-pair'. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Ameritech, AT&T Blame Each Other for Billing Problem Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:27:54 PDT From: tad@ssc.com Ameritech, AT&T Blame Each Other for Improper Billing of 150,000 Customers By Jon Van, Chicago Tribune Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News CHICAGO--Sep. 21--About 150,000 Chicago-area people who expected free local toll phone service in August are being billed for their calls because of a computer snafu between AT&T Corp. and Ameritech Corp. The foul-up, which each phone company blames on the other, is the latest episode in a competitive rivalry that's been spawning technology gaffes with disturbing regularity. AT&T has petitioned the Illinois Commerce Commission, which regulates telecommunications in the state, for help in straightening out the mess, which affects about one-third of the customers who this summer picked AT&T to carry their local toll calls. Ameritech had 100 percent of local toll business for residential customers until April, when the ICC opened up that part of the market for competition in anticipation of full-fledged competition later this year. AT&T launched an aggressive campaign to win customers away from Ameritech by offering to let new customers make local calls of 15 miles or more free during August, September and October. More than 400,000 signed up. AT&T then electronically sent lists to Ameritech to get the customers switched from the Chicago-based Baby Bell. But from Aug. 6 to Sept. 3, the lists were rejected by Ameritech's computers, so some 150,000 residential customers who thought they were getting AT&T's promotional free service stayed with Ameritech's regular toll service. AT&T contends that Ameritech changed its computer protocols in August without notice. Ameritech responded that it was a change in AT&T's computer system that triggered the rejections. "Our records clearly show that AT&T changed its format, and that's the source of the problem," said Dave Poacholczyk, an Ameritech spokesman. "We aren't interested in getting into a game of finger-pointing with Ameritech," said Tom Hopkins, an AT&T spokesman. "We just want to get this straightened out so we can make our customers whole. However this happened, we don't want to see a repeat of it." Once AT&T sorts out which customers were affected by the foul-up, the firm will probably issue them credits for future phone use, he said. A few months ago AT&T got into another row with Ameritech over a computer glitch that caused thousands of customers to be misbilled. In that snafu, which was linked to software that enables local toll service competition, some customers' local calls were incorrectly classed as toll calls and billed at a higher rate. In other cases, toll calls were counted as local calls, giving customers a break. AT&T ran full-page newspaper advertisements at the time, calling attention to the snafu and urging its customers to check their bills for errors. Other billing errors this spring were linked to foul-ups associated with adoption of new area codes in Chicago suburbs. In its complaint to the ICC, AT&T warned that further confusion is possible when most of Chicago outside the Loop is given the new area code 773 next month. "All these matters may tend to confuse customers concerning billing and concerning AT&T service," said the complaint. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll tell you another one between the two which is apparently just now starting to come to light, or if it was known before, nothing much was done to correct it. Earlier this year AT&T decided to pull its billings away from Ameritech for long distance and handle it all themselves. There was about a two month period over which the conversion was done, but it appears AT&T ran a billing tape they had already run via Ameritech, meaning calls which Ameritech billed in the final month they handled it were also in some cases billed again by AT&T the first month they started doing it direct. Not too many customers were affected; a few were affected. So some people were billed twice for the same calls: once by Ameritech and once by AT&T either the same month in a later billing cycle or the next month, etc. No amount of talking and explaining has gotten that one straightened out. AT&T's answer was to send a couple bills to customers, cut off access to their long distance network with a sort of snotty intercept recording, and send all those customers to the Gulf Coast Collection Agency in Houston, Texas. AT&T says pay them and get credit from Ameritech; not their fault, etc. I guess finding yourself cut off from the AT&T network is supposed to be of earth- shaking consequence. I am told by an insider that GC Services (the official name of the collection agency) thought it would be a great chunk of business for them, collecting AT&T 'bad accounts'; at last report the agency was holding its nose and handing the whole thing back to Mother. There was no money in it for them! Why is AT&T shooting itself in the foot and working so hard it would seem to alienate itself from the telcos with whom it had a good relationship for so many years and the customers who were generally loyal to it? They want business; they could have cut some incredible deals with the local telcos which I believe would have been within the legal boundaries of divestiture. Between AT&T and the local telcos they could have recaptured much of the business they have lost in the past few years (especially where AT&T is concerned). Instead, the telephone war has gotten so far out of hand; with so much of their dirty linen hanging out for full public view -- a definite no-no in the past -- that they are going to lose even more business. People do not care whose fault it is when they get billed twice or billed for something they were told was free; they just make a mental note of it when a competitor comes along who soothes them and placates them. I have to wonder if in twenty to thirty years AT&T will be the same way Western Union is today: a once very powerful, very well-known company which controlled the industry it was in reduced to being a quaint, and rarely used relic of the past. If that sounds scarey to people who work for AT&T, then good. In the 1940-50's no one at WUTCO ever thought the company would go down the tubes either; it just does not happen to large, powerful corporations ... :) .... in WUTCO's case it was failure to properly integrate the newest technology into the business; if it happens to AT&T my feeling is because it will be because of some horrible business decisions as we round out this century. You consider that unthinkable, eh? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Irenesimm@aol.com (Irene Simmons) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 20:54:04 -0400 Subject: Excel Telecommunications Offer to School Dear telecom: A rep from Excel Telecommunications was the guest speaker at a "Parents for Riverside Drive School" meeting that I recently attended. The pitch was something like this: If we (the board of directors of the school) could get every parent to switch their long distance carrier to Excel every month 5% of every person's long distance phone calls would go to the school! What a great and easy way to raise money for the school. Excel would charge us a $25.00 sign-up fee and give us a 90 day written guarantee. I know very little about Excel and what they are offering -- is this a good deal? Are there any other companies doing this? What questions should we be asking? Please E-mail me with any advice. Thank you, Irene Simmons (E-Mail irenesimm@aol.com) ------------------------------ From: sychung@hansol.co.kr (siyoung chung) Subject: Does Brand Loyalty exist in Long Distance Telephone Services? Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 00:28:20 GMT Organization: Hansol Telecom I am interested in brand loyalty in long distance telephone; does it exist or not? If it does, what is the most effective way in marketing strategies? (I am a telecommunication grad in Michigan State University). I did research on this question and I really want to share information with someone who does the same thing. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well tell me this: What was the results of your research on the topic? Years ago, there was kind of negative 'brand loyalty' which went like this: Until the early 1970's you *had* to use AT&T and your local telco. There was no choice in the matter. A number of people for a variety of reasons disliked AT&T. When MCI first went in business and introduced its very first offering called 'Execunet' around 1973 or so some people jumped over to them not so much out of love for MCI, but rather out of dislike for AT&T. Everyone was glad to 'get something over on Ma Bell ...'. Little did they know of course that in the 1970's and into the 1980's MCI was the single largest customer of AT&T. They didn't care; it was the idea of making a phone call not under the supervision of AT&T at AT&T's prices and terms of service. As for brand loyalty today, I don't personally think there is very much of it. AT&T still has a lot of customers who think of them as 'the telephone company' but I suspect MCI/Sprint/LDDS/others see a huge turnover among customers. 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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 #503 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Sep 23 13:01:22 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA29200; Mon, 23 Sep 1996 13:01:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 13:01:22 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609231701.NAA29200@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #504 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 Sep 96 13:01:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 504 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bellcore Selling Out to Defense Contracter "SAIC" (WSJ via Danny Burstein) Strange Results with ACR and BellSouth "Call Selector" (Stanley Cline) "Father of the Internet" to Speak (Sean E. Williams) Delaware Judge Rules Bell Atlantic Can Lower Residential ISDN (R. Fajman) Articles Don't Flatter RBOCs or Cable (Greg Monti) Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! (Chris Hudel) Annoying Phone Calls (WSJ via Tad Cook) Help Needed With Mexico Band Rates (Diego Betancor) Monday: Turkey Pot Pie, Oven Browned Potatoes, Steamed Cabbage (J Shaver) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:52:34 EDT From: danny burstein Subject: Bellcore Selling Out to Defense Contracter "SAIC" via WSJ recently: Note: SAIC also wears another hat, namely (the) Internic ... Report: Baby Bells Poised to Sell Research Arm to Defense NEW YORK (AP) - The seven Baby Bell telephone companies are poised to sell their research cooperative Bellcore to a defense contractor for about $700 million, {The Wall Street Journal} reported today. The sale would end a jointly-owned arrangement that began a dozen years ago with the breakup of the old AT&T empire. The newspaper said the sale of Bellcore to Science Applications International Corp., an employee-owned defense contractor based in San Diego, could be announced as early as this week. The deal is subject to approval by the boards of all seven phone companies, the newspaper said. Bellcore spokeswoman Barbara McClurken said today that "no decision to sell the company has been made at this time." "Bellcore cannot comment on prospective buyers or about any board deliberations as this information is confidential," McClurken said. Telephone calls to Science Applications also were not immediately answered early today. Bellcore, which is formally named Bell Communications Research, has a staff of about 5,800 people and a stellar reputation in communications network expertise. Its scientists pioneered fiber optic technology, advise companies on how to recover from network failures and are expert in foiling computer viruses. It is based in Morristown, N.J. "We are not a (research and development) lab," McClurken said. "Less than 10 percent of our work is research. A majority of our work is communication software engineering and consulting." Bellcore is owned by Ameritech Corp., based in Chicago; Bell Atlantic Corp., Philadelphia; BellSouth Corp., Atlanta; Nynex Corp., New York; Pacific Telesis Corp., San Francisco; SBC Communications Inc., San Antonio; and U S West Inc., Englewood, Colo. The Bellcore board announced in April 1995 "it was considering selling their interest in Bellcore," McClurken said. The Journal said others making early and serious inquiries about buying the unit were International Business Machines Corp. and Electronic Data System Corp., which McClurken would not comment on. Science Applications International employs about 22,000 people in 350 locations worldwide and generated about $2 billion in revenue last year. Its main business is consulting and providing technical advice to the government. -------------------- Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Strange Results with ACR and BellSouth "Call Selector" Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 16:44:35 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: scline@usit.net My parents recently ordered BellSouth's Complete Choice plan (which allows "all-you-can-eat" calling features; in Tennessee and the extreme northwest Georgia areas of BellSouth, it's $27/mo.) Anyway, they subscribed to a number of services, including Repeat Dialing, Call Return, and Call Selector (which provides a distinctive ring for up to six calling numbers.) They also have Caller ID name/number with Anonymous Call Reject (ACR), which prevents "anonymous" (*67) calls from even ringing their phone. Anyway, I found out something strange about the mix of Call Selector and ACR: If a number's on the Call Selector list, it OVERRIDES ACR -- if I dial *67 + their number *from a number on the Call Selector list*, the call still rings at their house with the distinctive ring, and I do NOT get the "calling party not accepting blocked numbers" recording. Further, Call Return (which quotes back the last dialed number) READS BACK the *supposedly* blocked number, but the Caller ID unit shows "anonymous call"! Is this proper behavior, or should *ACR* override Call Selector and all other features on their line? If this *is* proper behavior, I may have found an easy solution to the problem of people who persistently block their numbers who call people with ACR! (Called person puts caller on Call Selector list, caller gets around ACR!) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 All opinions are strictly my own! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is working the way it is supposed to. The assumption is made that if you put someone on your special notification list -- that is, to have their call cause your phone to give a distinctive ring -- that you want to hear from that person. There is no real conflict with the person who wants to succeed in maintaining their privacy (i.e. *67 prepended to each dialing string) getting through to the person who does not wish to talk with such callers simply because there is little likelyhood of the privacy- seeker convincing the other party to add them to their distinctive ring list unless they happen to already know each other in which case the privacy-seeker probably would not bother with *67 on that particular call. It is nonsensical to say that someone you want to speak with is also someone you might not want to speak with. In the decision making hierarchy of how to process a call in the central office I suppose they could have gone either way with this; to honor the *67 request no matter what 'cost' (or undeliverable service situation) might occur to the called party or to honor the distinctive ringing request of the called party no matter what cost (or undeliver- able service situation) might occur to the calling party. You might also want to try the call-screening feature on the called party's phone where they add a number to the list of callers they do not wish to hear from and then have the calling party do it with and without *67. You'll note the results are the same: The called party's request to NOT connect with a given number is honored in deference to the calling party's request to 'not tell them what number I am'. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 19:01:51 EDT From: Sean E. Williams Subject: Father of the Internet to Speak Pat, I recently received this memo, and believe it maybe of interest to your readers. It is regarding a lecture which will take place at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf at Rochester Institute of Technology. Sean ----- "Father of the Internet" to speak at NTID October 1 Dr. Vint Cerf, "Father of the Internet," will speak at 1 p.m., Tuesday, October 1, in the Robert F. Panara Theatre, Lyndon Baines Johnson Building. The founder and developer of the Internet, Cerf will speak about taking advanced technology and turning it into products and services that people can use as well as where the future lies with these technologies and products. While at UCLA in the early 1970s, Cerf worked on the ARPANET (Advanced Research Projects Agency). He then went on to co-develop the computer networking protocols, later called TCP/IP (transmission control protocol/internet protocol), known collectively as the Internet. Cerf led the Internet Architecture Board, began the Internet Society and ran it until 1995, and was awarded the Silver Medal of the International Telecommunications Union in 1995. Cerf lost his hearing when he was born six weeks prematurely and placed in an oxygen-enhanced incubator. His hearing loss has been progressive, requiring hearing aids for correction from age 13, and he now has a binaural 60 dB loss. He is married to Sigrid Cerf, who is profoundly deaf, and they have two sons. Cerf holds a bachelor of science degree in mathematics from Stanford University and a master of science degree and a PhD in computer science from UCLA. He now is vice president of data architecture for MCI's Data and Information Services Division. For more information about Cerf, check the World Wide Web at http://www.mci.com/aboutmci/cerf/ Cerf's presentation is sponsored by the NTID Special Speaker Series and supported by the Rothman Family Endowment. Admission to the presentation, which will be sign language interpreted and real-time captioned, is free. The presentation also will be available via satellite. Downlink Technical Information: Ku-Band SBS 6 74 degrees west longitude Transponder 9 Downlink frequency 11921 MHz Horizontal polarity Audio 6.2/6.8 Help number: 716-475-7760 Broadcast times:Test 12:30-13:00, US Eastern Program 13:00-14:00, US Eastern ---------- mailto:sew7490@rit.edu http://www.rit.edu/~sew7490 Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA Mobile/Voicemail/Pager: +1 716 748-2960 Recycle yourself. Become an organ donor! ------------------------------ From: Roger Fajman Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 23:36:58 EDT Subject: 'Delaware Judge Rules Bell Atlantic Can Lower Residential ISDN Contact: Ells Edwards 302-576-5340 ellsworth.edwards@bell-atl.com DELAWARE JUDGE RULES BELL ATLANTIC CAN LOWER RESIDENTIAL ISDN RATES Company Proposed Rate Reductions Pending Appeal of Rate Decision DOVER, DE -- A Kent County Superior Court judge has granted Bell Atlantic-Delaware permission to reduce rates for Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) telephone service to the home while he reviews the company's appeal of a July 2 rate order by the Delaware Public Service Commission (PSC). Bell Atlantic asked Judge N. Maxson Terry to allow the company to charge the rates it proposed April 17 to the PSC. The company's proposal would reduce current rates by 15 to 86 percent for residential ISDN, a service that provides high-speed access to the Internet, on-line services and corporate computer networks. In his ruling, Judge Terry said Bell Atlantic-Delaware may bill customers for the following lower rates as of August 1: 20 Hours - $31 60 hours - $45 140 hours - $60 300 hours - $90 500 hours - $120 Unlimited - $248 Customers won't see the new rates on their bills right away. However, they will receive credits for the lower rates back to Aug. 1 at a future date. "We are pleased by the court ruling, because customers will clearly benefit from lower rates for residential ISDN," said Bell Atlantic-Delaware president Joshua W. Martin III. "Our goal has always been to make ISDN to the home as accessible and affordable as possible while covering the cost of providing the service." On Aug. 9, the court stayed the PSC's order that rejected the Bell Atlantic rate proposal and set a $28.02 flat rate for residential ISDN service. As a result of this stay, introductory rates that were implemented in November 1995 have remained in effect while the court considered the company's appeal of the PSC decision. Bell Atlantic Corporation (NYSE: BEL) is at the forefront of the new communications, entertainment and information industry. In the mid-Atlantic region, the company is the premier provider of local telecommunications and advanced services. Globally, it is one of the largest investors in the high-growth wireless communication marketplace. Bell Atlantic also owns a substantial interest in Telecom Corporation of New Zealand and is actively developing high-growth national and international business opportunities in all phases of the industry. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 23:36:24 -0400 From: cc004056@interramp.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Articles Don't Flatter RBOCs or Cable In {The Wall Street Journal} during the week of September 16 to 20, several articles appeared which don't bode well for the Bell Operating Companies or cable systems. On Monday 16 Sept, the {Journal} published an entire pullout section on telecommunications, with the lead article "It's War!" The special section is a good overview of the trials, tribulations, issues, technology and abbreviations of the newly-competitive industries. Well done for a general business publication. The results of several polls are presented in charts on page R4. One chart, titled "AT&T's Edge" lists the percent of consumers of each of the seven Baby Bells, who were asked which company they would like to be their single provider of local and long distance service. The results are damning for the RBOCs. For example, in Ameritech Territory, only 27% would like their single provider to be Ameritech, 4% would like it to be Sprint, 5% would like it to be MCI, 6% would like it to be GTE, and a whopping 41% would like it to be AT&T. 17% had no preference. The trend is even worse among Bell South customers, where only 18% would like their future single provider to be Bell South while 54% want AT&T. Scraping the bottom of the barrel is PacBell, among whose customers only 9% want to have PacBell as their single provider, while 54% want AT&T, a 6:1 landslide. The poll did not include residents in existing GTE territory, althouth GTE was given as one of the choices to the RBOC consumers. About 4% of them would prefer to have GTE as their single provider. Another chart, titled "Vulnerable Monopolies" asks consumers how likely they would be to jump to a different phone or cable firm than their current provider. If prices were the same, about 5% of phone customers would switch to a competing carrier. About 15% of cable customers would switch to a competing cable company if pricing were equal. The question was then re-asked with "if the competitor offered you a 10% to 15% discount, would you switch?" About 21% of phone custoerms said they'd switch. And a whopping 67% of cable customers would jump. Both polls were researched by the Yankee Group. Later the same week, another article, entitled "Nynex's Bad Service Is Issue in Bell Atlantic Deal" is unflattering of Nynex, which is being purchased by Bell Atlantic. Regulators in Nynex's states have to approve the merger and are loathe to do so. New York State, for example, sets benchmarks for customer service. The benchmarks get tougher with each passing year and cover items such as showing up on time for appointments, answering telephones in a timely manner, and fixing serious problems within the 24 hours observed by most other phone companies across the USA. New York State charges Nynex cash penalties for each shortfall. So far in 1996, Nynex has paid $19 million in penalties to New York. It has also paid $20 million in panalties to Massachusetts in the last two years. The article notes that Bell Atlantic has not paid any penalties [to its state regulators] within the last year. One regulator in Pennsylvania hopes that Bell Atlantic's resources are not spread too thin in attempting to bring Nynex up to snuff after the merger. --- Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA mailto:gmonti@interramp.com ------------------------------ From: hudel@hppad.waterloo.hp.com (Chris Hudel) Subject: Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! Date: 23 Sep 1996 12:47:27 GMT Organization: Hewlett Packard (Panacom Division) A frustrated hello to everyone. I'm having no end of problems trying to contact BellSouth in Charlotte, NC to arrange to install two phone lines before I relocate there from Ontario, Canada. To wit, I am having the following TELEPHONE woes when dialing +1.704.378.6000. (I have tried calling from home, from work, from an AT&T 800 access number, all the same): - The touch-tones don't get across to BellSouth's automated attendent. - The above happens and I "wait for an operator" to assist me. Receive one phonemercial and then a message like "you have been on the phone for too long. Hanging up" and then it hangs up on me! (The time is only about two minutes) - I get the above but somebody picks up before the the attendent hangs up on me. But the BellSouth rep can't hear a word I'm saying ... and proceeds to just talk to the rep beside him/her as if I'm not even there. - I actually _get_ a single touchtone across to BellSouth's attendent and get to speak to a customer service agent. We talk for about 60 seconds and the phone suddently issues a fast-busy. I must say, I'm not all that impressed so far with Bell South! So, would someone from there see this message and call _me_ (+1.519.883.3145) to arrange for service hookup and answer my rate inquiries? PS: when I *do* get through, the rep seems very nice, friendly, and helpful (for about 60 seconds before the phone hangs up on me) Thanks, Chris Hudel -- hudel@waterloo.hp.com -- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Try it this way ... when you are able to get through to someone, immediatly explain the difficulty in connecting (use the sixty seconds or whatever you manage to get) to explain this and relay your number to that person, getting their name in the process in case they don't call back and you need to prompt them a second time. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Annoying Phone Calls Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:25:02 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (An excerpt from a {Wall Street Journal} article. My favorite approach with these guys, as I mentioned in TELECOM Digest several years ago, is to ask before they can get very far "May I have your name please? And how do you spell that? May I have your HOME TELEPHONE NUMBER PLEASE? You don't give out your home number? Why not? You called ME at home!" I understand that this same routine was used sometime later on the Jerry Seinfeld show. Does this mean that Seinfeld or one of his writers reads TELECOM Digest, or I have potential to be a brilliant stand up comic? -Tad Cook tad@ssc.com) The Front Lines: They Keep Workers Motivated to Make Annoying Phone Calls Via AP By THOMAS PETZINGER Jr. The Wall Street Journal WATERLOO, Iowa (Wall Street Journal) -- "C'mon you guys! Eight to go!" It is midafternoon, and the shift supervisors are stalking the aisles to pick up the pace. One hundred workers sit side by side in a big, gray room with only a few narrow windows. The minutes tick by. Anyone who beats quota gets to go home 15 minutes early today. They call this place the production floor, but it's not a manufacturing operation. It's a telemarketing center, an air-conditioned sweatshop of the '90s. On this day, the operators are cold-calling small businesses on behalf of a major long-distance company. Tomorrow they may be pitching credit cards or on-line services. The base pay: $5.75 to $8 an hour. The weekly bonus: maybe $30. "Four more!" calls another supervisor. "Four more!" This is the operating headquarters of Ron Weber & Associates, one of the oldest and most respected agencies in the telemarketing industry. The company invited me here to show off its success in recruiting and training a motivated work force. But I leave convinced that even under the industry's best conditions, this is a miserable way to make a living. I confess to a personal bias. These calls can wreck a few minutes of precious home time or vital work. So just imagine what it's like to spend all day placing them. Yet for the owners of these independent call centers -- and for their clients -- telemarketing has never been more profitable. "It just keeps growing because it works," says founder Ron Weber. In 16 years he has built a force of 1,000 employees in four locations, with three centers opening this year. (Some of the centers field in-coming calls.) So how does a business make so much money over the telephone when both parties to the conversation would surely rather be doing something else? How indeed does Weber & Associates keep the lines staffed and the staff motivated? Purely in commercial terms, telemarketing works because it is incredibly cost-effective. Database technology enables companies to compile ever-more-targeted calling lists (which is good news for consumers) and more and more such lists (the bad news). These prospect lists come to Weber & Associates on reels of nine-track tape, and the calls begin. The dialing is done by a bank of computers that wait until a person has answered before switching the call to an operator. The technology makes 30 percent more connections than straight dialing. And it accounts for the annoying delay you sometimes hear with sales calls, although they say it doesn't happen here. When calls are switched to the production floor, the prospects' names and vital data -- address and customer history -- appear on the agents' screens. "They are constantly being flooded with calls," says Jim Strong, computer chief. None of this would be economical without inexpensive labor. Unskilled workers are in tight supply nationwide, so call centers seek out pockets of unemployment. Like many such firms, Connecticut-based Weber & Associates began building up operations in Iowa and Illinois to hire victims of the 1980s farm crisis. The company has added medical and other benefits for full-time workers to help control costly turnover, and a number of employees have been with the firm five years or longer. But turnover still totals about 60 percent to 70 percent a year. One big reason, says Celina Peerman, the personnel chief, is "phone call after phone call after phone call of rejection." With some products, an operator will endure ten hang-ups, insults or polite brush-offs before winning a sale. Often, it's much worse than that. During my visit here, each operator was expected to complete two sales in eight hours of roughly 160 calls. "You come in and start getting hang-ups right away," says operator Charles Allen Pearson. "You've just got to deal with it." The company explicitly informs applicants that the work involves rejection and abuse. Still, says Mr. Weber, most people don't believe the warnings until "they come in and find it is as bad as they say." So in addition to their array of motivational courses and sales tips, new hires receive training in coping with insult. Supervisors watch for outbreaks of the blues, so despair doesn't become epidemic. "If someone's having a bad day, it spreads from one person to the next person to the next person," says the head trainer, Ellen Humphrey. "I got one!" "All right, Judy!" Sustaining the mood also involves a routine of small gestures -- a pie in the face of a supervisor, a free carwash for high performance, the addition of a second microwave for popcorn. But many of the morale boosters only highlight the drudgery of the work. A supervisor jumping in after someone has had a great hour, providing a bonus break of five minutes. A big producer winning the privilege of wearing jeans or sweats to work the next day. As I strolled the aisles here (always accompanied by a manager), I was moved by the spirited attempt at cheerfulness in everyone's voice. Clearly, the personnel department is making its mark. But there was no sugarcoating the tedium. A few operators slouched against the desk dividers. Others gossiped over the partitions during downtime. Mostly, people just wanted to go home. ------------------------------ From: dbetancor@twtel.com (Diego Betancor) Subject: Help Needed With Mexico Band Rates Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 15:20:13 GMT Organization: Digital Telemedia Inc. Anyone have the information or database that shows which Mexican area codes belong to which band rate? Thank you very much. Diego Betancor ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 96 07:33:34 MST From: John Shaver Subject: Monday: Turkey Pot Pie, Oven Browned Potatoes, Steamed Cabbage ----- Forwarded message # 1: From: Keith Bostic Subject: Monday: Turkey Pot Pie, Oven Browned Potatoes, Steamed Cabbage. Forwarded-by: "Rob Pike" Call 704-377-4444, enter 1955 when you hear the recording. ----- End of forwarded messages [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll admit it is sort of funny. I do not know if it is for real or not; but it was worth 25 cents on the phone to listen for a minute or so. 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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 #504 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Sep 23 16:18:05 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA22025; Mon, 23 Sep 1996 16:18:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 16:18:05 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609232018.QAA22025@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #505 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 Sep 96 16:18:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 505 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New French Numbers (Marc Zirnheld) Northland Tel Buys Siemens CO (Tad Cook) Telephone Scam Referring to 809 (But What About Splits?) (Carl Moore) Three-Way Calling Scam (Tad Cook) Can Cordless Phone Crystals be Changed? (jenglund@qlink.com) Sub-interface Routing on IRX-111 (Scott King) Home PBX or Key System (David Siegel) For Sale: HP 3780A Pattern Generator/Error Detector (T1 and DS3) (Tim Bass) They Are Even More Stupid! (was Re: Stupid Spamster Tricks) (Wolf Paul) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marc.Zirnheld@teaser.fr (Marc Zirnheld) Subject: New French Numbers Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 16:33:27 GMT Reply-To: Marc.Zirnheld@teaser.fr On October 18th, France will have a quasi-uniform 10-digit dialing plan (it should have taken place in April this year but was delayed). Although it has not be officially announced, it seems that present eight-digit number will still be effective (from France at least, and on a regional basis) until December 31 (a time-out has to occur after dialing, since some new and old numbers begin with the same strings). A voice recording is due to inform subscribers about the new form of misdialled numbers. The following table gives the numbering plan and the changes to happen. These informations are believed to be reliable, but are given with no warranty of any kind. In addition, I know there are many numbers missing in the "36" plan slice (many of them, including pay-pay-pay per call, are even not listed in the directory pricing information). The basic principle is to add two digits before the actual local number: - 01 for the Paris area wich has area code (1) - 02..05 for other areas - 06 for mobile - 08 for special services Most special two or four-digit numbers will remain unchanged. I was told the leading 0, which will not (yet?) be dialed when calling from foreign countries (sort of an area-code prefix, despite there are no areas) might be called an "operator-code". Does this mean numbers provided by companies other than France-Telecom will be assigned other leading digits? I don't think so, since it is considered allowing inter-operator number portability. Any information on this topic would be appreciated. Information in the table below is *for calls from continental France*, and believed accurate *for fixed subscribers* (mobile operators have various additionnal services available to their subscribers). You may find more (and other) information on http://www.francetelecom.fr/ which is bilingual French/English. Also, you may locate a subscriber upon the four or five first digits of its number on http://www.planete.net/cgi-bin/abpq : this unofficial service is provided by an ISP to help customers locate the its cheapest point of presence. (Information provided "as is" with no warranty ... usual disclaimer ... If you know a better source of information, please let me know. ------------------- Legend (1) : area code {1,3} : subset of digits [0..4] : interval of digits (equiv. to {0,1,2,3,4}) x : any digit in [0..9] y : same digit of an aforementionned set of digits Dpt : 'Departement' (administrative area) DOM : 'Departement d'Outre-Mer', Oversea Dpt CT : 'Collectivite Territoriale', French Oversea Territory that is not considered a DOM TOM : 'Territoire d'Outre-Mer', French Oversea Territory that is not considered a DOM or a CT. Ph : ordinary wire telephone service (wether POTS or ISDN, phone or fax...) Tl : 'Teletel' Data services (mostly V23, CEPT2) Mb : mobile : see note number 'n' c,cc,ccc: country-code (except 33 France) note : 0 is considered before 1, not after 9. ---------------------------------- The following table has four parts: * numbers in the Paris Area, having area code (1) * numbers outside the Paris Area, having no area code * non-localized numbers, to be dialed from both areas * numbers considered as "international" numbers (Classification made upon *actual* situation) ----------------------------------- * inside Paris Area =================== Actual number Assignment Will change to ------------- ---------- -------------- (1) 3{0,4,9} xx xx xx Ph, Val-d'Oise & Yvelines Dpt except Roissy/Charles- de-Gaule Airport 01 3y xx xx xx (1) 41 65 xx xx Mb, Messaging, 'Alphapage' pagers 06 41 65 xx xx (1) 41 77 xx xx Wireless local loop experiment at Saint-Maur 01 41 77 xx xx (1) 49 9{4,7} xx xx same 06 49 9y xx xx (1) 4x xx xx xx Ph, Paris & Val de Marne except & Hauts-de-Seine above-listed & Seine-Saint-Denis Dpt & above airport 01 4x xx xx xx (1) 51 0x xx xx Mb, pagers, Kobby 06 51 0x xx xx (1) 5{3,5} xx xx xx same 01 5y xx xx xx (1) 54 xx xx xx MbPh, Pointel (bi-bop) 06 54 xx xx xx <4> (1) 57 {2,4,5}x xx xx Mb, France-Telecom pagers 06 57 yx xx xx (1) 6{0,4,9} xx xx xx Ph, Essonne & Seine-et-Marne Dpt 01 6y xx xx xx * outside Paris Area ==================== Actual number Assignment Will change to ------------- ---------- -------------- 28 03 xx xx Mb, pagers 06 57 03 xx xx 2x xx xx xx Ph, Northern F. 03 2x xx xx xx except above-listed 3{1,2,3,5,7,8,9} xx xx xx Ph, Normandy 02 3y xx xx xx 40 10 xx xx Mb, pagers 06 57 10 xx xx 4{0,1,3,7,8}xxxxxx Ph, Mayenne & area except above-listed 02 4y xx xx xx 42 xx xx xx Ph, Bouches-du-Rhone Dpt 04 42 xx xx xx 44 xx xx xx Ph, Oise Dpt 03 44 xx xx xx 4{5,6,9} xx xx xx Ph, Charentes & area 05 4y xx xx xx 50 xx xx xx Ph, Savoie & Ain Dpt 04 50 xx xx xx 5{1,3} xx xx xx Ph, Vendee & Loir-et-Cher Dpt 02 5y xx xx xx 54 1{7,8,9} xx xx MbPh, Pointel (bi-bop), Lille 06 54 1y xx xx 54 xx xx xx except above-listed Ph, Indre dpt 02 54 xx xx xx 57 90 xx xx Mb, pagers 06 57 90 xx xx 58 1x xx xx MbPh, Prologos, Bordeaux 06 58 1x xx xx 5{5..9} xx xx xx except above-listed Ph, South-Western F. 05 5y xx xx xx 6{1,2,3,5} xx xx xx Ph, South-Central/Western F. 05 6y xx xx xx 6[6..9] xx xx xx Ph, South-Central/Eastern F. 04 6y xx xx xx 72 03 xx xx Mb, pagers 06 57 04 xx xx 79 97 xx xx MbPh, Pointel (bi-bop), Avoriaz 06 79 97 xx xx 7x xx xx xx Ph, Auvergne, Rhone-Alpes except above-listed & Central F. 04 7y xx xx xx 83 03 xx xx Mb, pagers 06 57 02 xx xx 88 77 5x xx MbPh, Pointel (bi-bop), Strasbourg 06 54 77 5x xx 89 99 xx xx MbPh, Pointel (bi-bop), Strasbourg 06 54 99 xx xx 8x xx xx xx Ph, Burgundy, Alsace, Lorraine except above-listed & Eastern F. 03 8y xx xx xx 91 01 xx xx Mb, pagers 06 57 01 xx xx 91 36 6x xx same 06 57 36 6x xx 9[0..5] xx xx xx Ph, South-Eastern F, except above-listed Cote-d'Azur 04 9y xx xx xx 9[6..9] xx xx xx Ph, Brittany 02 9y xx xx xx * non-localized numbers ======================= Actual number Assignment Will change to ------------- ---------- -------------- 01 1x xx xx Mb, pagers, Tam-tam 06 01 1x xx xx 02 0x xx xx MbPh, Bouygues Telecom (Paris) 06 61 6x xx xx 02 {1,2}x xx xx same 06 68 yx xx xx 02 [3..6]x xx xx same < what 06 60 yx xx xx 02 7x xx xx same a 06 61 3x xx xx 02 8x xx xx same mess ! > 06 61 4x xx xx 02 9x xx xx same 06 61 5x xx xx 0{3,9} xx xx xx MbPh, SFR 06 0y xx xx xx 0{4,7,8} xx xx xx MbPh, Itineris 06 0y xx xx xx 05 xx xx xx Toll-free 08 00 xx xx xx <3> 06 [0..3]x xx xx Mb, pagers, Tatoo 06 yx xx xx xx 06 4x xx xx Mb, pagers, Tatoo & Kobby 06 06 4x xx xx 06 5x xx xx Mb, pagers, Tam-tam 06 06 5x xx xx 06 [6..9]x xx xx MbPh, maritime (VHF) 06 06 yx xx xx 11 Tl, Electronic phonebook 36 11 <5> 12 Directory assistance 12 13 Repair 13 14 Salespeople 14 15 Ambulance 15 <1><2> 16 inter-area prefix (for reference only) no more ! 17 Police 17 <1> 18 Fire 18 <1><2> 36 01 1[3..7] 1y Tl, Computer, IP access 08 36 01 1y 1y 36 01 28 28 Tl, Computer access 08 36 01 28 28 36 05 xx xx Tl, toll-free 08 36 xx xx 36 10 F.-T. calling card, automated 36 10 36 12 Public Tl mail 36 12 36 1[3..5] Tl, menu page 36 1y 36 19 Tl, foreign services 36 19 36 21 Tl, ASCII 36 13 (add # prefix to service code) 36 22 Tl, Internet, from ISDN 36 22 36 23 Tl, high speed link 36 23 36 2[4..9] xx xx Tl, direct access 08 36 2y xx xx 36 3x xx xx Unlisted!! but some are voice servers 08 36 3x xx xx 36 44 Loop test, Callback (POTS only) 36 44 36 50 F.-T. calling card, automated 36 50 36 55 Ph, telegram service 36 55 36 56 Tl, telegram service 36 56 36 63 xx xx 'Azur' numbers (local call charge whatever the distance) 08 01 63 xx xx 36 6[4..9] xx xx 'Audiotel' voice servers 08 36 6y xx xx 36 70 xx xx same 08 36 70 xx xx 36 72 'memophone' public voice mail 36 72 36 75 10 10 'top message' voice mail checking/listening 08 36 75 10 10 36 8x xx xx Unlisted!! but some are voice servers 08 36 8x xx xx 36 99 clock service 36 99 52 11 10-digit numbering information, automated server 52 11 52 12 10-digit numbering information, operator 52 12 * international-like numbers ============================ 19 international prefix (+) 00 +590 xx xx xx Guadeloupe DOM 0 590 xx xx xx <6> +594 xx xx xx Guyane DOM 0 594 xx xx xx <6> +596 xx xx xx Martinique DOM 0 596 xx xx xx <6> +262 xx xx xx Réunion DOM 0 262 xx xx xx <6> +508 xx xx xx St Pierre et Miquelon CT 0 508 xx xx xx <6> +269 xx xx xx Mayotte CT 0 269 xx xx xx <6> +687 ... New Caledonia TOM +687 ... +681 ... Wallis-et-Futuna TOM +681 ... +689 ... French Polynesia TOM +689 ... 19 00 c Home Country Direct, operator 08 00 99 00 0c <7> 19 00 cc same 08 00 99 00 cc <7> 19 00 ccc same 08 00 99 0c cc <7> 19 02 c Home Country Direct, automated 08 00 99 20 0c <7> 19 02 cc same 08 00 99 20 cc <7> 19 02 ccc same 08 00 99 2c cc <7> 19 33 12 ccc Intl Directory assistance 00 19 33 12 ccc <8> 19 33 ccc Intl operator 00 33 ccc <8> Notes : ======= <1> Emergency services will eventually merge under 112 (already accessible from GSM and DCS1800 phones). <2> Numbers are usually routed to the same emergency answering point. <3> 08 05 xx xx xx may (???) also be permitted. <4> Could also be 01 54 xx xx - there's something odd here, could be a mistake. <5> 3611 already in service. <6> From continental/DOM/CT France only, I suppose. From other countries, consider international calls to respective 3-digit "country-like"-codes. <7> Some country codes need be replaced as follows : 1 (NANP)--> 16 for Canada 11 for USA, ATT 19 for USA, MCI 87 for USA, Sprint 81 (Japan)-> 81 for KDD 80 for IDC 043 for ITJ 44 (UK) --> 944 for Mercury 44 for BT 7 (CIS) --> 71 <8> Some country codes need be replaced as follows : 1 (NANP) --> 11 7 (CIS) --> 71 (CIS includes Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyztan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan). Additional Comments : ===================== * aspirin, please. * old analog mobile networks Radiocom-2000 and SFR : numbers look like fixed numbers and will change the same way. * DCS 1800 experiments will be assigned slices : 06 89 xx xx xx (Toulouse) 06 18 xx xx xx (Strasbourg). * dialing 10 digits with a rotary dial causes excessive finger stress, and will cause those few old devices to disappear. * eating fish should help remembering 10-digit numbers... * European-wide integration of numbering plan is considered, but I don't have any precise information regarding this. __________________________________ Marc Zirnheld AdressE: Marc.Zirnheld@teaser.fr (ISO-8859-1/Latin-1) Dazibaobab: http://www.teaser.fr/~mzirnheld/ Telecopie: [+33](1)60192380 - 18 oct. 96: [+33]0160192380 ------------------------------ Subject: Northland Tel Buys Siemens CO Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 10:13:27 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (Here is a press release from Siemens on the sale of a CO to Northland Telephone Co. of Maine. Notice that instead of having a bunch of central offices, they will instead by ONE C.O. for their entire network, and then host *72* remotes off of it?? Does anyone know what the largest number of remotes off of a central office is? Tad Cook - tad@ssc.com - Seattle, WA) ------------------------- Northland Telephone chooses Siemens Stromberg-Carlson's EWSD switch to modernize Maine-based network BOCA RATON, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 23, 1996--Northland Telephone Co. will modernize its entire Maine-based network using Siemens Stromberg-Carlson's EWSD switch. The EWSD contract includes replacing existing switching equipment at a host and 72 remotes. Initial engineering phases already are completed, and equipment will begin shipping in October 1996. The entire project is expected to be completed by 2001. `Siemens Stromberg-Carlson is pleased to be Northland's strategic partner and a key supplier,' said Fred Fromm, president & CEO of Siemens Stromberg-Carlson. `The EWSD opens exciting new avenues of communication to Northland's customers. Besides intrastate and international Equal Access, they'll also enjoy advanced technologies such as SS7, ISDN and CLASS services. In the future, Northland can expand its capabilities with state-of-the-art products and services designed for the EWSD, such as Personal Communication Services; Inter-eXchange Carrier, and Local Number Portability.' `The Siemens EWSD will form the backbone of our entire network,' said John Duda, president and CEO of Northland Telephone. `Northland will be able to further modernize all of its facilities through this platform, and be positioned to provide for enhanced services and growth. Our customers will also notice improved dialing when making long-distance calls due to SS7 technology.' Northland Telephone and its affiliate, Sidney Telephone, are subsidiaries of MJD Communications. Northland, one of the largest independent telcos in Maine, serves more than 21,000 customers through 24 all-digital exchanges in Maine and New Hampshire. Headquartered in Portland, Maine, Northland's territory ranges from the Canadian border to the foothills of western Maine. Four business offices are located at key exchange complexes within the state: Fort Kent, Island Falls, Morrill and Fryeburg. Northland also serves more than 5,000 customers in northern Vermont. Siemens Stromberg-Carlson, headquartered in Boca Raton, is a leading provider of telecommunications equipment to the public network service providers in North America. The company designs and manufactures digital central office switching equipment, broadband switching systems, wireless solutions, end-to-end multimedia solutions, Internet solutions, telecommunication network management products, customer premise equipment and transmission products. Siemens Stromberg-Carlson is a subsidiary of Siemens AG, which has annual revenues of $61 billion and is present in 190 countries. See http://www.ssc.siemens.com. CONTACT: Siemens Stromberg-Carlson, Boca Raton Robert Bartolotta, 561/955-3140 robert.bartolotta@ssc.siemens.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 96 13:00:42 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: Telephone Scam Referring to 809 (But What About Splits?) I just received the following in email to my office. I am passing it along AS IS. It refers to 809 area code (note that Dominican Republic is apparently keeping that area code), but does not refer to the new area codes being spun off for the various countries that have used 809. ---------------------------- The National Fraud Information Center, a partnership of the National Association of Attorneys General, The Federal Trade Commission and The National Consumers League, is warning consumers about a telephone scam that entices callers to return calls to an "809" area code in the Caribbean. The scamsters are trying to get around U.S. restrictions and consumer blocks against "900" pay per call services. People are getting messages on their answering machines, in their voice mailboxes, and recently on their pagers, urging them to return an important call to a number with an "809" area code. Upon returning the call, the caller hears a lengthy marketing pitch, which in turn, generates a healthy long distance charge on their telephone bill. The marketing pitches are a worthless waste of time and money. The scamsters are making money merely by delivering U.S. long distance calls to telephone companies in the Dominican Republic and some of the other countries that share the "809" area code. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So far so good, but I think there are a few things not being considered here. How many calls must be made to answering machines, pagers, etc to get the owners of those devices to return a call? I doubt sincerely it is 1:1, where everyone who gets paged/called returns the call. Now with that thought in mind -- and even if it is 1:1 -- calls have to originate, *and be paid for* somewhere. They are not getting free service on their outgoing calls to the pagers/answering machines. Continuing this thought then, what are they spending on outgoing traffic to stir up incoming traffic? If the motive was merely to generate incoming traffic to the country in question, isn't any balance on the books (with AT&T probably) offset by the outgoing traffic? A call out to induce someone to call in ... ? Now if they have a confederate in the USA making the outbound calls for them to reduce the cost of the outgoing calls; or if they have confederates in several large urban areas in the USA where there is likely to be a huge concentration of voicemail making 'local calls' at local call rates in order to generate an expensive long distance call in return, then this makes sense. I can see where someone in Chicago for example, with a speed dialer or autodialer loaded full of all the number combinations in 312-659 (a Cellular One-Chicago exchange) could zap all those numbers, leaving voicemail wherever possible in a day or so and theoretically do it inexpensively enough that provided a good percentage of the recipients took the bait and called back there would be a profit generated at the 809 end. A message left in voicemail is going to 'sound like' a telemarketer to many people and they are not going to return the call, so our confederate had best concentrate on just zapping pagers so the person getting the page can't be certain what it is. Some are still not going to return the call. Now what if the rate of calls placed in an effort to prompt return calls is more like 3:1 or 4:1? Isn't the profit margin or bottom line for the 809 people getting a bit thin, even at the inflated rates charged for a call from here to there? You see, none of the newspapers which report these so-called scams really bother to investigate what it is they are reporting. They just chatter like a bunch of angry crows whose nest has been upset or invaded. Remember the one about 212-540 a few years ago and how people on those numbers were allegedly (and maybe they really were) calling pagers all over the country? Before it was finally forgotten about as the newspapers moved on to other things and all the memo- writers in corporations went on to writing memos about other topics, everyone everywhere was being warned about the terrible things that you would see on your phone bill if you dialed 212-540-xxxx. Not a single one bothered to check or note this simple thing: ** 212-540 like anywhere-976 is not dialable from anywhere except the areacode wherein it is located, or in the case in point, in Manhattan, NY. ** Therefore let them page you all they want (and they learned quickly not to bother) and let people in other places try all they want to return the call. They won't get through and there won't be any big charges, etc. Telecom admins, don't even *bother* to block 212-540; telco has already done it for you unless you are in 212/718/914. Still, the newspapers and corporate memo-writers went crazy. We must notify everyone now, leaving everyone frightened to death that they would be the next victim of the scam. And so it is with this latest 809 nonsense. *Of course* you can dial their number (unlike 976) from anywhere, assuming AT&T does not specifically block that given number which I understand has occurred. Anyone who stops to think about it should realize the 809 people are probably going to give up on this when their bookkeeper comes to work and lays it out for them if they have not already ceased and desisted. But something tells me I am going to be getting copies of corporate memos and newspaper stories for the next year or two warning of this terrible scam and how I really should post something on it at once so that there won't be any more victims. And everyone who writes me will think they are the first to have heard about it. Now, if they are running *newspaper advertising* asking people to call an 809 number then that is a somewhat different situation, but how many people do you know, seriously, who would respond to a help-wanted ad in the paper involving a long distance number that was not toll-free? They must be hard up for a job I guess. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Three-Way Calling Scam Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 19:01:05 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (I wonder if the blocking they are describing is some sort of selective blocking of three-way calls from prisons? I have heard of this before, but don't know how it works. The outgoing prison phone calls must be class marked in some way. Tad Cook - tad@ssc.com) The Sun Herald, Biloxi, Miss., Tradewinds Column By Charles Busby, The Sun Herald, Biloxi, Miss. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Phone scam: BellSouth's new three-way calling feature has given criminals a new way to prey on the young, naive or mentally disabled. One man in Harrison County reports that his disabled granddaughter accepted collect calls from a jail inmate who then tricked her into engaging the three-way calling feature that's available to all customers. The inmate proceeded to run up a $700 bill to talk to his friends. Three-way calling, like some other features, is available to all customers but can be blocked. In this victim's case, the man said he asked BellSouth to block the feature. Others can take more precautions: If you wish to block a feature from your phone, make sure you document the name of the customer service representative you talk to and the time you call, and ask for documentation showing the feature has been blocked. (Charles Busby is business editor of The Sun Herald. You can reach him by mail at P.O. Box 4567, Biloxi, MS 39535-4567; by fax at 896-2104; by phone at 896-2358; or by e-mail at CaBusby@aol.com.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone should mention that the young, the naive and the mentally-disabled will be with us always. Maybe someone could stop the world so the rest of us can get off. I am not aware of three-way calling being a 'use on demand' feature available by default like (for instance) 'return last call'. Is it that way also? Perhaps it is at some telcos. I do know that centrex can be arranged so that if the originating end is forbidden to do something, any receipient of a call is forbidden to do the same thing. Let me explain further: a centrex extension is restricted from receiving incoming calls originating outside the subscriber's premises. Caller from outside receives an intercept to that effect. Caller from outside attempts to bypass this by dialing another extension on the centrex and asking to be transferred. The attempt to transfer will fail. Caller dials the centrex operator and passes the extension number. Again, generally the attempt by the oper- ator to transfer the call will fail. Another example: user of a centrex extension is restricted from dialing an 'outside' number. He asks a confederate to dial the number from an unrestricted extension and then transfer the call to him. The attempt to transfer will fail. It may or may not be possible to dial the centrex operator and ask that she complete the connection; the operator at least can supervise or oversee what is occuring on the centrex and respond appropriately. It is also the case that if 900/976 blocking is installed on a line the operator is unable to override the restriction. Ever notice how when you call 900 from a blocked phone the intercept message tells you the phone is blocked but continues by saying, " ... the operator will be unable to complete the call for you ..." I would think -- but I do not know for sure -- that it is possible to send information about the class of service on the phone of the person making the call and require that the central office receiving the call for one of its susbcribers honor that class of service, in effect giving its subscriber the same (if more restrictive) class of service as the calling party for the duration of that call. That is to say if you the prisoner cannot make a credit card call, then for the time we are connected I cannot make one either; if you cannot make a three way call, then I cannot make one either. If this were implemented, wouldn't that end a great deal if not all of the fraud committed from jail phones? PAT] ------------------------------ From: jenglund@qlink.com Subject: Can Cordless Phone Crystals Be Changed? Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:29:08 GMT Organization: Qlink First off, how many crystals are used in a cordless phone, two? --one in base and one in handset? My cordless is an old cheapy single channel style. If a person wanted to change the crystal in their cordless, do you have to replace both the handset AND base crystals? With remote controlled cars, they use a single frequency and hypothetically, can someone put in a R/C car crystal in the base and have it still work? Is there a specific reason for the pairings ie 49.670 (handset) --46.610(base)MHz? Would 49.670 (handset) -- 75.410 (base) MHz work? Do you have any examples that would work? Has anyone tried this? Since I had some extra r/c car crystals I thought I could "move" the frequency out of the typical cordless spectrum for free. You can answer here as I don't have e-mail access. (Its a friend's account.) Thanks for the information. Robert [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Within some reasonable parameters and assuming you know what you are doing, you can change crystals around in radio equipment. But after you do, you have to be sure to 're-peak' the radio to make sure it all comes together nicely. Some components or parts in the radio may be next to impossible to deal with short of expert assistance from a technician at his work bench with the proper tools and instruments, etc. For one example, Radio Shack now buries the things users used to 'tamper with' under lots of glue, etc to make them inaccessible. Years ago it was very common to do (what were called) 'the mods' on CB radios to expand their range from forty channels to eighty or more channels, or to take them out of eleven meter entirely and make yourself an inexpensive ten meter rig. It was easier to do it on the 'newer' (in 1978-80) forty channel radios than it was to do it on the older twenty-three channel units because of the different way the crystals were installed. The old radios had two crystals for each channel; one for transmit and one for receive. The newer forty channel radios only had like three or four crystals in all, and they were synthesized; the crystals would interact with each other in various combinations to get the desired channels or frequencies. A forty-position gang switch would connect and unconnect the crystals to each other, using some- thing like an 02-A chip from Motorola. By the way, the FCC got on Motorola's case and forced them to quit making that programmable chip, using instead a chip which had everything in ROM, or read-only memory. So, the guys learned they could get on the circuit board with an exacto-blade and carefully cut a trace here and a trace there to cause a certain pin which heretofore always was held high to go low or another pin which was always sent to the chassis ground or the floating ground to do something else instead. A couple of wires sold- ered in place to nice little mini-toggle switches on the side of the radio and bingo! Now the radio would tune all over the place, going all the way up to ten meters and down a distance also. Radio Shack sold everything you needed to do the job and even published 'the mods' in a handy little xerox copy of some other fourth generation xerox copy which invariably 'some customer' left in the store for the benefit of the other guys. Or at least they did until the feds got after Radio Shack and told them to can the s--t which is when Tandy took the hint and told their clerks to quit giving out those helpful pirate documents. Had there been computers and a Usenet in those days, I'm sure a newsgroup would have had all the instructions needed to operate a pirate CB radio station. There were thousands of pirate radios operating, every one of them quite loud and far-reaching with their radiation. Trouble is, all those pirate mods never seemed to mention one thing: Get the radio that far out of its intended frequency and it would sound like pooh! The modulation and the carrier was awful; that is if you could get the radio to oscillate at all on those distant frequencies. I had a radio like that which went all over the place -- it even would handle 5kc increments instead of the standard 10kc if you wanted to talk 'between channels'. I had a device called 'DigiScan' which got the frequencies instead of the usual channel selector. No matter how much I peaked and re-peaked that radio I could not get it to oscillate (that is, 'key up' or transmit) on the bottom or top ten or so channels without completely warping it in that direction. Finally I gave up on it and used the forty channels God's representative here on Earth (the Federal Communications Commission) intended for me to have, with maybe twenty or thirty extra frequencies but that was it. To make the changes you suggest would be illegal under FCC rules, but worse yet, you might really wind up with a piece of junk that sounded like pooh with about half the range of before and terrible modulation, etc. Maybe others who know something about radio will comment. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sking@galaxynet.com (scott king) Subject: Sub-Interface Routing on IRX-111 Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 22:56:09 GMT Organization: Connect Northwest Internet Services, LLC Hi! I'm trying to upgrade to full T-1 on a Livingston IRX-111 (PM 2) and give another client a 56K port from the single interface. It has the latest operating system in it, and I don't want the added expense of adding a separate serial port and CSU/DSU just to port to that client. I know it is done elsewhere, and of course Livingston says "Sure thing!" but they said the same about the PM-2e terminal server/router that did NOT do it reliably. Anyone with an authoritative answer (as in you've done it) PLEASE email a reply to "admin@galaxynet.com". Thank you very much! ------------------------------ From: David Siegel Subject: Home PBX or Key System Wanted Reply-To: David-Siegel@deshaw.com Organization: D. E. Shaw & Co. Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:48:45 GMT I'm looking for a home phone system. I'm going to be installing up to 16 phones (a mixture of regular phones, modems, fax machines, intercoms (on exterior doors) and answering machines). I'd like the system to support both analog phones, and "feature phones", that are specific to the system. The functions that I need include the following: 1) Support for at least four outside lines. 2) The ability to dial between internal phones. 3) The ability to "block" outside calls from certain lines. 4) Support for an intercom that can be used in place of a door bell. 5) Internal "intercom" mode, where you can blast something out of the speaker of all phones. 6) The ability to route incoming calls to certain phones. For example, I might want incoming lines one and two to go to 1/2 the phones in the system, and incoming line three to go to only a select few phones. 7) Dial "9" selection to get a free outside line. 8) The ability to route a number of incoming lines to one analog extension. 9) The ability to transfer calls by flashing a switch hook on an analog phone. I'm wondering if someone could recommend a system that can do things like this. I'm looking to spend around 2K for the system, plus more for the phones. Thanks! Dave ------------------------------ From: bass@cais.cais.com (Tim Bass) Subject: For Sale: HP 3780A Pattern Generator/Error Detector (T1/DS3) Date: 23 Sep 1996 03:13:34 GMT Organization: ValueRocket Labs Reply-To: bass@linux.silkroad.com Hi, I have HP 3780A Pattern Generator/Error Detector used for testing binary errors, code errors, and frequency offsets for fixed rate digital circuits. The unit is in excellent working condition and the front panels are almost flawless. Please e-mail me if you are intereted in the HP 3780A. The original HP price was over $8,700.00 (very nice units), but since it is used I will let them go for a much lower price or lease to qualified businesses. Regards, Tim (bass@silkroad.com) ------------------------------ From: wolf.paul@aut.alcatel.at (Wolf Paul) Subject: They Are Even More Stupid! (was Re: Stupid Spamster Tricks) Date: 23 Sep 1996 07:56:01 GMT Organization: Alcatel Austria AG In article , Marty Brenneis writes: > Here is another fool for the files. heh heh heh > I have included the full header for your amusement. Note the reply > address. This is where he has you send the remove requests. This one > is a real scum sucking bottom feeder. > ... > Comments: Authenticated sender is Then Pat adds the following comment: > Remember, spamming and junk mailing on the net will cease when the > perception that there is profit to be made by doing so is gone. The > spammers long ago learned they dare not give a valid email address > in their messages ... But you see, the guy's provider DID insert the valid email address in the "Comments:" line I retained in the quote above, and I am sure this nice operator of advertising services would not at all object to people sending lots of inquiries about his services to that authenticated sender address so thoughtfully provided in the header. (Although, since he is using Pegasus, which by default does not show a lot of headers, he probably is not aware that his real address got out after all!) W. N. Paul/KSRU * Alcatel Austria AG * Scheydgasse 41 * A-1210 Vienna, Austria wnp@aut.alcatel.at * +43-1-277-22 x2523 (voice)/x118 (fax) * +43-1-774-1947 (h) ------------------------------ 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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 #505 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Sep 23 22:24:08 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA01640; Mon, 23 Sep 1996 22:24:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 22:24:08 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609240224.WAA01640@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #506 TELECOM Digest Mon, 23 Sep 96 22:24:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 506 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FBI Surveillance Demands Rejected on Privacy Grounds (Monty Solomon) Kevin Poulson Update (Tad Cook) Availability of Special ISDN Customer Premises Equipment? (Dave Schulman) Nynex Penalties (was Re: Articles Don't Flatter RBOCs) (Danny Burstein) Erata on EXchange Names in NYC/NJ (Mark J. Cuccia) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 01:32:57 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FBI Surveillance Demands Rejected on Privacy Grounds Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM ----- ---- --------- / ____| __ \__ __| ____ ___ ____ __ | | | | | | | | / __ \____ / (_)______ __ / __ \____ _____/ /_ | | | | | | | | / /_/ / __ \/ / / ___/ / / / / /_/ / __ \/ ___/ __/ | |____| |__| | | | / ____/ /_/ / / / /__/ /_/ / / ____/ /_/ (__ ) /_ \_____|_____/ |_| /_/ \____/_/_/\___/\__, / /_/ \____/____/\__/ The Center for Democracy and Technology /____/ Volume 2, Number 32 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A briefing on public policy issues affecting civil liberties online ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 32 September 20, 1996 CONTENTS: (1) FBI Demands for Broad New Surveillance Power Rejected on Privacy Grounds (2) CDT Background Memo on the FBI Demands (3) How to Subscribe/Unsubscribe (4) About CDT, contacting us ** This document may be redistributed freely with this banner intact ** Excerpts may be re-posted with permission of ** This document looks best when viewed in COURIER font ** (1) FBI Demands for Broad New Surveillance Power Rejected on Privacy Grounds A telecommunications industry standards body on Thursday voted to reject a demand by the FBI to create a national tracking system out of the wireless telephone network. CDT applauds this decision as a significant victory for privacy and condemns the FBI's blatant efforts to subvert the specific requirements of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, also known as "Digital Telephony"). "The FBI is demanding that every cell phone double as a tracking device, providing instant and continuous location information not just when a subject is talking but whenever a cellular phone is turned on. " said CDT Executive Director Jerry Berman. "The FBI is demanding real-time tracking of anyone suspected of committing a crime. This is a clear violation of the statute and the Fourth Amendment." Berman added At issue are technical standards currently being drafted to implement the 1994 law. The FBI, which holds an influential position within the industry standards process, has demanded that the wireless telephone network be designed in a way that would allow real time tracking of individuals suspected of a crime. Specifically, the FBI is demanding that wireless networks be designed to facilitate: * Tracking of the physical location of a subject any time a cellular phone is turned on (even if no call is being made or received) * Tracking of the physical location of a subject when a cellular phone moves within a service area or moves to another carrier's service area * Tracking of the physical location of a subject when a cellular phone makes or receives a call * Delivery of this information to law enforcement in real time (within 500 milliseconds) Although law enforcement currently has the authority to obtain certain location information through a search warrant, the standards proposed by the FBI would have allowed access to far more detailed location information under a lower standard. "The law was designed to freeze the FBI in time, not as a blank check to the FBI to design the telecommunications network any way it pleased." Berman said. "The FBI's demands go far beyond what's permitted under CALEA and contradict statements by Director Freeh before Congress 2 years ago." The drafters of CALEA specifically stated that the statute was not designed to expand law enforcement surveillance authority. The Committee report on the legislation notes: "The FBI director testified that the legislation was intended to preserve the status quo, that it was intended to provide law enforcement no more and no less access to information than it had in the past. The Committee urges against over broad interpretation of the requirements." -- House Judiciary Committee Report to Accompany H.R. 4922. Rept. 103-827 Part 1, Page 22 NEXT STEPS In order to ensure public oversight and accountability over the FBI's surveillance authority, CALEA requires the government to reimburse the telecommunications industry for the costs of meeting the statute's requirements. Congress is currently considering a mechanism to fund the implementation of the law. CDT urges the Congress to exercise its oversight role to determine whether the FBI is seeking to use CALEA to expand current surveillance capabilities contrary to the specific intent of the law. Unless and until the FBI clarifies its intent and justifies its demands, Congress should not allow the expenditure of any funds to implement CALEA. CDT and a ad-hoc task force of other privacy organizations and telecommunications industry representatives are currently conducting a review of electronic surveillance issues at the request of Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA). The task force report will cover the implementation of CALEA and will be released within the next few months. CDT stands ready to intervene again at the standards setting process and before the FCC if necessary in order to ensure that privacy is protected as CALEA is implemented. The Center for Democracy and Technology is a Washington DC based non-profit public interest organization focusing on free speech and privacy issues in new computer and communications technology. CDT can be found on the World Wide Web at: http://www.cdt.org/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (2) CDT BACKGROUND MEMO ON THE FBI DEMANDS FBI SEEKS TO USE CELLULAR TELEPHONES AS TRACKING DEVICES The FBI is demanding the telecommunications industry design cellular telephone networks in a way which would allow law enforcement to track the physical location and movements of individuals in clear violation of the law. This effort by the FBI raises grave privacy concerns and must be rejected by the telecommunications industry. In ongoing discussions with a Telecommunications Industry Association committee established to set technical standards to implement the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, P.L. 103-414, also known as the "Digital Telephony" statute), the FBI is requesting surveillance capability far beyond current law enforcement capabilities and in clear violation of the scope of the law. CALEA was not designed as a blank check from Congress allowing law enforcement to design the telecommunications network to expand existing surveillance capability. Rather, the statute was carefully balanced to ensure that law enforcement maintain the status quo. This overreaching by the FBI raises serious privacy concerns and clearly violates the balance struck by CALEA. CDT strongly urges Congress to refrain from approving any funding for the implementation of CALEA until the FBI makes its intentions clear. FBI Demanding Location Information In Clear Violation of the Statute The FBI's request is contained in a proposal called the Electronic Surveillance Interface (ESI), which specifies the design of the interface between the telecommunications network and law enforcement's own surveillance equipment. The FBI has refused a formal request by CDT to view a copy of the ESI. However, documents obtained from a meeting of the FBI and the telecommunications industry on September 12 indicate that the FBI is demanding that cellular networks be designed to deliver location information to law enforcement. Specifically, the ESI states that cellular networks must be designed to provide the geographic location of a particular subject: The ESI states: R7-62 The SSM (Surveillance Status Message) shall be delivered to the LEA (Law Enforcement Authority) whenever the subject changes location or between systems and this location is available to the IAP (Intercept Access Point) In short, the FBI is requesting that the cellular network be designed to report the geographic location of an individual subject: 1. When a cellular phone is turned on (even if no call is made) 2. When a cellular phone moves within a service area or moves to another carrier's service area. 3. When a cellular phone makes or receives a call. The FBI claims that location information has to be provided to law enforcement under CALEA because it is part of "call setup information." However, in his testimony before a joint hearing of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on March 18, 1994, FBI Freeh director stated exactly the opposite: "Several privacy-based spokespersons have criticized the wording of the definition (of call setup information)... alleging that the government is seeking a new, pervasive, automated 'tracking' capability. Such allegations are completely wrong.... In order to make clear that the acquisition of such information is not... included within the term 'call setup information' we are prepared to add a concluding phrase to this definition to explicitly clarify the point: '*** except that such information [call setup information] shall not include any information that may disclose the physical location of a mobile facility or service beyond that associated with the number's area code or exchange.'" (Testimony of FBI director Louis Freeh before a joint hearing of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights and the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology and the Law, March 18, 1994. S. Hrg 103-1022). The drafters of CALEA noted in the Committee report that the statute was not designed to expand law enforcement surveillance ability: "The FBI director testified that the legislation was intended to preserve the status quo, that it was intended to provide law enforcement no more and no less access to information than it had in the past. The Committee urges against over broad interpretation of the requirements." (House Judiciary Committee Report to Accompany H.R. 4922. Rept. 103-827 Part 1, page 22) The FBI's demand that all wireless communications equipment provide the physical locations of a subscriber at all times goes raises obvious privacy issues and goes well beyond the scope of CALEA and the explicit statements of the FBI. No Funds Should Be Appropriated to Implement CALEA Until This Issue is Resolved In passing CALEA, Congress sought to preserve law enforcement's ability to conduct electronic surveillance as new communications technologies are developed. At the same time, Congress was very clear that the law was designed to preserve the status quo and not to expand law enforcement surveillance authority. In addition, Congress took the extra step of including substantial Congressional oversight and public accountability to the implementation process in order to ensure that law enforcement did not overreach and that privacy interests would be protected. The law requires the telecommunications industry to set standards for meeting the FBI's general requirements in an open process, allows interested parties to challenge any standard before the FCC if it fails to protect privacy, and requires Congressional oversight and accountability over the implementation of the law by mandating government reimbursement for expensive capability upgrades. We urge Congress to exercise its oversight role to determine whether in fact the FBI is seeking to use CALEA to expand its current surveillance capabilities contrary to the intent of the law. Unless and until the FBI clarifies its intent and justifies its demands, Congress should not allow the expenditure of any funds to implement CALEA. We look forward to discussing this issue with you further. If you have any questions please contact: Center for Democracy and Technology +1.202.637.9800 Danny Weitzner, Deputy Director Jonah Seiger, Policy Analyst ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (3) SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION Be sure you are up to date on the latest public policy issues affecting civil liberties online and how they will affect you! Subscribe to the CDT Policy Post news distribution list. CDT Policy Posts, the regular news publication of the Center For Democracy and Technology, are received by nearly 10,000 Internet users, industry leaders, policy makers and activists, and have become the leading source for information about critical free speech and privacy issues affecting the Internet and other interactive communications media. To subscribe to CDT's Policy Post list, send mail to policy-posts-request@cdt.org with a subject: subscribe policy-posts If you ever wish to remove yourself from the list, send mail to the above address with a subject of: unsubscribe policy-posts ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (4) ABOUT THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY/CONTACTING US The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest organization based in Washington, DC. The Center's mission is to develop and advocate public policies that advance democratic values and constitutional civil liberties in new computer and communications technologies. Contacting us: General information: info@cdt.org World Wide Web: URL:http://www.cdt.org/ FTP URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/ Snail Mail: The Center for Democracy and Technology 1634 Eye Street NW * Suite 1100 * Washington, DC 20006 (v) +1.202.637.9800 * (f) +1.202.637.0968 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- End Policy Post 2.32 9/20/96 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Subject: Kevin Poulson Update Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:08:29 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Hacker is freed but he's banned from computers By Brandon Bailey Mercury News Staff Writer Convicted hacker Kevin Poulsen is out of prison after five years, but he still can't touch a computer. Facing a court order to pay more than $57,000 in restitution for rigging a series of radio station call-in contests, Poulsen has complained that authorities won't let him use his only marketable skill -- programming. Instead, Poulsen said, he's doomed to work for minimum wage at a low-tech job for the next three years. Since his June release from prison -- after serving more time behind bars than any other U.S. hacker -- the only work he's found is canvassing door to door for a liberal political action group. It's a big change for the 30-year-old Poulsen, once among the most notorious hackers on the West Coast. A former employee at SRI International in Menlo Park, he was featured on television's "America's Most Wanted" while living underground in Los Angeles as a federal fugitive from 1989 to 1991. Before authorities caught him, Poulsen burglarized telephone company offices, electronically snooped through records of law enforcement wiretaps and jammed radio station phone lines in a scheme to win cash, sports cars and a trip to Hawaii. Poulsen now lives with his sister in the Los Angeles area, where he grew up in the 1970s and '80s. But he must remain under official supervision for three more years. And it galls him that authorities won't trust him with a keyboard or a mouse. U.S. District Judge Manuel Real has forbidden Poulsen to have any access to a computer without his probation officer's approval. That's a crippling restriction in a society so reliant on computer technology, Poulsen complained in a telephone interview after a hearing last week in which the judge denied Poulsen's request to modify his terms of probation. To comply with those rules, Poulsen said, his parents had to put their home computer in storage when he stayed with them. He can't use an electronic card catalog at the public library. And he relies on friends to maintain his World Wide Web site. He even asked his probation officer whether it was OK to drive because most cars contain microchips. Living under government supervision apparently hasn't dampened the acerbic wit Poulsen displayed over the years. Prankster humor When authorities were tracking him, they found he'd kept photographs of himself, taken while burglarizing phone company offices, and that he'd created bogus identities in the names of favorite comic book characters. Today, you can click on Poulsen's web page (http://www.catalog.com/kevin) and read his account of his troubles with the law. Until it was revised Friday, you could click on the highlighted words "my probation officer" -- and see the scary red face of Satan. But though he's still chafing at authority, Poulsen insists he's ready to be a law-abiding citizen. "The important thing to me," he said, "is just not wasting the next three years of my life." He said he's submitted nearly 70 job applications but has found work only with the political group, which he declined to identify. Poulsen, who earned his high school diploma behind bars, said he wants to get a college degree. But authorities vetoed his plans to study computer science while working part-time because they want him to put first priority on earning money for restitution. Poulsen's federal probation officer, Marc Stein, said office policy prevents him from commenting on the case. Poulsen's court-appointed attorney, Michael Brennan, also declined comment. Differing view But Assistant U.S. Attorney David Schindler partly disputed Poulsen's account. "Nobody wants to see Mr. Poulsen fail," said Schindler, who has prosecuted both Poulsen and Kevin Mitnick, another young man from the San Fernando Valley whose interest in computers and telephones became a passion that led to federal charges. Schindler said Stein is simply being prudent: "It would be irresponsible for the probation office to permit him to have unfettered access to computers." Legal experts say there's precedent for restricting a hacker's access to computers, just as paroled felons may be ordered not to possess burglary tools or firearms. Still, some say it's going too far. "There are so many benign things one can do with a computer," said Charles Marson, a former attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who handles high-tech cases in private practice. "If it were a typewriter and he pulled some scam with it or wrote a threatening note, would you condition his probation on not using a typewriter?" But Carey Heckman, co-director of the Law and Technology Policy Center at Stanford University, suggested another analogy: "Would you want to put an arsonist to work in a match factory?" Friends defend Poulsen. Over the years, Poulsen's friends and defense lawyers have argued that prosecutors exaggerated the threat he posed, either because law officers didn't understand the technology he was using or because his actions seemed to flaunt authority. Hacking is "sort of a youthful rebellion thing," Poulsen says now. "I'm far too old to get back into that stuff." But others who've followed Poulsen's career note that he had earlier chances to reform. He was first busted for hacking into university and government computers as a teen-ager. While an older accomplice went to jail, Poulsen was offered a job working with computers at SRI, the private think tank that does consulting for the Defense Department and other clients. There, Poulsen embarked on a double life: A legitimate programmer by day, he began breaking into Pacific Bell offices and hacking into phone company computers at night. When he learned FBI agents were on his trail, he used his skills to track their moves. Before going underground in 1989, he also obtained records of secret wiretaps from unrelated investigations. Though Poulsen said he never tipped off the targets, authorities said they had to take steps to ensure those cases weren't compromised. According to Schindler, the probation office will consider Poulsen's requests to use computers "on a case-by-case basis." ------------------ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Carey Heckman's analogy is a very strange one indeed. I wonder what his reasoning was? He obviously does not know much about arsonists. Matches and various inflammable materials are available everywhere. One does not have to work in a match factory to obtain matches. Furthermore, arsonists are not tempted by matches. They commit that crime for various reasons, but the presence of matches has nothing to do with it. Next point: If Kevin Poulsen is not allowed access to computers, how is it he has a web page? I mean, they don't just pop out of nowhere. I suppose his friends might have worked on it for him, without him actually touching the keys on the computer, etc, but that would seem to violate the spirit of the injunction against him if not the actual letter of the injunction itself. Also: It certainly *is* the intent of the federal authorities to see Kevin fail in life. No law enforcement officer from the local police officer through Janet Reno ever want to see someone they have decided is a criminal to be able to climb out of the hole they toss them in and make any sort of recovery. Ask any police officer if an important thing is not to keep the people they arrest discredited, without any resources to fight back, and as incommunicado as possible. If the person is able to find a job anywhere, the first thing you know they are going to have some money and be hiring some private attorney to represent them and give some back-talk to the government. It is far better in the eyes of the law enforcement personnel in this country to keep the people they have decided are criminals in as precarious a situation as possible both financially and socially. That way there is a better chance the person will screw up and they can lock him up again. I do not mean to excuse what Kevin Poulsen did in the past or what he might choose to do in the future but it is very hypocritical of the government to talk on the one hand about paying one's debt to society and then fixing things so for all intents and purposes the debt never does get paid. Obviously the government has to do that to keep control over Kevin, but wouldn't a far better solution be to sit him down and tell him, "Kevin, do whatever you want with computers, but now you are a two-time loser and the next time makes three. If we catch you again, hell will freeze over before you get out of prison ... " and then let *him* decide where to go with his life. Does the government really think he could not obey the letter of their injunction against him while instructing friends what keys to press on the keyboard? Are they going to suggest he had no input into the contents of his web page? Probably law enforcement feels they would have been better off to convince the judge to let them give him a lobotomy; that would have ended his impure thoughts once and for all. By the way, did they also forbid him to use a touchtone phone? If not, why not? They seem to want to insure he fails in life and screws up again. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 13:46:56 -0400 From: capsalad@gate.net Subject: Availability of Special ISDN Customer Premises Equipment? Organization: Nortel DMS-10 Feature Test 1 - Morrisville, NC Hello there, I'm researching some new ISDN features for Nortel from a validation perspective, and I can't seem to locate any CPE equipment which makes use of User-to-User Signaling or Access Transport features (low- and high-layer compatibility, calling and called party subaddresses). Are there, in fact, any currently available Type I (BRI) devices that make use of this information? The 2/94 NIUF ISDN Solutions Catalog (is there a more recent edition?) lists only one UUS application, which involves call-center load balancing between PBXs using PRI. The catalog further notes that UUI transfer is a proprietary feature (AAARGGHH!), and that "NI-2 does not assure interoperable user-to-user information transfer. Each PBX must have PRI access onto switching systems with comparable UUI treatment. Similarly, PBXs that implement the application do so in a proprietary manner." Can anyone help me get a high-level understanding of what the UUS and ATP features are for, why anyone would want them, and how they might be used? I'm drawing a blank here. TR-845 and TR-444 are not exactly clarifying the issue, if you know what I mean and I think you do. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Dave Schulman Validation Engineer, Feature Test I Nortel, Inc. Dept. 3K57 (ESN = 263) 400 Perimeter Park Drive (919) 905-4844 (Voice) Morrisville, NC 27560 (919) 905-2549 (FAX) ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: Nynex Penalties, was Re: Articles Don't Flatter RBOCs or Cable Date: 23 Sep 1996 14:52:56 -0400 In cc004056@interramp.com (Greg Monti) writes: > In {The Wall Street Journal} during the week of September 16 to 20, > several articles appeared which don't bode well for the Bell Operating > Companies or cable systems. > Regulators in Nynex's states have to approve the merger and are > loathe to do so. New York State, for example, sets benchmarks for > customer service. The benchmarks get tougher with each passing year > and cover items such as showing up on time for appointments, > answering telephones in a timely manner, and fixing serious problems > within the 24 hours observed by most other phone companies across > the USA. And which is also (the 24 business hour timeframe) specifically referenced in NYS law. > New York State charges Nynex cash penalties for each shortfall. So > far in 1996, Nynex has paid $19 million in penalties to New York. It > has also paid $20 million in penalties to Massachusetts in the last > two years. One key clarification should be added here: Nynex's penalty money doesn't merely go back into the gummint's endless wallet. Most of that money is, in fact, rebated to customers as a credit on a phone bill. Earlier this year people in the NYC area (aside from midtown, where service was supposedly good) got a (roughly) $9 credit on their bills. There's another (approx) $2 coming in the next round. Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 12:57:51 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Erata on EXchange Names in NYC/NJ In the transcription of the Engelwood NJ customer Long Distance Dialing booklet, I accidently mis-spelled a few EXchange names indicated in northern NJ and for New York City. The *significant* first two letters were okay, but the remainder of the name was accidently mis-spelled: I showed: It SHOULD be: (NJ) BEllville-2 BElleville-2 (add an "e" at the end of "Belle-") ^ ^ (NJ) BOnton-8 BOonton-8 (an extra "o") ^ (NJ) PRescot-x PRescott-x (TWO "t's" at the end) ^ (NYC) BEckman-3 BEekman-3 (the "c" should be an "e") ^ ^ (NYC) TOllenville-8 TOttenville-8 (double "t's", not double "l's") ^^ ^^ and for New York City, I also inadvertantly omitted "STillwell-x". There was the '*' indicated on this exchange rather than a *particular* numberical for the third, as there were more than one STillwell three-dialpull prefix used in the New York City area. 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 ------------------------------ 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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 #506 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Sep 24 18:09:05 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id SAA10927; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 18:09:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 18:09:05 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609242209.SAA10927@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #507 TELECOM Digest Tue, 24 Sep 96 18:09:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 507 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AOL Wins Latest Round on Junk E-Mail (Curtis Wheeler) Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name (Jeff Colbert) Re: Bellcore Selling Out to Defense Contracter "SAIC" (John Cropper) Re: Three-Way Calling Scam (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street (Gary Sanders) Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street (GreivAngel) Re: Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) (D. Clayton) Re: Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) (B. Franken) Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic (Joel M. Hoffman) Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic (Bill Mayhew) Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic (Stephen Balbach) Re: BANM Ends Equal Access (Mark Smith) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Curtis Wheeler Subject: AOL Wins Latest Round on Junk E-Mail Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 14:02:24 -0700 Organization: Just Me and My Own Opinions Reply-To: cwheeler@ricochet.net Excerpt from WSJ 9/23. America Online Wins Rounds In Suits Over E-Mail, Billing By THOMAS E. WEBER Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL America Online Inc., in the midst of an effort to revitalize its growth, won rounds in separate legal battles over electronic junk mail and the service's billing practices. In one of the cases, AOL received permission to resume blocking junk e-mail to its members as a federal appeals court in Philadelphia vacated a restraining order. In the other, a judge in San Francisco tentatively approved the proposed settlement of a class-action lawsuit by members who alleged they had been improperly charged by AOL. [several more paragraphs follw but you get the idea] Curtis KD6ELA / GROL / PP-ASEL ------------------------------ From: Jeff Colbert Subject: Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 16:45:48 -0500 Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc. Reply-To: jcolbert@earthlink.net That is just one of many reasons I "try" to not buy Chinese produced goods. I say try, because it is virtually impossible to buy almost anything with out it being made in China. Burns my barnacles, but until government is not beholden to big business, or consumers care about something more than price, this will continue to be a problem. Jeff ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: Bellcore Selling Out to Defense Contracter "SAIC" Date: 23 Sep 1996 20:07:49 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 23, 1996 11:52:34 in article , 'danny burstein ' wrote: > via WSJ recently: > Note: SAIC also wears another hat, namely (the) Internic ... > Report: Baby Bells Poised to Sell Research Arm to Defense > NEW YORK (AP) - The seven Baby Bell telephone companies are poised to > sell their research cooperative Bellcore to a defense contractor for > about $700 million, {The Wall Street Journal} reported today. > The sale would end a jointly-owned arrangement that began a dozen > years ago with the breakup of the old AT&T empire. > The newspaper said the sale of Bellcore to Science Applications > International Corp., an employee-owned defense contractor based in San > Diego, could be announced as early as this week. Why not? Jim Deak considers NPA information as if it's a military secret now, might as well 'close the loop'. (Talk about trying to get blood from a stone!) > The deal is subject to approval by the boards of all seven phone > companies, the newspaper said. > Bellcore spokeswoman Barbara McClurken said today that "no decision to > sell the company has been made at this time." > "Bellcore cannot comment on prospective buyers or about any board > deliberations as this information is confidential," McClurken said. See what I mean? I'm sure anyone found leaking info will be drawn and quartered on the south lawn at high noon ... 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 : 6o9.637.943o email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 16:17:19 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Three-Way Calling Scam > (I wonder if the blocking they are describing is some sort of > selective blocking of three-way calls from prisons? I have heard of > this before, but don't know how it works. The outgoing prison phone > calls must be class marked in some way. Tad Cook - tad@ssc.com) (text deleted, about prison calls to unsuspecting customers requesting an additional three-way connection be added on.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone should mention that the young, > the naive and the mentally-disabled will be with us always. Maybe > someone could stop the world so the rest of us can get off. I am not > aware of three-way calling being a 'use on demand' feature available > by default like (for instance) 'return last call'. Is it that way also? > Perhaps it is at some telcos. The blocking referred to is where you can get the 'per-use' three-way feature blocked/restricted, similar to requesting a blocking on 'per-use' "repeat-dialing" (*66=1166) or "call-return" (*69=11-69), or blocking access to 976, 1/0+900-, or blocking access to toll (1+), international (011+), or blocking access to other codes or pay-per-call codes or prefixes. Yes, Pat, BellSouth *does* offer 'per-use' three-way calling. I mentioned this in the Digest in an earlier article about a month ago. About ten years ago, Bell began 'per-use' three-way, but you had to dial *71 (=1171) first, before dialing the first 'leg' of the three-way call. When dialing *71/1171, you'd get the 'three beeps' and then a second dialtone. You'd dial the first 'leg' of the three-way call. When the party answered, you'd then flash, get the 'three beeps' and then a second dialtone, when you could dial the second 'leg' of the three-way call. You didn't have flash privilages on incoming calls to add a third party, and you couldn't add a third party on an already existing outgoing call unless you had originally dialed *71/1171. (Of course, you had full flashing privilages if you *subscribed* to three-way calling on a monthly basis). This feature code only works in non-digital central offices (#1AESS). The cost for a completed 'per-use' three-way call was about one dollar. Blocking against dialing the *71/1171 code has always been available upon request Late last year or early this year, BellSouth began to offer 'per-use' *66/1166 and 'per-use' *69/1169 to *ALL* lines, at 75-cents a pop, unless you already subscribed to them on a monthly basis. They also dropped the charge for 'per-use' three-way to 75-cents a pop. *AND* they added 'per-use' three-way to digital switches (#5ESS, DMS, etc), but NOT by requiring dialing *71/1171 before the call (which is still how you activate the 'per-use' three-way feature from non-digital #1AESS switches), but by *ADDING FULL FLASHING PRIVILAGES to ALL* non-coin or non-PBX or otherwise non-restricted lines. Three-way flashing can be done in the middle of a call, whether the original call was incoming or outgoing. If you do NOT subscribe to monthly three-way calling, any completed three-way with unrestricted flashing will cost 75-cents a pop. Blocking against the feature is available. Many parents have been hit with $20.00 or more of three-way calls activated by 'the kids', and many businesses have been hit by such done by their employees. However, this is three-way, but not call-transfer. Once the three-way 'controlling party' hangs up, whether they have monthly three-way or do a 'per-use' three-way', the full connection is dropped. 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: gws@monroe.cb.att.com (Gary Sanders) Subject: Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street Date: 23 Sep 1996 16:26:55 GMT Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Columbus Ohio. Reply-To: gary.w.sanders@att.com > LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Hackers are breaking into telephone line boxes and > tapping dial tones belonging to businesses and homes, selling access > on the street using a special hand-held receiver. Hmm, I wonder how many people on the list have a special hand-held receiver? Guess that makes up special people too -:) > The practice emerged early this year. Authorities believe several > million dollars in illegal calls have been rung up since January. You would have though that people would have though about tapping lines a long time ago.. -:) > As many as 15 incidents a week are now reported in California alone, > Pacific Bell said. > The highly skilled scam artists typically are former phone company > employees or others with extensive knowledge of telephones, investigators > say. Didnt know a butt set required that much extensive knowledge to use.. -:) Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR) gws@sunray.cb.att.com AT&T Columbus,Ohio 614-860-5965 Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine. ------------------------------ From: greivangel@aol.com (GreivAngel) Subject: Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street Date: 23 Sep 1996 20:03:38 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: greivangel@aol.com (GreivAngel) You think this is news? A suggestion. Lock all demarcation points! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, it is coming to that as new installations are done and secure boxes installed. The trouble is, there are lots of old installations dating from the 1930-50's era still around, and typically they tend to be in older inner-city areas where the problems described seem to be in abundance. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 00:01:55 GMT Organization: Customer of Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) wrote: > joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) writes: >> Yes, but cellular phone use is banned in airplanes even when they are >> on the ground in the airport. >That's< what I don't understand. If >> you're stuck in a plane, on the ground, waiting 90 minutes to take >> off, it would be especially convenient to be able to call the pople >> planning on picking you up. But you can't, at least not with your >> cell phone. > Hmm, the last several flights I've been on (using American Airlines > and Midway), you *have* been allowed to use cellphones on the plane > before takeoff. Right before departure, the crew does caution people > to stop using electronic devices (including cellphones). Of course, > once the plane has attained cruising altitude and other electronic > devices are permitted again (laptops, Walkmans, etc.), you still can't > use cellphones due to the cell-swamping problem. But that's an FCC > rule, isn't it? Whereas using your phone on the ground or during > takeoff/landing is something that the FAA needs to care about, for > safety reasons. Airlines and captains appear to have a lot of > discretion in this matter, so perhaps you've just run into airlines or > pilots who impose a "no cellphones, period" rule instead of just > banning them during instrument-critical periods such as takeoff. In Australia you are not allowed to use cellphones at any time while on board a plane, and the rules for other devices seem similar. I believe that the current theory is that the EMI, (Electro Magnetic Interference), emissions from these devices MAY find their way into on board systems, (that were designed long before anyone started taking their own EMI emitting devices onto planes). The EMI problem is cumulative, that is a small number of active lap tops, computer games, cell phones etc. may not cause a noticeable problem, but when 40 or more of these devices are operating then the background EMI "noise" may reach a problem level. This can be a bigger with GSM cell phones, whose Time Division Modulated carrier produces a noticeable and annoying interference compared to AMPS phones with their continuous carrier. In hospital Intensive Care Units in Australia, cell phone use is also banned, (although some hospitals themselves use low power internal PCS type systems connected to their PBX's). With a lot of the more modern aircraft now being 'fly by wire' i.e. computer controlled, I would not want to risk having EMI from a cell phone getting into any of the systems and causing problems, even if the risk is smaller than 1000:1, I do not want to take those odds when I fly. Until aircraft are designed to exclude EMI from inside, we may find the using any device that emits EMI an unacceptable risk. (E.G. waiting in queue on runway, cell phone call EMI gets into throttle control system, plane accelerates into the back of the aircraft in front of it - ouch!). Now back to signal propagation, a few years ago in Sydney, I was having dinner in the revolving restaurant at Centerpoint Tower, (a building which reaches the height of the tallest towers in town). I answered a call on my GSM phone and was involved in a conversation which went long enough to cause quite a lot of problems which I believe were due to my phone having good signal access to too many cell sites at the same time. As the restaurant rotated, I think that the network could not decide which cell to 'hand off' the call to, as the signal from my phone was reaching too many cells at the same time. Because the network was designed to expect a strong signal in one cell, with weaker signals in adjacent cells, simultaneous strong signals in many cells seem cause confusion, perhaps similar problem may occur when airborne?. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 02:20:40 GMT In article , Bob Goudreau wrote: > Hmm, the last several flights I've been on (using American Airlines > and Midway), you *have* been allowed to use cellphones on the plane > before takeoff. Right before departure, the crew does caution people > to stop using electronic devices (including cellphones). Of course, > once the plane has attained cruising altitude and other electronic > devices are permitted again (laptops, Walkmans, etc.), you still can't > use cellphones due to the cell-swamping problem. But that's an FCC > rule, isn't it? Yes. And as such, using a cell phone from the air is illegal even in private aircraft. > Whereas using your phone on the ground or during > takeoff/landing is something that the FAA needs to care about, for > safety reasons. Airlines and captains appear to have a lot of > discretion in this matter, so perhaps you've just run into airlines or > pilots who impose a "no cellphones, period" rule instead of just > banning them during instrument-critical periods such as takeoff. Most airlines (i.e. any that I've flown) ban everything during takeoff and once aloft, ban everything designed to transmit or receive radio signals. This is all of their own accord -- the government doesn't have any requirements in this area (except the FCC ban on cell phone usage). A recent IEE Spectrum had a "cover story" on this issue. Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Sep 96 14:30:00 EDT From: joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic Organization: Excelsior Computer Services > exceed your callpack. Genuine flat rate is $239/month in NJ, a > whopping $10 less than BA wanted, and only around $229 above analog. > Hit 'em hard with a wet noodle, that NJ BPU! This is about the same > result that BA got in MD, the state historically best known for competing > with NJ for the title of "finest government that money can buy". I don't understand why anyone uses ISDN. I can get a 28.8 modem connection for about $20/mo. Allowing for problems with the digital/analog interfaces, and problems with multiplexing, the bottom line is about $1/Kbaud of bandwidth. What do I get for $239/mo.? 64K? I don't see why this is good. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: Bill Mayhew Subject: Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 16:17:40 -0400 Organization: TWC Roadrunner Service Reply-To: bmayhew@neo.lrun.com To call B-A's rates, "Stratospheric," would probably be putting it mildly. They'll probably be able to sell ISDN to, say maybe, a half dozen or so customers at those rates! Compare that to what we pay here in Ohio: http://www.ameritech.com/products/data/teamdata/pricing/7042ohrp.html My internet connection here at home is on a 2B+D residential ISDN with message rate service, which is about $40 per month with taxes. No limit on total number of hours, 30 calls per B per month. My router usually only has to make one or two calls per B per month, so I've never come anywhere near having to worry about paying the princely sum of $0.08 per call above the 30 per line! My average call duration is around 20 days. At least there are some advantages to living in the rust-belt! Bill Mayhew bmayhew@neo.lrun.com ... or ... wtm@itelcom.com http://www.itelcom.com on foot: 41 07' 45"N, 81 30' 05"W "If nothing is what I get, then that's what I want." - Frank Zappa ------------------------------ From: stephen@clark.net (Stephen Balbach) Subject: Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic Date: 23 Sep 1996 21:13:44 GMT Organization: Clark Internet Services, Balt/DC, mail all-info@clark.net In article , Dave Perrussell wrote: > Why does ISDN **STILL** cost so much? I don't see this as much of a > "reduction" in rates. > Does ISDN cost the phone company (i.e. Bell Atlantic) more than a > regular POTS line? If so, how much does it REALLY cost? The question is not why does ISDN cost so much, but why do POTS line cost so little? Why do we get to stay online 24x7 for $20/month? Government regulation of "equal access" is why. Why does Bell Atlantic charge so much for ISDN? Because they can. Why? Because there is no-one else offering it. Why? Because of sixty years of government regulation in order to provide "equal access" POTS lines. So whats the REAL cost of a flat rate $20/month POTS line? Lack of competiton and price, lack of diversity of offerings. This is changing, but it takes a long time to dismantle the damage of so many years of government regulatory effects. Stephen Balbach VP, ClarkNet info@clark.net ------------------------------ From: Mark Smith Subject: Re: BANM Ends Equal Access Date: Tue, 24 Sep 96 15:00:22 EDT Organization: New Jersey Computer Connection, Lawrenceville, NJ In article , wrote: > I have a Bell Atlantic/NYNEX mobile phone subscription. I went to one > of their stores a couple of days ago to change my interexchange carrier > PIC. To my surprise I was told that they are no longer subject to Equal > Access rules and that if I wanted anyone other than BANM as my IXC it > would cost me $1.00 per month. I was told the same thing on their > customer service 800 line, but when I complained that they were trying > to change the terms of my contract, they "waived" the charge and changed > my PIC within a few minutes. This is due to the telecom bill. I was told by my BANM rep (in the Philly region) that anyone whose account was created before June, 1996 would be exempt from this charge, but that any new accounts had to use their carrier or pay. Mark ------------------------------ 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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 #507 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Sep 24 20:48:46 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id UAA28614; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 20:48:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 20:48:46 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609250048.UAA28614@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #508 TELECOM Digest Tue, 24 Sep 96 20:48:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 508 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Core Java" by Cornell/Horstmann (Rob Slade) ISPs' Information on Users (Monty Solomon) Most Home Users Picking Independent ISPs (Tad Cook) Is Undesirable Internet Advertising Increasing? (Lisa Hancock) Text Processing Under Windows (Jeremy Parsons) Where to Find Orange Card HQ (Steve Pershing) Re: Excel Telecommunications Offer to School (John R. Levine) Re: Excel Telecommunications Offer to School (Mike Seebeck) Rolm Phone System and IVR (Bradley Clark) For Sale: Brooktrout QuadraFAX 4-Line Fax-on-Demand System (Robert Wilson) Re: Telephone Scam Referring to 809 (But What About Splits?) (Matt Landry) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 15:23:24 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Core Java" by Cornell/Horstmann BKCORJAV.RVW 960606 "Core Java", Gary Cornell/Cay S. Horstmann, 1996, 0-13-565755-5, U$39.95/C$53.95 %A Gary Cornell 75720.1524 %A Cay S. Horstmann %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1996 %G 0-13-565755-5 %I Prentice Hall %O U$39.95/C$53.95 +1-201-236-7139 fax: +1-201-236-7131 %P 622 %S Java Series %T "Core Java" Calling a six hundred page book an introduction sounds a bit like a joke about German essays. Still, that is what Cornell and Horstmann have produced, and a very good introduction it is. Particularly if you have Windows 95/NT, this package gives you everything that you need to start working with Java -- and working properly. Unlike all too many other Java texts, this one does not automatically assume that you know C, C++, and object-oriented programming. That fact alone makes it a first class choice for those budding Webmasters who want to get in on the Java game. The background and concepts behind the language are explained, as well as the necessary commands and syntax to get started. Object-orientation is presented and explained very clearly. Experienced programmers are not left out. Icons indicate special tips for those who have worked with C++ and Visual Basic. The text can therefore be rapidly skimmed when a programmer is practiced in coding already. The book is an introduction: it is not design in a reference format. Those who go on to serious Java programming will likely want to look at a guide such as Flanagan's "Java in a Nutshell" (cf. BKJAVANS.RVW), but this is definitely the place to start. The four titles in the Sunsoft Press Java Series share a common CD-ROM. In the case of the current book and a system running Windows 95 or Windows NT, you are provided with the software and instructions for three possible development environments: a "Lite" version of Symantec's Cafe, the raw Sun JDK (Java Developer's Kit) and your favorite editor, or the JDK integrated with a customized version of WinEdit. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKCORJAV.RVW 960606. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca Institute for rslade@vcn.bc.ca Research into Rob.Slade@f733.n153.z1/ User .fidonet.org Security Canada V7K 2G6 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 01:49:59 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ISPs' Information on Users Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 01:18:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Agre Subject: ISPs' Information on Users 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, 20 Sep 1996 19:16:19 +0200 From: steve@isys.hu (Steven Carlson) To: hungary-online-announce@hungary.yak.net Subject: (HOL-A) It's a Brave Old World ------------------------------ Brave Old World: Reflections on Europe in the Digital Age by Steven Carlson; 20 Sep 1996 ------------------------------ ** So Much Fuss About A Bottle Of Ketchup Hungarian police recently sent a fax around to the local Internet service providers (ISPs) asking them to provide lists of their users in Esztergom, a small town outside of Budapest. It seems somebody had planted a bomb in a bottle of ketchup. Since everyone knows you can download bomb-making instructions from the Internet, the police figured they should investigate the local users. No, I'm not making this up. What's more, nearly every local ISP gave the police this information. Fortunately my company has no users in Esztergom and so that's what we told the police. We got off lucky. Believe me, as much as might want to make a stand for privacy of information my company is NOT eager to do battle with the Hungarian authorities. But that's what it might take. Because if the Hungarian police really understood the Internet they could have asked for even more. For example, it would only take a few keystrokes to forward a users' mail to the authorities. The police might also have asked for old email, since many ISPs back this up routinely. But that's not all. Some ISPs run caching servers, machines that store frequently-viewed webpages so that users access them locally rather than across the net. An ISP's caching server could give the police a profile of what web pages the users have been browsing. I'm not trying to scare anyone. My point is that sharing information on the Internet is a two-way street. Computers keep extensive records. Using the Internet often means you leave a trail behind you. This is part of life in the digital age. This "electronic trail" is not unique to the Internet. Every time you use a credit card you create a record in several computers. Other computers may be storing information about you such as your medical history, driving record, tax filings and so on. The more we rely on computers to manage our affairs, the more information that may be "out there." This means citizens in the digital age should know their rights. Many governments already have laws to protect private information. For example, the US has many laws restricting access to sensitive information such as medical and credit records. You might be surprised to know Hungary passed a law in 1991 to prevent misuse of information associated with the national identity card. Yet the growth of new technologies is outpacing legislation. For example, Holland and other countries are experimenting with "smart road" systems that can identify the licence number of a moving car for purposes of toll collection. Cellular phones and satellite navigation systems can report the locations of their users. It's not difficult to imagine how these and other technologies could be abused. Of course, now you know that even your local Internet provider has access to some rather sensitive information about you. This leads me to ask: what sort of service is your Internet provider actually offering? When it comes down to it, your ISP is like your doctor, your lawyer, your accountant or your psychiatrist. Each of these professionals deals with your data; each profession is governed by a code of ethics, written or implicit. Moreover these limits are codified in law. If your accountant allowed your competitors to read the company books, you could take him to court. Similarly, your Internet provider has an implicit duty to protect the privacy of your communication. Most professionals in my industry recognize this. I know most of the people working in Hungarian Internet and I doubt very much that they are reading your mail or mine. But they don't know where they stand in the eyes of the law. Internet professionals should certainly assist the police in a legitimate investigation. But should every Internet user in Esztergom be investigated just because they could (theoretically) find bomb-making information on the Internet? To hammer that point home a local Internet-based magazine has published, in Hungarian, complete bomb-making instructions: . In other words, if you've read this far you may be the subject of a future investigation. Have a nice day! ** Further Links: The Electronic Frontier Foundation The International Electronic Rights Server The Electronic Privacy Information Center Copyright (c) 1996. Permission granted to redistribute this article in electronic form for non-profit purposes only. My byline and this message must remain intact. Contact me for reprint rights. ------------------------------ Subject: Most Home Users Picking Independent ISPs Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 15:40:26 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) U.S. households shift to direct Web access--report SAN FRANCISCO (Reuter) - U.S. households with direct access to the Internet via an Internet service provider (ISP) now outnumber homes where computer users reach the Internet via a commercial online service, according to a new study. Market research firm Odyssey said its latest Homefront survey, released Monday, found that 48 percent of households surfing the Internet from home are using an ISP, while 35 percent use a commercial online service for Internet access. The findings represent a sharp turnaround from six months ago, when it found 54 percent of at-home Internet surfers used commercial online services, the research firm said. At the time only about 30 percent of home computer users gained access to the Internet via Internet service providers. The new survey found that the Internet is changing the way consumers evaluate a commercial online service and that the importance of proprietary content is "clearly decreasing." When asked to choose between the importance of quality of access to the Internet and quality of proprietary content, 41 percent chose quality of access to the Internet while only 29 percent deemed quality of the online service's proprietary content more important, the researchers said. Six months ago 37 percent chose content over Internet access. Odyssey President Nick Donatiello said this indicates that online service providers have not risen to the challenge posed by ISPs. "Commercial online services have to convince consumers that they are better on some dimension that's important, if not proprietary content, then ease-of-use, or content packaging, or customization, or something," Donatiello said. "Pathetically slow Internet gateways and pricing schemes that seem to ignore the fact that they are now competing directly with ISPs just make it harder," he said. Odyssey also said its latest study showed that 14 percent of U.S. households are now on-line. The survey showed America Online's market share rose to 18 percent of the home PC market, up from 14 percent in January. CompuServe Corp. held 5 percent of the home PC market, down a point from January. CompuServe's recently introduced WOW! family-oriented service accounted for another one percent of the market. International Wireless's Prodigy users accounted for four percent, down from five percent. The market for direct Internet access remains extremely fragmented, the market researchers said. Even the most popular home consumer Internet service provider, Netcom On-Line Communications Inc., has only captured 8 percent of the ISP market, Odyssey said. AT&T Corp.'s WorldNet, the second most popular direct Internet access service, has attracted seven percent, while MCI Communications Corp. and Performance Systems International Inc. have 4 percent each. The rest of the market is divided among a myriad of smaller players. On the browser front, Odyssey's Homefront survey indicated that Netscape Communications Corp. still leads in the battle for at-home World Wide Web surfers versus Microsoft Corp. The Netscape Navigator is more popular than Microsoft's Internet Explorer, with 54 percent of households surfing the Internet using the Netscape version, compared to 6 percent using the Microsoft browser. Odyssey's Homefront study is the largest in-depth national survey tracking the home computing market. Research is based on interviews with 2,000 consumers. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com ------------------------------ From: hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Is Undesirable Internet Advertising Increasing? Date: 24 Sep 1996 03:20:26 GMT Organization: Philadelphia City Paper's City Net When I first started browsing Usenet a few years ago, advertisements were relatively rare. Those who did advertise got flamed. Indeed, I remember one company getting nasty publicity in the newspaper for advertising on the 'net, breaking the "non-profit" taboo. But lately it seems every non moderated newsgroup gets a daily "MAKE MONEY FAST!" ad. Getting unsolicited ads in my email used to be rare, now I get several every day. Is there anything that can be done to discourage this sort of thing? Posting on Usenet is one thing, but I greatly dislike unsolicited email as I'm afraid of overflowing my mailbox and losing legitimate mail. Further, the toll meter of my ISP is running as I go through said messages. (It only takes a few minutes, but it still isn't fair to me.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Has the amount of advertising on the net increased lately? Gee, I hadn't noticed. :) Lisa, I get five or six 'Make Money Fast' messages daily. Appealing to the sysadmins seems pointless. Some have done all they in their power can do to stop it, and others are so overwhelmed with letters of complaint that they have been forced to quit responding. I do not know if it is the *only* thing one can do, but an effective thing one can do is help insure the spammers/junk mailers have nowhere to receive responses in any significant number. In the early days of this scourge, they would give legitimate email addresses, and a few (but very few) still do. After learning the power of an angry and vengeful net community they quickly started forging their return addresses to the best of their ability. Now toll free 800/888 numbers appear quite often, and it would be wise in my opinion to demonstrate the futility of using that method to receive replies as well as the quite expensive nature of a toll-free number when you get a lot of netters replying without ordering your product. I'm not that concerned about them using a regular phone number because the rate of response via a call the caller has to pay for and one the advertiser pays for is about 20:1. Likewise, if they want to give some post office box in Kalamazoo and Timbuk as well expecting people will send a dollar or a credit card number to it, that's fine with me. They will soon learn there is pretty slim pickings that way also. I offer here in this Digest a nice, informative service for a reasonable price ($20 voluntary donation per reader/year) and I can tell you my post office box is not exactly filled to overflowing each day. I don't have to go to the caller's window to receive my mail. Spam and junkmail on the net will cease when the perception that there is profit to be made by such postings no longer exists. Just as the junkmailers discovered this *is* an easy and cheap medium in which to disburse their messages, I think some of them are now beginning to see that you get what you pay for. There will, I am afraid, always be a few Make Money Fast letters to deal with now that the net has become a part of popular culture in America but I believe over the next year or two we may see a substantial decrease in the amount. I would remind you that although Usenet and CB Radio are different in many ways, the similiarities between CB twenty years ago and Usenet today are rather remarkable also. Originally a small number of people were involved in CB; they also prided themselves on being 'anarchists'; any number of gentlemen's agreements held the whole thing together such as informal arrangements for what sorts of topics were dicussed on which channels in the every night/all night 'American Town Hall' as some called it. There were bomb-makers and pirate radio enthusiasts on CB; there were pedophiles doing their thing hanging out on the frequencies the kids would use; there were people engaging in sexual activities with the microphone deliberatly left open -- a sex orgy in progress broadcast over the radio in real time if you wish; nothing now is new at all. And then America found out about CB Radio, when a popular singer named Johnny Cash sang a song about using CB radios in trucks on the highway. Soon, every American had to have a CB and every business place also had to have one to play their advertisments over the air. Have we gone full circle on anything yet? The airwaves became solid heterodyne with nothing but hash, static and dozens of people all talking on top of one another at all times. The loudest stations were the ones run by stores which would put their advertising message on an endless loop tape and play it continuously all night long. All the old gentlemen's agreements the anarchists had made among themselves meant nothing any longer. The fundamental Christians would from time to time go screaming to the FCC asking -- demanding really -- that the FCC ought to 'cut those heathens and their live sex broadcasts off the air ... my child heard one of those on his CB yesterday ...' Finally most people got tired or bored and unplugged the radio, putting it away on a shelf in the closet somewhere. If you turn on a CB today (and yes, CB is still around) there are large pieces of spectrum which just essentially wasteland; you hear nothing except static with an occassional very loud obnoxious person several hundred miles away hooting and hollering and looking for some other loud mouth to talk with. He is running a couple thousand watts of power, splashing all over the band on several channels besides the one he intends to be on. The 'spammers' and 'junkmailers' of CB gave up on it as any viable (for their purposes) advertising medium years ago. Give them time, they'll eventually go away from here also. I just hope too many computers do not get unplugged and stored away in the closet before that time how- ever. I love having so many people getting on the net, don't you? I hate so many people getting on the net, don't you? In the old times, I never imagined myself getting out of CB and giving up on it. I guess I cannot imagine getting out of the net community either. Hang in there people; I think it will get a little worse, and then start to get better, even if the net of the 1980's never is recovered. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jeremy Parsons Subject: Text Processing Under Windows Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 13:52:01 -0400 It may look a bit off-topic, but increasingly I am finding I need to process text into other applications (Word processing mostly, but also spreadsheets and databases), for instance, the very useful information on country codes and area code assignments posted here. I only have access to a Windows machine, and while just about everything I want to do can be done in time by Microsoft Word, it's always tedious and often error-prone. This is frustrating when I know exactly how to do what I want using one of the common UNIX shells and some of the standard tools (especially awk). After a long search I have failed to unearth any commercial software, shareware or freeware to do this - frustratingly a few years ago I used just such a package under DOS but can't remember what it was. Can anyone help me with this? You'll earn my undying gratitude and the prospect of a beer next time you're in the Cayman Islands! ------------------------------ From: sp@questor.org (Steve Pershing) Subject: Where to Find Orange Card HQ Date: 24 Sep 1996 16:49:44 GMT Organization: The Questor Project - Phone: +1 604 687 4777 A few years ago I subscribed to the "Orange Card", a service which provides $0.25/m calling via an 800 number, anywhere in the USA. Not too long ago, I changed my mailing address and wanted to inform Orange Card of the change. Thus far, all the numbers I have tried for them in Minnesota are either disconnected or go to a modem. The 800 number they list for "service" on the back of the card goes to "LCI" who know little of how to find them. Can anyone help with a working number for Orange Card, where I might speak with a human? :-) Thanks in advance ... Steve Pershing [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am told Orange Card is out of business as of a year or so ago. All they ever were from the beginning was a contractor marketing the long distance service of LCI, so I think you would be safe in giving your address change to the LCI people. The last I heard, LCI was continuing to honor the 25 cent per minute with no surcharge rate for those customers whose account numbers indicated they had been signed up via Orange and that promotion. The nice thing about that promotion was it was great for people needing to make a large number of very short (one to three minutes in length) calls each day from payphones, etc. Unlike the other calling card plans where you get cheap per-minute rates after the first minute and have to pay a surcharge per call, the gimmick from Orange was no surcharge, and somewhat more expensive per minute rates. I think we calculated here in the Digest a few years ago that the cross-over point was after a call of six or seven minutes, at which point AT&T's surcharge would have been amortized or leveled out per minute and the total cost of the call would then be less on AT&T/Sprint, etc and more expensive on Orange. You may recall they also had the 'Orange Phone' which was a COCOT rigged for 25 cents per minute rates all over the USA starting with a dollar for the first four minutes. Now, a lot of COCOTs have that rate for their long distance direct dial calls. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Sep 96 10:44 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Excel Telecommunications Offer to School Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > A rep from Excel Telecommunications was the guest speaker at a > "Parents for Riverside Drive School" meeting that I recently > attended. The pitch was something like this: If we (the board of > directors of the school) could get every parent to switch their long > distance carrier to Excel every month 5% of every person's long > distance phone calls would go to the school! What a great and easy > way to raise money for the school. Excel would charge us a $25.00 > sign-up fee and give us a 90 day written guarantee. > I know very little about Excel and what they are offering -- is this a > good deal? Are there any other companies doing this? What questions > should we be asking? The question is for whom is it a good deal. It's clearly a good deal for the school, if gets you some free money. It's probably a lousy deal for the parents, though. Excel remarkets long distance service which I believe they buy from Frontier, one of the "second tier" LD carriers. (Frontier is fine, I buy LD service from them through someone else.) Excel is by far the largest LD vendor that uses multi-level marketing, and is listed on the NYSE, but it has had its share of problems during its short existence. For example, yesterday's {Wall Street Journal} reports that the Dallas Better Business Bureau expelled Excel last week, mostly for slamming (switching customers without their consent), but also because customers complained of trouble getting refunds and of misleading information from Excel sales reps. In July, the FCC fined Excel $80,000 for slamming, saying that sales reps forged customer signatures. Earlier this year some of Excel's larger reps sued the company, apparently because they weren't getting the commissions they believed they were owed. Excel will doubtless say that these problems were and are due to a few bad apples in their very large sales force, although that argument doesn't seem to have impressed their home-town BBB. As far as to whether it's a good financial deal, the last time I checked, Excel charged about 16 cents/min for most calls, a little less if you happen to call another Excel customer. Other resellers offer the same Frontier long distance service for under 13 cents/minute, so even if you take off the 5% for the school, it's still not a very good deal for the parents. (Indeed, reports in the paper say that AT&T is considering 15 cent flat rate service.) I'd suggest that if you want your school to be in the phone business, you encourage people to sign up with the low-priced long distance carrier of their choice, and to increase their tax-deductable contributions to the school. Or you might well find a non-MLM phone sales agent, of whom there are many, who'll agree to split the commission on more reasonably priced service if you bring them your parents as a group of new customers. 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: seebeck@lace.colorado.edu (Mike Seebeck) Subject: Re: Excel Telecommunications Offer to School Date: 24 Sep 1996 20:13:34 GMT Organization: University of Colorado at Boulder Irene Simmons (Irenesimm@aol.com) wrote: > I know very little about Excel and what they are offering -- is this a > good deal? Are there any other companies doing this? What questions > should we be asking? Is what a good deal? Did they mention any rates? I was just offered the same deal for the company I work for by a long distance carrier. I could beat the rates very easily. The IXC thought we would try to sign up employees just to make 5% while costing them more on their home bill. ------------------------------ From: Bradley Clark Subject: Rolm Phone System and IVR Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 14:22:16 -0700 Organization: KVI Has anyone used a voice response with a Rolm phone switch? If so, what vendor are you using? What type of application are you running? and what does your call volume look like? We are currently using a system by Talx Corp. and are looking for alternatives. I'm tired of hearing marketing BS and want to know from the masses what works and what doesn't. Thank you, Bradley Clark btcski@netins.net ------------------------------ From: dcomm@ix.netcom.com (Robert Wilson) Subject: For Sale: Brooktrout QuadraFAX 4-Line Fax-on-demand System Date: 24 Sep 1996 04:26:19 GMT Organization: Netcom This is the analog four-line unit. Extremely flexible and fully featured. Great for small or medium-sized businesses. Very easy to set up with a PC or fax machine. Truly plug-and-play. Full documentation included. I will call Brooktrout to transfer registration and update info. Used very little. Asking $3,500.00 OBO. Absolutely perfect, mint condition. Please respond by email with offers. I do not have regular access to this group. Thanks for your time, Robert Wilson dcomm@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ From: mbl@mail.msen.com (Matthew B Landry) Subject: Re: Telephone Scam Referring to 809 (But What About Splits?) Date: 24 Sep 1996 17:32:07 GMT Organization: Flunkies for the Mike Conspiracy Our Beloved Moderator wrote: > Now if they have a confederate in the USA making the outbound calls > for them to reduce the cost of the outgoing calls; or if they have > confederates in several large urban areas in the USA where there is > likely to be a huge concentration of voicemail making 'local calls' > at local call rates in order to generate an expensive long distance > call in return, then this makes sense. I can see where someone in This is in fact how it is being done by at least one such company. Several people I know have reported receiving "recruiting" email messages, soliciting partners for this enterprise. As with all such scams, megabucks are promised while actual returns are probably small or nonexistent. But when one thinks of how many times MAKE.MONEY.FAST has been around, it's not hard to realize that there really isn't a meaningful limit on the number of gullible people who can be conned into aiding a scam like this. > an effort to prompt return calls is more like 3:1 or 4:1? Isn't the > profit margin or bottom line for the 809 people getting a bit thin, > even at the inflated rates charged for a call from here to there? Why? The cost is so close to zero that it's not worth measuring. Remember, the people doing the paging are being compensated in promises, not necessarily in actual money. Is there any reason to believe a scammer like this would be especially reliable in its payments to gullible co-conspirators? > They must be hard up for a job I guess. PAT] Lots of people are. Remember also that the target for this scam is not the (generally savvy and presumably able to keep good-paying jobs) readership of fora such as this one ... it's the more gullible people out there. Anyone who reads this publication most likely either knew already what 809 was, or would know at least a dozen places to check before calling an unknown phone number there (assuming they were in the habit of returning pages from unknown numbers to begin with ...) Matthew Landry [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I guess you are right. And there are a lot of gullible people, and people who are desparately seeking employment. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #508 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Sep 24 23:25:39 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA15849; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 23:25:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 23:25:39 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609250325.XAA15849@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #509 TELECOM Digest Tue, 24 Sep 96 23:25:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 509 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Employment Opportunities Bulletin (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Kevin Poulson Update (Gary Fancher) Re: Kevin Poulson Update (Rich Mulvey) Re: Kevin Poulson Update (Paul Thompson) Re: Exchange -> Location Map Wanted; NYNEX Still Ignorant (Seymour Dupa) Re: Exchange -> Location Map Wanted; NYNEX Still Ignorant (James Anderson) Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic (Kenneth E. Gray) Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name (Rishab Ghosh) Re: Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! (John R. Covert) Re: Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! (Greg Ramsey) Re: Formal FCC Action Filed to Stop I-Phone (Kevin Werbach) Re: Database of Area Codes and Country Codes to Time Zones? (Paul Eggert) Re: Database of Area Codes and Country Codes to Time Zones? (A. Pritchard) Re: Does Brand Loyalty exist in Long Distance Telephone Services? (E Smith) Financial Cryptography '97 (Monty Solomon) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 21:43:20 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: New Employment Opportunities Bulletin Starting today, and on a periodic basis, I'll be mailing out to the list (and making available to Usenet) a listing of telecom-related employment opportunities. This will come out to you from time to time as a separate mailing not part of the regular Digest. It is edited and completely prepared by Zev Rubenstein and his associates at NTR -- National Telecommunications Resources. It is intended to help you find employment in the telecommunications industry and to help find qualified employees for your job openings. National Telecommunications Resources is now a corporate sponsor of the Digest, and I hope when you have reason to correspond with Zev or others at NTR you will thank them for their assistance. I also hope the employment opportunities supplement which you receive from time to time will be a useful resource. The first issue will be sent out late Tuesday evening. PAT ------------------------------ From: Gary Fancher x95268 Subject: Re: Kevin Poulson Update Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:34:18 -0500 Organization: DSC Communications Corporation, Plano, Texas USA On Mon, 23 Sep 1996, Pat Townson wrote concerning hacker Kevin Poulsen: > Also: It certainly *is* the intent of the federal authorities to see > Kevin fail in life. No law enforcement officer from the local police > officer through Janet Reno ever want to see someone they have decided > is a criminal to be able to climb out of the hole they toss them in > and make any sort of recovery. [ much good text deleted for brevity ] > They seem to want to insure he fails in life and screws up again. Pat, reading your response reminded me of a conversation I had many years ago with a former office-mate of mine. He made the bold assertion that it was the job of the police to make criminals, not to solve crime. If they ever solved all of the crime, he reasoned, they would be out of a job. At the time, I was young and still idealistic, but I have sadly lived to see too much fulfillment of his words. In addition to that revelation about the courts and the judicial system, I have learned that Doctors really don't mind if you remain a little sick since it increases their income. Businesses of all kinds intentionally build obsolescence into their products so you will have to replace it with a new one. (Razors is a great example -- do your get as many shaves out of yours as you used to?) In the last two or three months, I have had several problems with my LEC (SWB) which I may write to you about some day. How can we ever teach morality to our youth and restore integrity to our society when we tolerate these things as though they were normal and to be expected? (My apologies for the sour notes. Today must be a bad air day.) Gary Fancher E-mail: gfancher@spd.dsccc.com DSC Communications Corporation 972-519-5268 voice 1000 Coit Road, MS 121 972-519-3563 fax Plano, Texas 75075 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two points here. One, in the USA the Congress and various state legislatures long ago quit passing laws that had anything to do with morality or ethics. All laws written now (and they get created on a regular basis; many new laws each year) only have to do with corporate profits. They don't say it that way of course, but guess who always seems to be the beneficiary of whatever the lawmakers think up? Your point about police officers creating criminals is interesting. As a little child I remember a police officer coming to our school by the name of Officer Friendly. His talk was about the police and how it was the hope of police officers everywhere that someday crime would be eliminated. I thought that sounded kind of strange then, but just the other day Officer Friendly was giving a talk here in Skokie to some school children and I listened to some of it. Afterward I asked him who he *really* thought he was kidding with that little speech, which apparently they have made to school kids since whenever. The Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois has about five thousand people employed -- by the court alone -- in various administrative tasks. The Cook County Sheriff has over four thousand employees, about 75 percent of whom (about three thousand) are directly employed by Cook County Jail with its roughly ten thousand inmates. The Chicago Police Department has over three thousand sworn officers and about the same number of clerical/administrative employees. Then we have all the suburban communities. I asked Officer F. if he was really certain that twenty-thousand or so payrollers in Cook County would be happy when the day came they were out of work. And what about all the prison guards, and the witch-doctors they have in their psychiatric facility? All of them out of work? Of course police officers have to keep a steady flow going to the courthouse and the jail. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 19:12:39 -0400 From: Rich Mulvey Subject: Re: Kevin Poulson Update Reply-To: mulveyr@frontiernet.net > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Carey Heckman's analogy is a very strange > one indeed. I wonder what his reasoning was? He obviously does not know > much about arsonists. Matches and various inflammable materials are > available everywhere. One does not have to work in a match factory to > obtain matches. Furthermore, arsonists are not tempted by matches. They > commit that crime for various reasons, but the presence of matches has > nothing to do with it. I think you're missing the point of the analogy -- matches are used by the arsonist to facilitate their crimes, no matter what the original motivation happened to be. In the case of Poulsen, computers are used to facilitate the crime in exactly the same fashion. > Next point: If Kevin Poulsen is not allowed access to computers, how > is it he has a web page? I mean, they don't just pop out of nowhere. > I suppose his friends might have worked on it for him, without him > actually touching the keys on the computer, etc, but that would seem > to violate the spirit of the injunction against him if not the actual > letter of the injunction itself. Quite true - I wondered about that myself. :-) > Also: It certainly *is* the intent of the federal authorities to see > Kevin fail in life. No law enforcement officer from the local police > officer through Janet Reno ever want to see someone they have decided > is a criminal to be able to climb out of the hole they toss them in > and make any sort of recovery. They have not just "decided" that he is a criminal -- he is, in fact, a criminal, albeit one who is now free. He admitted that he committed the crimes. That is completely unambigious. Now, someone may argue that after a criminal has completed his term of incarceration and probation, that he may no longer be considered to be a criminal, but Poulsen is still on probation, and therefore, his debt to society has not yet been completed. Just like we don't allow people who are guilty of insider trading to sell stock, or people who are guilty of abuse to work in nursing homes and child-care centers, why should we allow someone who habitually committed crimes to work with the same mechanisms that they used in the first place? > Ask any police officer if an important thing is not to keep the > people they arrest discredited, without any resources to fight back, > and as incommunicado as possible. If the person is able to find a job > anywhere, the first thing you know they are going to have some money > and be hiring some private attorney to represent them and give some > back-talk to the government. It is far better in the eyes of the law > enforcement personnel in this country to keep the people they have > decided are criminals in as precarious a situation as possible both > financially and socially. That way there is a better chance the person > will screw up and they can lock him up again. Poulsen committed a huge number of crimes. Why should we assume that he is any different now than when he went into prison? There are a tremendous number of other occupations that he can work in that don't involve intensive use of computers. Please note that he has not been unilaterally forbidden from using a computer -- he just needs to have the job approved by the court. This is, in my opinion, far more than he had any right to hope for -- and very merciful on the part of the government. Rich [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you suggesting there is no penitence to be acquired in the penetentiary? And ' ... any right to hope for -- and very merciful on the part of the government ...' pardon me while I go gag. What a bad taste I got in my mouth from that final statment of yours. Now its a special privilege for people to get the government to show mercy on them is it? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 17:51:04 CDT From: Paul Thompson Subject: Re: Kevin Poulson Update TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > Also: It certainly *is* the intent of the federal authorities to see > Kevin fail in life. No law enforcement officer from the local police > officer through Janet Reno ever want to see someone they have decided > is a criminal to be able to climb out of the hole they toss them in > and make any sort of recovery. [.snip.] > It is far better in the eyes of the law enforcement personnel in this > country to keep the people they have decided are criminals in as > precarious a situation as possibleboth financially and socially. That way > there is a better chance the person will screw up and they can lock him > up again. Absurd blanket generalities such as this only serve to discredit your more sane comments elsewhere in the post. Law enforcement has been demonstrated at times to be ambivalent to achieving both its own priorities and those goals which might most benefit society, but a statement such as the above is certainly taking this concept too far. Paul ------------------------------ From: grumpy@en.com (Seymour Dupa) Subject: Re: Exchange -> Location Map Wanted; NYNEX Still Ignorant Date: 24 Sep 1996 14:24:36 GMT Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc. Reply-To: =?US-ASCII?Q?=E5=B0=05?=@en.com tmitariffs@aol.com (TMITARIFFS) wrote: > Wire Center V&Hs from The National > Exchange Carrier Association (NECA) Tariff 4 (Filed with the FCC, monthly) Where can a person get a copy of this? How much does it cost? ------------------------------ From: James W. Anderson Subject: Re: Exchange -> Location Map Wanted; NYNEX Still Ignorant Date: 24 Sep 96 23:23:32 GMT That is kind of odd that NYNEX doesn't seem to have an exchange location map. I assume you want to know the extent of the coverage of a particular exchange. An example is that I live in Provo, Utah where part of the city has one set of exchanges and another part of the city (the north end) has other exchanges separate from the rest of the city. I have not seen an actual map here but in another example there at one time was a listing of the exchange names and which NXX's were in them (and a schematic map) showing roughly where those exchange names were and what they covered in the Minneapolis/St. Paul phone book years ago. I remember that that was a US WEST published book also. Hope this helps. James W. Anderson jander8@hotmail.com ------------------------------ From: kengray@interramp.com (Kenneth E Gray) Subject: Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 19:18:45 -0500 Organization: PSINet You think BA is expensive, try living in Connecticut. SNET does not distinguish between residential or business (I guess if you wanted Sprint Fridays Free, but thats another story ...). Install with a jack is about $305. Monthly fees are $57.50 and usage is .035 peak/.015 offpeak per B channel usage. They do have bulk packs of up to 100 hours that give an average rate of .028 per channel. No unlimited ISDN (a 20 day call would cost $32.4 per business day, or about $648) at all. So, by Connecticut standards, Bell Atlantic is the bargain basement! MCI and AT&T can't come in to the local market fast enough. Kenneth Gray ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:38:07 -0400 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic At 02:30 PM 9/22/96 EDT, Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > I don't understand why anyone uses ISDN. I can get a 28.8 modem > connection for about $20/mo. Allowing for problems with the > digital/analog interfaces, and problems with multiplexing, the bottom > line is about $1/Kbaud of bandwidth. What do I get for $239/mo.? > 64K? I don't see why this is good. For $239, it's not a good deal for anyone who doesn't *need* it. Around here, I pay NYNEX/MA $13/month above POTS for ISDN. Flat rate so long as I call the call "voice", which still works at 56k. The performance is worth it. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein@bbn.com +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone. Sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: rishab@CERF.NET (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Subject: Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name Date: 24 Sep 1996 03:44:02 -0700 Organization: CERFnet Dial 'n' CERF Customer Vincent Kuo (vincent_kuo@stsl.siemens.com.tw) wrote: > Although Taiwan is every bit an independent country, has 21 million > people and plays a significant role in the world, we remain anonymous > in official occasions. This is just unfair. Maybe nobody can change I would like to point out that this is at least partly due to the "official" position of Taiwan's own government -- that it does not represent an independent country, and is the true government of all China. This fits in very conveniently with Communist China's bosses, who think _they_ are the government of all China. Naturally, other countries (and multilateral organizations such as the UN and ITU) can only recognise _one_ government of a single country; naturally most chose to recognise the one in Beijing. Beijing's own policy that other countries can only have diplomatic relations with either Taipei or Beijing but not both is quite logical if both governments ignore the reality of an independent Taiwan. In the elections earlier this year, the candidate supporting a declaration of Taiwanese independence, which is required before outsiders can even _try_ to recognise both China and Taiwan, was defeated by the incumbent supporter of an ambiguous policy towards nationhood. True, the missiles being "tested" off Taiwan's coast didn't help the cause of independence, but blaming the ITU for not officially recognising what even Taiwan does not doesn't make sense. OTOH I doubt that the ITU would ever derecognise 886 -- it is marked "reserved" rather than put to other use simply because it is a de facto standard anyway. All the countries of the world that do not have _diplomatic_ links with Taiwan do retain _business_ ties, including telecom links. Rishab First Monday - The Peer-Reviewed Journal on the Internet http://www.firstmonday.dk/ Munksgaard International Publishers, Copenhagen International Editor - Rishab Aiyer Ghosh (rishab@dxm.org) Pager +91 11 9622 162187; Fax +91 11 2209608 or 2426453 or 2224058 A4/204 Ekta Vihar, 9 Indraprastha Extn, New Delhi 110092 INDIA ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 96 20:52:01 EDT From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! Chris Hudel wrote: > I'm having no end of problems trying to contact BellSouth in > Charlotte, NC ... when dialing +1.704.378.6000. > - The touch-tones don't get across to BellSouth's automated attendent. etc ... The problem is only partly BellSouth's problem. The number you're calling is not going off-hook (not actually answering, as far as the network is concerned -- and not starting billing). Since your calls appear to be routed via AT&T, you are running afoul of AT&T's insistance on being paid for calls before AT&T will allow you to transmit information towards the destination of your call. AT&T will also disconnect the call if it does not answer within about two minutes. MCI does not have this problem, so if you can find a way to route the call via MCI (1-800-COLLECT, maybe, if you can get around their automated system) you'll be able to get through. Bell South will accept your collect call. The good news is that you have not been billed for any of your attempts so far. john ------------------------------ From: Greg Ramsey Subject: Re: Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 12:14:26 GMT hudel@hppad.waterloo.hp.com (Chris Hudel) wrote: > A frustrated hello to everyone. > I'm having no end of problems trying to contact BellSouth in > Charlotte, NC to arrange to install two phone lines before I relocate > there from Ontario, Canada. Try dialing this number Chris, 800-767-2355. It is staffed 24 hours a day and is supposed to be functional outside North Carolina. I used it in July from Georgia to set up my service here in Charlotte prior to arrival. Hopefully you can access it also from Canada. Oh, and welcome to Charlotte. Greg Ramsey ------------------------------ From: werbach@access.digex.net (Kevin Werbach) Subject: Re: Formal FCC Action Filed to Stop I-Phone Date: 24 Sep 1996 10:31:50 -0400 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA > Anyone have any idea what is happening with the action that ACTA filed > with the FCC in an attempt to stop Internet Phone? The FCC has not taken any action on the ACTA petition, other than soliciting public comment as we routinely do for rulemaking petitions filed with the Commission. Reed Hundt, the Chairman of the FCC, has given several speeches in which he has stated that his view is that Internet telephony should not be regulated like conventional circuit-switched telephony. The most recent was at the Wall Street Journal Business and Technology conference last week; you can find the speech (and a similar speech to the INET conference in Montreal) on our Web site at: . Kevin Werbach Federal Communications Commission kwerbach@fcc.gov kevin@werbach.com The -k- Page http://werbach.com/home.html Bare Bones Guide to HTML http://werbach.com/barebones/ ------------------------------ From: eggert@twinsun.com (Paul Eggert) Subject: Re: Database of Area Codes and Country Codes to Time Zones? Date: 24 Sep 1996 12:36:56 -0700 Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA csells@teleport.com (Chris Sells) writes: > I'm looking for a database of area codes and country codes to time > zones so I can tell someone what time it is where they're about to > call. Anyone know of such a database? There's a free database for country codes at: ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzcode96l.tar.gz ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzdata96k.tar.gz To use it, extract the files onto a Unix host, modify the Makefile for your host, type `make install', and then run `./tzselect'. ------------------------------ From: apritchard@cix.compulink.co.uk (Alan Pritchard) Subject: Re: Database of Area Codes and Country Codes to Time Zones? Organization: ALLM Systems & Marketing Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 13:44:14 GMT Yes, we have such data as part of The Global Gazetteer. Where possible, we have coded automatically down to place level, but I am sure that you are aware of the fact that not only countries have multiple time zones, but so do administrative areas at both level 1 and level 2. I am sending some info over to you via email. Best wishes, Alan Pritchard The GLOBAL GAZETTEER: the world on file http://www.knowledge.co.uk/xxx/geodata/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 18:10:59 PDT From: Eric Smith Subject: Re: Does Brand Loyalty Exist in Long Distance Telephone Services? In article sychung@hansol.co.kr (siyoung chung) writes: > I am interested in brand loyalty in long distance telephone; does it > exist or not? I used to think I had some brand loyalty to AT&T, until one day they started sending me a minimum monthly bill of $5 for a line which I didn't even know had AT&T service and on which I *never* make any outgoing calls, local or long distance. AT&T continues sending me bills for increasing amounts of money, and I keep sending them back with a notice that I am not an AT&T customer. They are threatening to turn my "account" over to a collection agency. The one time I called their customer "service" number, I was told that if I didn't want to keep getting billed $5 every month that I would have to switch to another long distance carrier. I told them that if they keep billing me I will start billing them at my usual consulting for the time I spend dealing with them. In the mean time, I have switched to Sprint on the phone line on which I do place about $100 of long distance calls per month. I mentioned that to the AT&T representative, but she didn't seem to care. Unsurprising, as that's undoubted trivial to them. I suppose if I could bill someone $5/month for doing nothing vs. $100/month for offering an actual service I would prefer the former. Cheers, Eric ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 02:04:53 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Financial Cryptography '97 Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 09:35:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Phil Agre Subject: Financial Cryptography '97 [In any other universe this would be incredibly boring.] 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, 20 Sep 1996 17:43:04 +0200 From: R.Hirschfeld@cwi.nl Subject: Financial Cryptography '97 Call for Papers Sender: owner-ecash@digicash.com Financial Cryptography '97 February 24-28 1997, Anguilla, BWI CALL FOR PAPERS General Information: Financial Cryptography '97 (FC97) is a new conference on the security of digital financial transactions. The first meeting will be held on the island of Anguilla in the British West Indies on February 24-28, 1997. FC97 aims to bring together persons involved in both the financial and data security fields to foster cooperation and exchange of ideas. Original papers are solicited on all aspects of financial data security and digital commerce in general, including Anonymous Payments Fungibility Authentication Home Banking Communication Security Identification Conditional Access Implementations Copyright Protection Loss Tolerance Credit/Debit Cards Loyalty Mechanisms Currency Exchange Legal Aspects Digital Cash Micropayments Digital Receipts Network Payments Digital Signatures Privacy Issues Economic Implications Regulatory Issues Electronic Funds Transfer Smart Cards Electronic Purses Standards Electronic Voting Tamper Resistance Electronic Wallets Transferability Instructions for Authors: Send a cover letter and 9 copies of an extended abstract to be received by November 29, 1996 (or postmarked by November 15, 1996 and sent via airmail) to the Program Chair at the address given below. The extended abstract should start with the title and an abstract followed by a succinct statement appropriate for a non-specialist reader specifying the subject addressed, its background, the main achievements, and their significance to financial data security. Submissions are limited to 15 single-spaced pages of 12pt type. Notification of acceptance or rejection will be sent to authors no later than January 17, 1997. Authors of accepted papers must guarantee that their paper will be presented at the conference. Additional Information: Conference pricing and information on travel, hotels, and Anguilla itself will follow in a separate general announcement. A very limited number of stipends may be available to those unable to obtain funding to attend the conference. Students whose papers are accepted and who will present the paper themselves are encouraged to apply if such assistance is needed. Requests for stipends should be addressed to one of the General Chairs. Those interested in becoming a sponsor of FC97 or in purchasing exhibit space, please contact the Exhibits and Sponsorship Manager. A workshop, intended for anyone with commercial software development experience who wants hands-on familiarity with the issues and technology of financial cryptography, is planned in conjunction with FC97, to be held during the week preceding the conference. For information, please contact one of the General Chairs. Send Submissions to: Rafael Hirschfeld FC97 Program Chair CWI Kruislaan 413 1098 SJ Amsterdam The Netherlands email: ray@cwi.nl phone: +31 20 592 4169 fax: +31 20 592 4199 Program Committee: Matthew Franklin, AT&T Laboratories--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA Michael Froomkin, U. Miami School of Law, Coral Gables, FL, USA Rafael Hirschfeld, CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Arjen Lenstra, Citibank, New York, NY, USA Mark Manasse, Digital Equipment Corporation, Palo Alto, CA, USA Kevin McCurley, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA Charles Merrill, McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, USA Clifford Neuman, Information Sciences Institute, Marina del Rey, CA, USA Sholom Rosen, Citibank, New York, NY, USA Israel Sendrovic, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York, NY, USA General Chairs: Robert Hettinga, Shipwright, Boston, MA, USA Vincent Cate, Offshore Information Services, Anguilla, BWI Conference, Exhibits, and Sponsorship Manager: Julie Rackliffe, Boston, MA, USA Workshop Leader: Ian Goldberg, Berkeley, CA, USA Financial Cryptography '97 is held in cooperation with the International Association for Cryptologic Research. A copy of this call for papers as well as other information about the conference will be available at URL http://www.cwi.nl/conferences/FC97. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #509 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Sep 25 15:24:26 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id PAA27051; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:24:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:24:26 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609251924.PAA27051@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #510 TELECOM Digest Wed, 25 Sep 96 15:24:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 510 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Signal Propagation (dstott@uswest.com) Re: Signal Propagation/Interference (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Information Needed on Public Telephones (sancmari@telefonica.com.ar) Multiplexors - Marathon, Netrix or Newbridge (david@eop.ie) Re: Kevin Poulson Update (Richard Mulvey) Re: Kevin Poulson Update (Tom Trottier) Re: Kevin Poulson Update (Mark Lottor) Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name (Bob Goudreau) Anybody Using Ericsson Freeset or D.N.A (Thomas Piper) Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street (Robert Sinclair) Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street (Ed Kleinhample) Override Caller-Id Block (Timothy D. Hunt) AT&T One Rate (Lawrence V. Cipriani) Re: Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! (Chris Hudel) Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic (Rick Cox) Charlotte, NC (was: Monday: Turkey Pot Pie...) (Stan Schwartz) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dstott@uswest.com Date: Wed, 25 Sep 96 09:37:46 MDT Subject: Re: Signal Propagation In TELECOM Digest #507, Brett Frankenberger writes: > Most airlines (i.e. any that I've flown) ban everything during > takeoff and once aloft, ban everything designed to transmit or > receive radio signals. This is all of their own accord -- the > government doesn't have any requirements in this area (except > the FCC ban on cell phone usage). Does anyone know of any airline that requires a person to turn off their pager during take off or landing? It seems like that is a radio reciever. I know my Skypager has gone off on a flight before; we were at 32,000 feet somewhere over the Midwest, heading for Chicago. Then I used the GTE Airphone to return the call, and that's a radio transmitter. Except for the cell phones, sounds kind of arbitrary to me. stott ------------------------------ From: kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Signal Propagation/Interference Date: 25 Sep 1996 09:29:52 -0400 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. In article , David Clayton wrote: > With a lot of the more modern aircraft now being 'fly by wire' i.e. > computer controlled, I would not want to risk having EMI from a cell > phone getting into any of the systems and causing problems, even if > the risk is smaller than 1000:1, I do not want to take those odds when > I fly. Until aircraft are designed to exclude EMI from inside, we may > find the using any device that emits EMI an unacceptable risk. (E.G. I think you've hit on the problem with the paragraph above. Until the aircraft manufacturers start building fly-by-wire systems with shielding that is above and beyond adequate. But it's not going to happen -- here in the U.S. we've noticed the same problem with consumer electronics and amateur radio operators. Most people don't bother to read the Part 15 sticker that says, in essence, "This device may not interfere with other services but must accept interference from other services." But that's another issue although there might be some risk of life involved in a dispute between a ham and an irate neighbor. Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com ------------------------------ From: sancmari@telefonica.com.ar Subject: Information Needed on Public Telephones Date: Wed, 25 Sep 96 14:14:00 PDT Hi you all! We are preparing a document comparing the market divisions on telecommunications products around the world (what companies can provide each service). I need some information on public telephones in your country. Do they belong to the local providers or to the carriers? Can you choose the carrier if you desire from one of these telephones or are you just connected with a default one? If you can choose, how do they charge you the communication? All the answers are welcome through the Digest or my e-mail: sancmari@telefonica.com.ar. Thank you all. ------------------------------ From: European On-Line Partners Subject: Multiplexors - Marathon, Netrix or Newbridge Date: 25 Sep 1996 18:20:24 GMT Organization: European On-Line Partners Hi, I have a question wrt multiplexor selection. Which mux would people recommend for a data and voice link on a 256k line using 22 8k voice channels and 64k data, plus inter pabx signalling and overhead: 1. A Marathon Micom 5k Mux, statistical mux with dynamic bw allocation; 2. A Netrix 2210 Frame Access Mux, stat Mux with dynamic bw allocation; 3. A Newbridge 3600 series TDM mux with time of day bw allocation. Comments from current users would be particularly welcome. Are people having trouble with variable voice quality on the statistical muxes over leased lines when congested? Thanks for all replies. David ------------------------------ From: mulveyr@frontiernet.net (Richard Mulvey) Subject: Re: Kevin Poulson Update Date: 25 Sep 1996 18:16:57 GMT Organization: Frontier Internet, A reliable part of your life > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you suggesting there is no penitence > to be acquired in the penetentiary? Absolutely. The concept of a "Peniteniary" has been discredited for decades. That's why the preferred term is "correctional facility." Of course, most people are still well aware of the fact that prisons are primarily an institution to warehouse people who refuse to live by society's standards, and that the recidivism rate shows that. > And ' ... any right to hope for > -- and very merciful on the part of the government ...' pardon me > while I go gag. What a bad taste I got in my mouth from that final > statment of yours. Now its a special privilege for people to get the > government to show mercy on them is it? PAT] Yes, it most certainly is a "special priviledge." In an ideal society, Poulsen would never be allowed near a networked computer again. He is a *TWO-TIME* loser. If he didn't learn after his first brush with the law, there is no rational reason to assume that he learned after his second. How many chances should he be allowed? We expect a 10-year old to repeat grave mistakes. When an adult does the same, he has gone beyond the realm of learning to be a contributing member of society, to being a sociopath. How can you possibly assert that a sociopath is "deserving" of mercy? Poulsen has shown *repeatedly* that he cannot be trusted, and yet he will still have the opportunity, under the supervision of the court, to use networked computers again. That is the approximate equivalent of allowing a habitual burgler to posses lockpicking tools. Why, exactly, do you think that the burgler should be allowed to use his picks at will? Rich ------------------------------ From: Tom Trottier Date: 25 Sep 96 10:39:54 EDT Subject: Re: Kevin Poulson Update Many of the points people are making about the decision to subject Kevin's computer use to the court or the probation officer's judgment are good. But I consider that this current prohibition of computer use is a good way to help balance Kevin's life. He needs to find a life outside the bits & bytes. He needs to interact with people. It's not forever. It's only three years in which to break some bad habits and an focus which has been unhealthy for him. It's an opportunity to change, and he should enter a new phase. He can always go back later. This is part of his rehabilitation, not a life sentence. Ciao, Tom Trottier tom@act.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 96 11:46:25 PDT From: Mark Lottor Subject: Re: Kevin Poulson Update Hi- > It's not forever. It's only three years in which to break some bad > habits and an focus which has been unhealthy for him. It's an > opportunity to change, and he should enter a new phase. He can always > go back later. I think you forgot that he already spent a lot of time in jail. Why three more years of punishment? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They are adding that three years to make sure that all their theories on recidivism come true and that they get him back in prison again. You can't be letting people who get out of prison after a few years have the tools and wherewithal to rebuild their lives. Law enforcement in the USA does not work that way. The punishment must go on and on. Ask any vindictive prosecutor or police officer if you don't beleive me. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 14:21:30 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name rishab@CERF.NET (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) wrote: > Naturally, other countries (and multilateral organizations such as > the UN and ITU) can only recognise _one_ government of a single > country; naturally most chose to recognise the one in Beijing. > Beijing's own policy that other countries can only have diplomatic > relations with either Taipei or Beijing but not both is quite logical > if both governments ignore the reality of an independent Taiwan. It's odd that the International Olympic Committee is able to overcome this hurdle where the ITU is not. In the Olympic Games, the team from Taiwan competes under the name "Chinese Taipei". Perhaps the ITU could use the same moniker for the island to which +886 is assigned? Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: piper@online.no (Thomas Piper) Subject: Anybody Using Ericsson Freeset or D.N.A Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 07:47:50 GMT Organization: Telenor Online Public Access We have currently installed a network of 3 MD 110 PBX with D.N.A. server and PC switchboard as well as a freeset network with a total of 26 basestations and 100 freeset handsets. I am looking for people using any of those systems to exchange informations and experience. Regards from Norway, Thomas ------------------------------ From: Robert Sinclair Subject: Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 01:43:12 -0700 Organization: Sinclair & Associates Reply-To: robert-s@gvn.net Gary Sanders wrote: >> LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Hackers are breaking into telephone line boxes and >> tapping dial tones belonging to businesses and homes, selling access >> on the street using a special hand-held receiver. > Hmm, I wonder how many people on the list have a special hand-held receiver? > Guess that makes us special people too -:) >> The practice emerged early this year. Authorities believe several >> million dollars in illegal calls have been rung up since January. > You would have though that people would have though about tapping lines > a long time ago.. -:) >> As many as 15 incidents a week are now reported in California alone, >> Pacific Bell said. >> The highly skilled scam artists typically are former phone company >> employees or others with extensive knowledge of telephones, investigators >> say. > Didnt know a butt set required that much extensive knowledge to use.. -:) Yes and in my area the price of admission to unlimited "free" phone service is a 1/2" socket and a phone set! Think they'd lock those cabinets wouldn't you? ------------------------------ From: edhample@sprynet.com (Ed Kleinhample) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 06:10:12 -0700 Subject: Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street > LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Hackers are breaking into telephone line boxes and > tapping dial tones belonging to businesses and homes, selling access > on the street using a special hand-held receiver. (snip) > The highly skilled scam artists typically are former phone company > employees or others with extensive knowledge of telephones, investigators > say. Highly skilled -- ugh! It doesn't take that much smarts -- just a basic knowledge of how telephone systems work. Butt sets easily obtained in many electronics stores, catalogs, or at electronics swap meets/flea markets/etc. One can buy a book at Radio Shack that explains how to connect new wiring to your demarc, and even how to test your service at the demarc by taking a baseboard RJ11 jack and attaching a couple of gator clips to it. It doesn't take too much mental agility to extend this technique to cutting the plug off of a cheap hand-held phone and attaching a pair of gator clips to the cord in order to make a less-expensive replacement for a butt-set. With this simple device and a little bit of basic knowledge, you can connect to any phone line in any demarc block (as long as it is an analog line). While it is true that telco employees would know how to do such a thing, the authorities need to expand their profile to include anyone who has ever done any telephone, intercom, or local area network wiring. ------------------------------ From: tim@fsg.com (Timothy D. Hunt) Subject: Override Caller-Id Block Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 12:55:27 GMT Organization: Fusion Systems Group, Inc. Reply-To: thunt@fsg.com My in-laws have a permanent caller-id block on their outgoing calls. Is there a code they can use to override this on a per-call basis so I (or at least my spouse!) knows that they are calling. In case it makes a difference, they are in Florida and we're in New Jersey. The reason that I'm interested, is that I want to route unidentified calls to the machine, and they are they only unidentified caller that we may actually want to talk to. Thanks for any information. Tim Hunt Fusion Systems Group, Inc., One Wall Street Court, New York NY 10005 Phone: +1-212-376-6306 Fax: +1-212-376-6320 e-mail: thunt@fsg.com Main number: +1-212-376-6300 Voicemail: +1-212-293-1021 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The classic example of the unstoppable object meeting the unmoveable object ... your relatives in Florida should ask their local telco for the code to use. It might be something like *87 or possibly *67 prepended to their dialing string. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lvc@lucent.com (Lawrence V. Cipriani) Subject: AT&T One Rate Date: 25 Sep 1996 13:16:45 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Columbus, Ohio Reply-To: lvc@lucent.com In article is written: > (Indeed, reports in the paper say that AT&T is considering 15 > cent flat rate service.) Call 1-800-4-ONE-RATE to sign up for the $0.15/minute anytime to anywhere in the US rate. Given my calling patterns I'd save only a few bucks a month /before/ the AT&T True Savings discounts. If you sign up for the "AT&T One Rate" you are not eligible for AT&T True Savings, or other calling plans. I stuck with my current AT&T calling plan. Larry Cipriani, lvc@lucent.com, Lucent Technologies ------------------------------ From: hudel@hppad.waterloo.hp.com (Chris Hudel) Subject: Re: Canada to BellSouth: Come in Please! Date: 25 Sep 1996 13:22:39 GMT Organization: Hewlett Packard (Panacom Division) I (hudel@hppad.waterloo.hp.com) wrote: > I'm having no end of problems trying to contact BellSouth in > Charlotte, NC to arrange to install two phone lines before I relocate > there from Ontario, Canada. Thanks to the replies on this group (and their email counterparts). The 800 number does work without any problems from Canada. John Cropper, who reads and posts to this Digest, was kind enough to "link me in" and I was able to obtain my two residential phone numbers. Thanks again to all! Cheers, Chris Hudel -- hudel@waterloo.hp.com ------------------------------ From: RICK.R.COX@x400gw.ameritech.com (Rick Cox> Date: 25 Sep 96 08:46:58 -0500 Subject: Re: ISDN From Bell Atlantic joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) wrote: > I don't understand why anyone uses ISDN. I can get a 28.8 modem > connection for about $20/mo. Allowing for problems with the > digital/analog interfaces, and problems with multiplexing, the bottom > line is about $1/Kbaud of bandwidth. What do I get for $239/mo.? > 64K? I don't see why this is good. Joel, I agree that the price difference seems huge and I can see why you would question the value of ISDN. But you have to ask yourself "What is my time worth?" Depending on what you use the connectivity for this may be a critical question for you. If you just surf the web while waiting to talk to a client than you're not getting much of a benefit. If, on the other hand, you routinely transmit quantities of data in any format, than ISDN is a huge bargain. Let's examine the time issue. In most cases a 28.8k modem will give you around 20k of throughput. It is also very sensitive to noise etc. and liable to drop file transfers, usually just before they would have been complete. There are few things more frustrating than having 98% of a multi-meg file transferred and then losing your connection. Now with ISDN in an optimal environment you get the full 128k. The worst I've heard of is approximately 94k due to serial port limitations and signalling requirements. Having an internal Terminal Adapter means you will get much closer to the full 128k. Also ISDN is much less liable to drop your call in progress. So what does this mean in time? We have a document available on our www page (www.ameritech.com/teamdata) called simply a Speed Comparison sheet. Looking at the 14.4k (28.8k was never added) row and halving the time it shows that a 100 Megabyte file will take approximately 7.7 hours to be transferred. That is with a full 28.8k throughput, which I have never seen. That same 100M file at 128k would take 1.7 hours. I am sure most folks could think of something else for the person and/or PC to do for the minimum 6 hour time differential reflected above. Something else that would benefit the business etc. Keep in mind that if the modem call drops you start over again, at least doubling the amount of time involved. I don't mean to preach here but I felt it necessary to point out that $$ isn't the only consideration for ISDN. My personal point of view is that even when I'm not on company time, my time is valuable enough to me to do whatever I can to not chain it down. ISDN is very helpful in that way. Rick Cox Data Design Consultant Ameritech Team Data 1800-TEAMDATA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 11:06:27 EDT From: Stan.Schwartz Subject: Charlotte, NC (was: Monday: Turkey Pot Pie...) John Shaver quoted others: > Subject: Monday: Turkey Pot Pie, Oven Browned Potatoes, Steamed Cabbag> > From: Keith Bostic > Forwarded-by: "Rob Pike" > > Call 704-377-4444, enter 1955 when you hear the recording. > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll admit it is sort of funny. I do > not know if it is for real or not; but it was worth 25 cents on the > phone to listen for a minute or so. PAT What you were listening to was "Lunch Menu Man". It's all on the level, and it's actually the menu for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. David Price (if I'm recalling his name correctly) started doing the recorded menus for the Cabarrus County schools a while back and about a year ago he started getting regional and some national notariety. "Morning Zoo" radio shows everywhere were calling and overwhelming the Cabarrus County Schools' switchboard. It was about that time that he was moved over to {The Charlotte Observer}'s "O-Plus" service, which is what the (704) 377-4444 number is. From the O-Plus directory hanging on my cubicle wall: 1955: "Lunch Menu" 1954: "Talk to Me" (leave a message for Lunch Menu Man) 1953: "I Sing Country" 1952: Order t-shirts (I guess that was inevitable) Press '*' to return to the main menu to make another selection without re-dialing. It's things like this that remind me what a small town Charlotte, NC is, compared to the New York Metro area (where I moved from last year). For Chris Hudel, if you haven't been able to reach BellSouth yet, try one of these two numbers: (1 800) 767-2355 if you can reach this from Canada. If not, try (1 704) 780-2355. The people there are quite helpful. It may be just me, but I like that they preserved the phone numbers that spell "BELL" (2355). Stan (stan@vnet.net) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #510 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Sep 25 16:07:15 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA03082; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 16:07:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 16:07:15 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609252007.QAA03082@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #511 TELECOM Digest Wed, 25 Sep 96 16:07:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 511 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson BellSouth Launches Suite of Conferencing Bridging Services (Mike King) Cell Phones in Aircraft (Mark Peacock) Re: Availability of Special ISDN Customer Premises Equipment? (L. Poulsen) Re: Availability of Special ISDN Customer Premises Equipment? (H. Sharp) DDS vrs T1 (What Makes the Difference Other Than Speed?) (Hugo Zambrano) Re: Nynex Penalties, was Re: Articles Don't Flatter RBOCs (John Cropper) Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted (John Dearing) Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted (Spencer Roedder) Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted (Tom Thiel) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Launches Suite of Conferencing Bridging Services Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 12:06:52 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:14:23 -0400 (EDT) From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH LAUNCES SUITE OF CONFERENCING BRIDGING SERVICES BellSouth Launches Suite of Multi Point Conferencing Bridging Services First to announce commercially viable, multi point document conferencing via the Internet Company aims to become 'Tier One' player in global voice, video and document conferencing services market Atlanta, GA, September 25, 1996 BellSouth Business Systems, Inc. (BBS), a subsidiary of BellSouth Telecommunications, today announced the availability of a complete suite of voice, video and document conferencing bridging services to allow business professionals to simultaneously collaborate in real time with multiple locations. BBS also stated that it plans to become one of the top three multi point conferencing service providers by the year 2000, when the global conferencing marketplace is projected to reach $2.5 to $3 billion. The company intends to achieve this positioning by following aggressive business strategies such as operating the world's largest commercial video conferencing network; charging service rates that are two to five times less than those of other current competitive offerings; and introducing innovative commercial features like multi point, Internet based document conferencing. "The launch of our conferencing services exemplifies BellSouth's resolve to devise and offer creative solutions that our customers can use to communicate instantaneously and globally," said Dick Anderson, president of BellSouth Business Systems. "This comprehensive family of service offerings will enable BellSouth to compete successfully in the evolving global telecommunications arena." Anderson noted that the new services also illustrate BellSouth's commitment to standards based, global communications that deliver real value and convenience to customers. "Our multi point conferencing services deliver viable, easy to use solutions that help business professionals make more effective daily decisions, increase process efficiencies and better leverage opportunities for meeting with customers and prospects," said Anderson. BBS Strategy Takes Cues from PC Industry To reach its goal of becoming a top three multi point conferencing service provider, BBS is employing a strategic approach influenced by the successful competitive tactics used by the personal computer industry, according to Anderson. Tactical approaches within the strategy include: Gaining share in the video, voice and document conferencing markets quickly and aggressively; Controlling service and operating costs by outsourcing and forging key strategic alliances to achieve broader market reach; and, Deploying rapid innovations such as Internet based, multi point document conferencing, scheduled for January 1997 general availability. Neil Hediger, vice president of marketing, BellSouth Business Systems, explained: "At BellSouth, we do not believe we have to 'make it' ourselves. We are working with strategic alliance partners, such as ConferTech International on voice and document conferencing service and VSI Enterprises on multi point video conferencing service. Leveraging the strengths of these alliance partners and our commitment to standards based services enables us to offer the best price and performance value in the marketplace." As an example, Hediger noted that BellSouth will provide services and pricing plans that match individual customer requirements. In terms of pricing, the company will offer per minute use plans as well as monthly use plans that are priced two to five times less than competitors' offerings. "With our approach, BellSouth is taking a leadership position to dramatically expand conferencing usage by making multi point video conferencing an affordable business communications tool," Hediger concluded. Commenting on the BellSouth introduction, Robert Mirani of the Yankee Group said, "BellSouth has made a bold entry into business conferencing services. The company's standards based approach will provide much needed leadership to this evolving market. Its family of video, audio and text services offers superior integration of advanced conferencing technology and customer support." BellSouth Operates Largest Commercial Video Conferencing Network A second cornerstone of BBS' conferencing services business plan is the company's commitment to operate an open standards, multi point video network that eclipses all other competitors' networks in size and capacity. BellSouth has engineered and built the largest commercial multi point video conferencing network in the United States, featuring four to 15 times as many multi point control units (MCUs) the key network component as its major competitors. With more than 30 MCUs deployed throughout the top 20 markets in its nine state region, BellSouth provides access to more than 1,000 ports of capacity four to seven times larger than that of any other provider. For video conferencing users, this number of MCUs delivers increased network availability which translates into greater freedom and convenience for scheduling video conferences, with some sites benefiting from the reduction or even elimination of long distance charges. In addition to establishing the world's largest commercial multi point video conferencing network, BellSouth already operates another industry leading multi point video conferencing network for the Georgia State wide Academic and Medical System (GSAMS). Consisting of more than 20 MCUs, the GSAMS network facilitates a variety of communications tasks, including distance learning and telemedicine. All GSAMS conference reservation and scheduling services are provided by BellSouth's strategic partner, VSI Enterprises. VSI's Video Administrator software package schedules more than 100 conferences per day, covering 400 sites. For BellSouth's commercial network, VSI also serves as the primary systems integrator and offers BellSouth video conferencing customers a number of services. These include site surveys, wiring/system installation, centralized service reporting, trouble analysis/ diagnostics and repair. Moreover, VSI's unique software based conferencing management system provides greater flexibility, ease of use, and the high degree of reliability that business customers demand. BellSouth is also teaming with Vtel Corp., another leader in video conferencing services and products, to provide desktop, roll about and room systems and consulting services to offer customized video conferencing solutions. Both Vtel and VSI are part of BellSouth's Network Complementary Applications Program (NCAP). BellSouth's conferencing network is based on VideoServer, Inc.'s Multimedia Conferencing Servers. One of the recognized leaders in open standards based multi point video conferencing, VideoServer specializes in networking equipment and associated software used to create multimedia conferencings that connect multiple users over wide area networks and allow them to interact as a group. The company's products provide multi point conferencing, as well as applications for conference control, network management and bandwidth management. Voice and Document Conferencing Alliance Emphasizes Enhanced Services In the voice and document conferencing arena, BellSouth selected ConferTech International, the largest dedicated multimedia teleconferencing company in the world. Based in Denver and one of the pioneers in a strong and rapidly growing technology industry, ConferTech's roots trace to 1978 with the invention of the first teleconferencing bridge. In 1995, ConferTech became the first service provider to expand its data conferencing services to support T.120 compliant software and room systems. Today, the company has an installed bridge capacity of more than 12,000 ports worldwide and has shipped more than 40,000 ports of bridging technology to customers around the world. For voice and document conferencing services, BellSouth will focus on providing customers with enhanced capabilities, such as audio bulletin boards, fax broadcast, fax on demand, translation services, transcription services and quick polling. Hediger explained, "Our voice and document conferencing services will help our business users create new opportunities for meeting with their customers and prospects. In essence, these services will benefit anyone interested in speeding up day to day business processes and enhancing relationships with colleagues and clients." The document conferencing offering is an open standards based T.120 service, which accommodates multi point document collaboration and high resolution image sharing over analog lines or the Internet. Access to document conferencing via the Internet an industry leading service feature will provide corporate customers with increased network flexibility and speed. BellSouth is a $17.9 billion communications services company. It provides telecommunications, wireless communications, directory advertising and publishing, video and information services to more than 25 million customers in 17 countries worldwide. BellSouth's telecommunications operations provide service over one of the most advanced networks in the world for nearly 22 million access lines in its nine state region that includes Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. Visit BellSouth Corporation's web site at www.bellsouth.com. For Information Contact: David A. Storey, BellSouth, (205)977-5001 Debbie McGinley, Bozell Public Relations, (212)484-7774 --------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 96 00:53:06 CST From: Mark Peacock Subject: Cell Phones in Aircraft goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) wrote: > Hmm, the last several flights I've been on (using American Airlines > and Midway), you *have* been allowed to use cellphones on the plane > before takeoff. ->snip<- > Airlines and captains appear to have a lot of discretion in this > matter, so perhaps you've just run into airlines or > pilots who impose a "no cellphones, period" rule instead of just > banning them during instrument-critical periods such as takeoff. dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) wrote: > With a lot of the more modern aircraft now being 'fly by wire' i.e. > computer controlled, I would not want to risk having EMI from a cell > phone getting into any of the systems and causing problems Once, while standing and waiting to de-plane, I powered up my cell phone to alert my ride that I had arrived. The flight attendent immediately told me to shut it off. I complied, but given that we were at the gate with the engines off, I told the flight attendent that she wasn't making a lot of sense. She told me that some captains get very sticky about the no-cellphone rule, especially on the new fly-by-wire planes, such as the Airbus A321 we were on. She said that the captains flying Boeing 727s and DC-9s were much less fussy about cell-phones on the ground. Mark Peacock Deloitte & Touche Consulting Group Chicago, Illinois mpeacock@dttus.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It sounds to me like she was the one getting very sticky about things. I wold have asked to speak with the captain to confirm that those were his instructions. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Availability of Special ISDN Customer Premises Equipment? Date: 24 Sep 1996 22:32:50 -0700 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article capsalad@gate.net writes: > Can anyone help me get a high-level understanding of what the UUS > and ATP features are for, why anyone would want them, and how they > might be used? I'm drawing a blank here. ISDN setup requests are very much like X.25 call requests: They offer a number of fields intended to communicate next-higher-level-protocol. The reason there are so many, is probably because five different implementors on the committee each proposed a mechanism, and in the political give-and-take, they ended up including all of them, but making them all optional. Which means none of them are usable. In X.25, we had: - call user data (variable length, the first 4 designed to carry next-level-protocol selection from user to user). In the later variations, ("fast select") user data was expanded, and could be included even on call reject. This allowed a transaction protocol to be implemented in rejected call requests, which formed a sort of connectionless datagram protocol. While ths was elegant and efficient, it really bothered the telco, which felt that one would then have to charge for uncompleted call attempts, and since this bothered North American customers, they tended to strip out the user data instead. - network specific facility requests. Most networks processed and stripped all of these at the originating switch, but some passed them end-to-end. - subaddressing. Usually two extra address digits, not processed by the network, but passed end-to-end. Since none of these were guaranteed, user software had to be configurable to use any of these. (Call user data made the most sense, but subaddresses were more generally available worldwide.) My expectation is that we will converge on support for (and use of) UUI, so long as nobody expects to be able to do UUI on rejected calls. Meanwhile, your validation test should verify that arbitrary bit fields will be passed end-to-end. 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 ------------------------------ From: Hascall H. Sharp Subject: Re: Availability of Special ISDN Customer Premises Equipment? Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 17:48:11 -0400 Organization: Cisco Systems, Inc. capsalad@gate.net wrote: > I'm researching some new ISDN features for Nortel from a > validation perspective, and I can't seem to locate any CPE equipment > which makes use of User-to-User Signaling or Access Transport features > (low- and high-layer compatibility, calling and called party > subaddresses). Are there, in fact, any currently available Type I > (BRI) devices that make use of this information? I've been designing ISDN CPE for about ten years and I have avoided basing any CPE features on the services you describe because the CO switch vendors and the network providers did not and do not provide these services in a reliable fashion. I can think of lots of applications for these services (e.g., delivery of routing updates over UUS links instead of setting up a call), but it makes no sense to design and build a feature that is unusable because the network can't support it. I suppose its a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Hascall H. ("Chip") Sharp voice: +1 (919) 472-3121 Consulting Engineer fax: +1 (919) 472-2177 Cisco Systems email: chsharp@cisco.com 7025 Kit Creek Road http://www.cisco.com/ P.O. Box 14987 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-4987 USA ------------------------------ From: hzambrano@synapse.net (Hugo Zambrano) Subject: DDS vrs T1 (What Makes the Difference Other Than Speed?) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 04:19:27 GMT Organization: Synapse Internet [www.synapse.net] Can sombody out there tell me what are the technical limitations of a DDS line that does not allow it to transfer T1 rates? Both use four wires; Both are digital transmissions; Both need a DSU/CSU; I already now that DDS can transfer up to 64Kbps (or 56Kbps) and that T1 can transmit up to 1.544 Mbps What are those technical differences that make the difference? ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: Nynex Penalties, was Re: Articles Don't Flatter RBOCs or Cable Date: 24 Sep 1996 06:39:07 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 23, 1996 14:52:56 in article , 'dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein)' wrote: > In cc004056@interramp.com (Greg > Monti) writes: >> In {The Wall Street Journal} during the week of September 16 to 20, >> several articles appeared which don't bode well for the Bell Operating >> Companies or cable systems. >> Regulators in Nynex's states have to approve the merger and are >> loathe to do so. New York State, for example, sets benchmarks for >> customer service. The benchmarks get tougher with each passing year >> and cover items such as showing up on time for appointments, >> answering telephones in a timely manner, and fixing serious problems >> within the 24 hours observed by most other phone companies across >> the USA. > And which is also (the 24 business hour timeframe) specifically > referenced in NYS law. Perhaps NY State should be looking at this from the *other* direction, namely that a merger with BA would IMPROVE response times, since NYNEX would then be able to draw on BA's labor pool and subcontractors more so than it does now. I personally have had extremely good experience with BA's service division on every call I've made. Of course, the flip side is that it would deepen NYNEX's pockets to pay bigger fines :-) >> New York State charges Nynex cash penalties for each shortfall. So >> far in 1996, Nynex has paid $19 million in penalties to New York. It >> has also paid $20 million in penalties to Massachusetts in the last >> two years. > One key clarification should be added here: Nynex's penalty money > doesn't merely go back into the gummint's endless wallet. Most of that > money is, in fact, rebated to customers as a credit on a phone bill. > Earlier this year people in the NYC area (aside from midtown, where > service was supposedly good) got a (roughly) $9 credit on their bills. > There's another (approx) $2 coming in the next round. Just a drop in the (Bell) Atlantic. How much did they raise in the last round of rate increases in all states they serve in the last 24 months? John Cropper, NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 6o9.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 6o9.637.943o email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: jdearing@netaxs.com (John Dearing) Subject: Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted Date: 24 Sep 1996 02:18:55 GMT Organization: Philadelphia's Complete Internet Provider David Siegel (David-Siegel@deshaw.com) wrote: > I'm looking for a home phone system. I'm going to be installing up to > 16 phones (a mixture of regular phones, modems, fax machines, intercoms > (on exterior doors) and answering machines). I'd like the system to > support both analog phones, and "feature phones", that are specific to > the system. The functions that I need include the following: -=[ list of required features deleted ]=- I'm not sure if it's still made, but your list sounds like the feature list of the Panasonic "616" PBX. 6 C.O lines and 16 stations. Stations can be regular analog devices (phones, modems, fax machines, etc...) or "feature phones". I helped with an installation a few years back and know three folks that have the systems and they're all very happy with them. You'll probably have to contract with an installation company since (at the time I was involved at least) Panasonic only sold to Authorized Resellers. Good luck! John Dearing : Philadelphia Area Computer Society IBM SIG President Email : jdearing@netaxs.com U.S.Snail : 46 Oxford Drive, Langhorne PA 19047 (USA) Voice Phone : +1.215.757.8803 (after 5pm Eastern) ------------------------------ From: roedder@netcom.com (Spencer Roedder) Subject: Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 17:01:27 GMT David Siegel (David-Siegel@deshaw.com) wrote: > I'm looking for a home phone system. I'm going to be installing up to > 16 phones (a mixture of regular phones, modems, fax machines, intercoms > (on exterior doors) and answering machines). I'd like the system to > support both analog phones, and "feature phones", that are specific to > the system. The functions that I need include the following: This is a vague answer, but I would suggest looking in the various home automation catalogs. In one I got recently (it's at home now so I don't have the name) there was a Panasonic 16-line 6-trunk PBX that took feature and regular phones and had lots of smarts. And about 8 years ago some of my co-workers used and swore by the small Panasonic PBXs. roedder@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: tomthiel@aol.com (Tom Thiel) Subject: Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted Date: 25 Sep 1996 02:45:24 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article , David Siegel writes: > I'm looking for a home phone system. I'm going to be installing up to > 16 phones (a mixture of regular phones, modems, fax machines, intercoms > (on exterior doors) and answering machines). I'd like the system to > support both analog phones, and "feature phones", that are specific to > the system. Seriously consider the AT&T (Lucent) Partner Plus or Partner II Telephone Systems. They will do everything you specify and more. I don't sell them, but I do install them, and have found it to be a very reliable, flexible, expandable system. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #511 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Sep 25 17:29:10 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA12788; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 17:29:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 17:29:10 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609252129.RAA12788@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #512 TELECOM Digest Wed, 25 Sep 96 17:29:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 512 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ACLU Sues Georgia Over Net Regulation (Tad Cook) Ameritech -> Nynex Cellular Brownout (Rob Warmowski) Internet Phone Petition (Reed Miller) Re: 214/972 Confusion (D. Larry Martin) Re: Philadelphia EXchanges, Circa 1946 (Michael Muderick) Re: Strange North Georgia Phone Pricing (John R. Levine) Re: Shortwave Radio in the USA (Jim Haynes) Re: Sheath Slitter Tool Wanted (Mike Morris) A European Communications Group Has Openings in Research (Stephen Gallucci) Re: NANP - In or Out? (John R. Grout) Re: What Services Are Offered by Concert? (David Larsen) Re: Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) (Bill Newkirk) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: ACLU Sues Georgia Over Net Regulation Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:49:18 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Suit Challenges State's Restraint of the Internet Via AP By JARED SANDBERG The Wall Street Journal Can the state of Georgia hold sway over the global Internet? A federal lawsuit filed against the state Tuesday by the American Civil Liberties Union should eventually answer that question. The suit, filed in federal district court in Georgia, challenges a new Georgia law that makes it illegal in some instances to communicate anonymously on the Internet and to use trademarks and logos without permission. The ACLU, joined by 13 plaintiffs including an array of public- interest groups, contends that the Georgia law is "unconstitutionally vague" and that its restraints on using corporate logos and trade names are "impermissibly chilling constitutionally protected expression." The plaintiffs also argue that the Georgia law, which imposes a penalty of up to 12 months in jail and $1,000 in fines, illegally tries to impose state restrictions on interstate commerce, a right reserved for Congress. The legal challenge is one of the first major assaults on state laws that seek to rein in the Internet, despite its global reach and audience. Since the beginning of 1995, 11 state legislatures have passed Internet statutes and nine others have considered taking action. Connecticut passed a law last year that makes it a crime to send an electronic-mail message "with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person" -- despite the Internet's hallowed tradition of "flaming" users with messages designed to do just that. Virginia enacted a bill this year making it illegal for a state employee -- including professors who supposedly have academic freedom on state campuses -- to use state-owned computers to get access to sexually explicit material. New York state has tried to resurrect prohibitions on "indecent material" that were struck down as unconstitutional by a federal appeals panel ruling on the federal Communications Decency Act three months ago. Most Internet laws target child pornographers and stalkers. Opponents argue the well-intended efforts could nonetheless chill free speech and the development of electronic commerce. They maintain that the Internet, which reaches into more than 150 countries, shouldn't be governed by state laws that could result in hundreds of different, and often conflicting, regulations. "We've got to nip this in the bud and have a court declare that states can't regulate the Internet because it would damage interstate commerce," says Ann Beeson, staff attorney for the ACLU. "Even though it's a Georgia statute, it unconstitutionally restricts the ability of anybody on the Internet to use a pseudonym or to link to a Web page that contains a trade name or logo. It is unconstitutional on its face." Esther Dyson, president of high-tech publisher EDventure Holdings Inc. and chairwoman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a high-tech civil liberties organization that is a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit, calls the Georgia law "brain-damaged and unenforceable" and adds: "How are they going to stop people from using fake names? Anonymity shouldn't be a crime. Committing crimes should be a crime." But Don Parsons, the Republican state representative who sponsored the Georgia bill, countered that the law is a necessary weapon to combat fraud, forgery and other on-line misdeeds. The groups that oppose it, he says, "want to present (the Internet) as something magical, as something above and beyond political boundaries." It is none of these things, he adds. Nor does the Georgia law seek to ban all anonymity, Mr. Parsons says; instead, it targets people who "fraudulently misrepresent their (Web) site as that of another organization." Misrepresenting on-line medical information, for example, could cause serious harm to an unsuspecting user, he says. But Mr. Parsons's critics, including a rival state lawmaker, Rep. Mitchell Kaye, say political reprisal lies behind the new law. They say Mr. Parsons and his political allies were upset by the Web site run by Mr. Kaye, which displayed the state seal on its opening page and provided voting records and sometimes harsh political commentary. Mr. Kaye asserts that his Web site prompted the new law's attack on logos and trademarks that are used without explicit permission. "We've chosen to regulate free speech in the same manner that communist China, North Korea, Cuba and Singapore have," Mr. Kaye says. "Legislators' lack of understanding has turned to fear. It has given Georgia a black eye and sent a message to the world -- that we don't understand and are inhospitable to technology." Mr. Parsons denies that the political Web site was the primary reason for his sponsorship of the new statute. The very local dispute underscores the difficulty of trying to legislate behavior on the Internet. "It creates chaos because I don't know what rules are going to apply to me," says Lewis Clayton, a partner at New York law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. "Whose laws are going to govern commercial transactions? You don't want to have every different state with the ability to regulate what is national or international commerce." In the case of the Georgia statute, while its backers say it isn't a blanket ban of anonymity, opponents fear differing interpretations of the law could lead to the prosecution of AIDS patients and childabuse survivors who use anonymity to ensure privacy when they convene on the Internet. "Being able to access these resources anonymously really is crucial," says Jeffery Graham, executive director of the AIDS Survival Project, an Atlanta service that joined the ACLU in the lawsuit. His group's members "live in small communities," he says, and if their identities were known, "they would definitely suffer from stigmas and reprisals." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 11:54:15 CDT From: rob@tezcat.com (Rob Warmowski) Subject: Ameritech -> Nynex Cellular Brownout During a trip this week to Noo Yawk City, I took my trusty cellphone and the assumption that my carrier's (Ameritech) roaming policies were something approaching dependably ubiquitous among major metropolitan centers. I was, of course, wrong. Upon arriving in Manhattan, I announced my MIN and ESN to the Nynex network via dialing the usual #18 and was denied roaming service. A call to Ameritech customer service by landline led to the discovery that Nynex's service area had been "browned out" by Ameritech, the reason given by Customer Service supervisors being the "astronomical amount of cloning and piracy going on in Nynex's service area." Amusingly, an alternative cellular carrier _was_ made available, whose name I now forget, but I will never forget their outrageous prices: $1.75 for "call setup" and $1.50 / minute. Well, that's NY piracy, all right. I have three questions: - Is this brownout condition in existence between other carriers in other markets, - What effect might the new PIN-less RF signature authentication techniques have on the brownout condition in existence currently between Ameritech and Nynex? - How exactly may one most effectively scream and holler about the sudden, unannounced and uncompensated crippling of my Ameritech cellular service? Rob Warmowski Network Sales Consultant - Tezcat Communications, Inc. rob@tezcat.net / 1023 W. Jackson, Chi Il 60607 / (312) 850-0181 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Roaming between carriers is getting a little more 'iffy' than it used to be. I think what you need to do in some cases such as Chicago <==> New York is notify Ameritech in advance -- while you are still here in their territory -- of your plans. I also know that only a select few prefixes of Ameritech Cellular are able to roam outside Ameritech's territory; or let's say roam in the areas where there has been the most trouble. The prefix my cell phone is on is 847-727, and I am told that is a prefix eligible for roaming without any advance notice needing to be given. It is rare these days that I ever go anywhere other than this immediate area or Milwaukee (also an Ameritech point) so in a way I don't know why I bothered getting the 'roamable' prefix of 847-727, but I did. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 14:10:47 EDT From: reedm@ucg.com (Reed Miller) Subject: Internet Phone Petition The last I heard about the petition by ACTA was that Chairman Reed Hundt of the FCC had made a speech at INET in which he said, "We shouldn't be looking for ways to subject new technologies to old rules." He added, "Instead, we should be trying to fix the old rules so that if those new technologies really are better, they will flourish in the marketplace." Actually, Hundt had one of his cohorts make the speech for him because he couldn't make INET at the last minute. But, the effect is the same. Apparently the FCC is leaning away from regulating voice calls over the Net. I talked with the lawyer for America's Carriers Telecommunication Association (ACTA), Chuck Heilen, in early August about Hundt's speech, and he said ACTA is not going to drop the petition. So, the FCC will more than likely have to make a decision at some point, but who knows when with all the '96 act stuff they're tackling. I also interviewed reps from the Big Three long distance carriers in early August for a story I did on I-phones, and they said they're not concerned that the phones might wipe out regular long distance. MCI and AT&T even said they would consider offering Internet phones to customers if the FCC made a strong stand against regulating voice calls on the Net. MCI added that it's testing an I-phone. This stance by the Big Three sounded strange to me, but I guess it shows just how far they're willing to go to keep their ISP customers happy. They're buying big chunks of bandwidth, after all. Any other theories on why they'd take this position? Reed Miller Editor of 411 Newsletter CCMI (The Center for Communications Management Information) ------------------------------ From: DAmos@why.net (D. Larry Martin) Subject: Re: 214/972 Confusion Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 03:44:12 GMT Organization: Why? Network (817) 795-1765 psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) wrote: > On Sep 10, 1996 21:00:00, 'gordon@sneaky.lerctr.org (Gordon Burditt)' > wrote: >> 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. Here's something even more confusing. I dialed my home (now in the 972 NPA) from my office (in the 214 NPA) using seven digits (forgot to change my speed dial) and got through. I thought after the change that you HAD to dial ten digits when crossing NPA's. BTW, my wife confirmed that it works the other way around as well. So does that mean that some of the outlying offices may not have been fully converted yet? D. Larry Martin DAmos@why.net 74634.246@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: am004d@netaxs.com (Michael Muderick) Subject: Re: Philadelphia EXchanges, Circa 1946 Date: 25 Sep 1996 04:09:22 GMT Organization: Philadelphia's Complete Internet Provider Lisa Hancock (hancock4@cpcn.com) wrote: > In Phila, City Hall continues to be served by MUnicipal 6, now > referred to 686. In the 1970s, this was a centrex with a 24 position > 608 switchboard in City Hall. The operator's number if you didn't > know the direct extension or for non-dialable extensions was MU > 6-9700; after the bicentennial it became MU 6-1776. > The City Govt had a lot of phones. In the 1970s, quite a few were > five digit extension numbers, which were not diable directly from the > outside, but dialable from other City Govt lines. Not too long ago > the system was revised, and the five digit extensions were converted to a > new exchange 685 (which makes sense.) A visit to Phila's main library > (Logan Square) only a few years ago found plain 500 sets with the > MUnicipal 6 number card still service. I'm told "most" such phones > are replaced now with touch-tone models. I think that many of the phones in the library, at least in the public areas are still rotary. Up until a few years ago, the main card catalog area had six button key strips with double headset jacks so that librarians could go with headset and lookup info. To this day, much of the library is still 1A2 equipment. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 96 00:38:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Strange North Georgia Phone Pricing Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Several COs on the Tennessee-Georgia border near Chattanooga have > customers with *different local calling areas* SERVED OUT OF THE SAME > SWITCH! Hey, there's a switch like that three blocks from here with nary a state line in sight. The Trumansburg Home Telephone Company has three exchanges, Trumansburg, Interlaken, and Ovid. T'burg is the most southerly and closest to Ithaca, the largest city in the area, then Interlaken, then Ovid. There's only one switch, here in Trumansburg. The local calling areas are: T'burg: T'burg and Ithaca Interlaken: Interlaken, Ovid, and Ithaca Ovid: Ovid, Interlaken, and Lodi (another small town nearby) Interlaken is local to Ithaca, but toll to T'burg, even though you have to go through T'burg to get from Interlaken to Ithaca. So if I call Interlaken, the call goes out of the switch on a toll trunk to NYNEX in Syracuse, where all the toll calls are switched, and back on another toll trunk to the very same switch, for which I pay about 9 cents/minute. Wow! The reasons for this wierd setup are historical. The three towns originally had separate manual exchanges with only intra-town calls considered local. The switches were consolidated about 15 years ago for cost savings. Interlaken and Trumansburg both petitioned at some point to add Ithaca to their local calling areas, and got it along with a small increase in their monthly rate, but never bothered to ask for each other since the call volume between the two is small. (Ithaca is about 10 times as big as T'burg, Interlaken, and Ovid together, although we have a diplomatic motif music club founded by ex-Woodstock hippies and they just have the extremely overrated Moosewood restaurant.) The telco's chief engineer has told me that they'd be much happier if they could treat all their intra-switch traffic as local and not send it out to NYNEX and back, but the cost of changing the tariffs and the political hassles involved therein aren't worth it. 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: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 22:59:04 -0700 Subject: Re: Shortwave Radio in the USA Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Here's a suggestion. Get a nice big world map and hang it on the wall. Get a supply of pushpins or map tacks or adhesive dots. When the kid hears a station on the radio help him find the location on the map and mark it. Maybe that will get him interested in hunting for more stations and in geography. If you have a globe, or an azimuthal equidistant map centered on Chicago, you can also see how far away the station is, and in which direction. You might also want to keep a log of stations heard, with date, time, frequency, call sign or name, location, and something about what you heard. Someone suggested World Radio-TV Handbook or Passport to World Band Radio. Fine books, but if you want to spend less just get Monitoring Times or Popular Communications magazine, as these have recent shortwave schedules. Which leads me to the soapbox for another campaign. I think it would be neat to get a whole school class and give them an assignment. Use an AM radio (because everybody has one). Listen for a non-local station. Hint - late night or early morning is the best time. Write down the date and time, call letters, frequency, and city. Then on a certain date everyone gets up and tells what station was heard, points it out on a map, and tells something learned about the city or area from listening to the broadcast. This might be as mundane as the weather and the names of some advertisers; but we could hope for something more interesting, maybe local business or politics. That's all the assignment, but the assumption is that some of the kids will be interested in keeping it up, adding more stations to the list of stations heard, getting into shortwave or amateur radio, and learning about geography and society in the process. With enough data there's also material for some science: what is the relation among frequency, distance, and time of day that stations are most likely to be heard? ------------------------------ From: morris@cogent.net (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: Sheath Slitter Tool Wanted Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 03:44:25 PDT In article tewhite@mailbox.syr. edu (T E White) writes: > I am trying to locate the manufacturer or retailer of a sheath slitter > tool that we used when I worked for US WEST. The tool was silver in > color and had a razor blade type cutting blade in the middle. One > could hold this tool on both ends and draw it down on the cable to > open up the sheath(s). Then one could turn the blade perpendicular to > the tool and wring the sheath around the circumference of the cable. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No guarentees, but you might check with > Mike Sandman. His mail order catalog of telephone tools is very complete > with things like this. Known as "Chicago's Telecom Expert", he has > operated his business for several years and is pretty well known both > here in this Digest and in general on the Internet. To get one of his > catalogs see http://www.sandman.com or mailto:mike@sandman.com or > contact his shop at 630-980-7710 in Roselle, Illinois. PAT] Try: Neuses, P. K., Inc. Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 USA 847-253-6555 FAX: 847-253-6652 They make a lot of off-the-wall stuff like crossbar adjusters, cable slitters, etc. ------------------------------ From: stepheng@scom.com (Stephen Gallucci : S-Com) Subject: European Communications Group Has Openings in Research Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:15:23 GMT Organization: S-Com CSE Ltd. A European Communications Group has a number of openings in its research and analysis department. Contact Stephen Gallucci 01296 311402 http://bigweb.scom.com/scom/advert/95_00833.html S-COM Computer Systems Engineers Ltd. Phone (+44) 01296-311411 Fax (+44) 01296-436895 Location UK, Europe, USA, or work from home The company A leading supplier of business and market information to worldwide customers The project 1. Broadband communication. 2. Network services. 3. Wide area communication. 4. international telecommunications (regulatory issues). 5. General voice telecommunications (PBX, CTI, etc) The role 1. Research and analysis of vendor product lines and of related markets. 2. Work as part of a global team (ie with others in other countries). 3. Participation in custom research projects. 4. support of sales activity Rates Dependant on experience Start Date Ongoing Contract length Long term Contract or permanent Other lures Chance to work remotely from home Please mail your CV to Stephen Gallucci mailto:stepheng@scom.com contact me direct 01296 311402 ------------------------------ From: grout@polestar.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: NANP - In or Out? Date: 25 Sep 1996 10:17:36 -0700 Organization: Center for Supercomputing R and D, UIUC In article Jeremy Parsons writes: > International is international, so really if there is a concern, the > option has to be either: > (a) The NANP countries part company and seek separate unique codes, and in > all likelihood no-one would stay in +1; > (b) +1 to be restructured by agreement of the NANP countries, so each > country has a unique prefix (not presently the case for US and Canada, > which each has multiple prefixes), to make international destinations > obvious; > (c) NANP remains as it is, and carriers endeavour to ensure that their > customers understand that 1-XXX may be domestic or international. In my opinion, if there is to be a change in the NANP, the most likely outcome is: (d) The NANP countries part company and the USA (which uses the vast majority of its numbering space) gets to keep +1. John R. Grout Center for Supercomputing R & D j-grout@uiuc.edu Coordinated Science Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ From: larsendg@mcgraw-hill.com (David Larsen) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 96 11:05:17 EDT Subject: Re: What Services Are Offered by Concert? Formed in July 1993 by BT and MCI, Concert was established to provide comprehensive telecommunications services on a global basis. Concert began marketing data services in June 1994 and introduced Concert VNS in November 1994. Under terms of the Concert joint venture, the MCI sales force is responsible for marketing Concert services in North, Central, and South America while BT is responsible for marketing Concert services in Europe, Asia, and the rest of the world. Concert provisions network services in over 800 cities in more than 50 countries and through approximately 6000 nodes. Concert currently offers a portfolio of networking services that consists of: 1) Concert Virtual Network Service (VNS); 2) Concert Managed Data Services including Concert Packet Services, Concert Frame Relay Service, and Concert Managed Bandwidth Services; and 3) Concert applications Services including Concert Message Switching, Concert EDI, and Concert Enterprise Integration. According to Concert, demand for international telecommunications services is expanding at three times the rate of demand for services within the United States or within the United Kingdom. With its sizable network infrastructure and its already-deployed global billing and network management systems, Concert believes that it is well positioned to compete in this rapidly growing market. Further information is contained in Datapro's report "Concert Network Services". Regards, David Larsen larsendg@mcgraw-hill.com Tel: +44 1628 773277 Fax: +44 1628 26865 Datapro Information Services Group Singapore Tel: +65 538 4432 Fax: +65 538 4436 ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: Signal Propagation (was Re: "Roaming" in Home Territory) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 10:36:27 -0400 Organization: Rockwell Avionics/Collins Reply-To: wenewkirk@rodes.cca.rockwell.com Joel M. Hoffman wrote: > Yes, but cellular phone use is banned in airplanes even when they are > on the ground in the airport. >That's< what I don't understand. If Because some people (even trained professionals) can be such dunderheads when it comes to use of radios. I would bet there are people that could be convinced that jet airplanes don't really fly but are really fast elevators or trains. So to make the rules simple enough for everyone to understand and enforce fairly, they said that if you're on the plane, you can't use the cell radiophone. That way you don't get into discussions along the lines of like "well, we're in the pattern, so we're ALMOST on the ground, and my need to call is so important that I just gotta call in." (For those just tuning in, the reason you don't use a cell phone in flight is because the typical transport aircraft flies high enough that the cell radiophone would contact more than one cell radio site. The problem with this is that cell radio system wasn't designed for this and doesn't like it and grief to others is experienced since folks don't get that a plane at 30,000 feet has a good line of sight distance ("...but captain, I'm only 5'9", how could I be putting out a signal at 30,000 feet?"). I could see adding another status light and gong to every aircraft that would say something like "No Cell Phones"..."Welcome to Melbourne International Airport, the time is 8:23 PM EST and you'll see that the captain has turned off the cell phones sign...") bill newkirk rockwell avionics/collins wenewkirk@rodes.cca.rockwell.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #512 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 26 12:57:06 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA13586; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 12:57:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 12:57:06 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609261657.MAA13586@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #513 TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 Sep 96 12:56:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 513 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cancelbots Flood Net; Thousands of Messages Lost (Tad Cook) Some Carriers Slow to Recognize New NPAs (Tad Cook) FTC Seeks Privacy Safeguards In Response To P-TRAK Flap (Monty Solomon) Phone Sex Goes Global With Help of Technology (Stan Schwartz) Selling ATM to Cable TV is Like Selling Shoes in Third World (CIR Web) Like, INVITE Someone to Phreak, Willya? (Elana Beach) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cancelbots Flood Net; Thousands of Messages Lost Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:35:58 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By Rory J. O'Connor Knight-Ridder Newspapers WASHINGTON -- Vandals swept through the Internet last weekend, wiping clean dozens of public bulletin boards used by groups of Jews, Muslims, feminists and homosexuals, among others. In one of the most widespread attacks on the international computer network, the programs automatically erased copies of more than 27,000 messages from thousands of servers, before operators stopped the damage. The identity of those responsible for launching the apparent hate attacks -- some of the programs were titled "fagcancel" and "kikecancel" -- is unknown. The incident further illustrates the shaky security foundation of the Internet, which has mushroomed from academic research tool to international communications medium in just three years. And it raised the ire of many Internet users furious at the ease with which a user can erase someone else's words from worldwide discussion groups, known as Usenet newsgroups, in a matter of hours. "There's nothing you can do as an individual user to prevent someone from canceling your message," said John Gilmore, a computer security expert in San Francisco. "We need something added to Usenet's software that would only allow a cancellation from the originator." The incident follows closely three other well-publicized Internet attacks. In two cases, hackers altered the World Wide Web home pages of the Justice Department and the CIA, apparently as political protests. In the third, a hacker overloaded the computers of an Internet service provider called Panix with hordes of phony requests for a connection, thus denying use of the service to legitimate users. The latest attacks -- called cancelbots -- were launched sometime over the weekend from a variety of Internet service providers, including UUNet Technologies in Fairfax, Va., and Netcom Inc. in San Jose, Calif. One attack was launched from a tiny provider in Tulsa, Okla., called Cottage Software, according to its owner, William Brunton. "The offending user has been terminated and the information has been turned over to the proper (federal) authorities," Brunton said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "It's now in their hands." Legal experts said it's unclear if the attacks constitute a crime under federal laws such as the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. "It's really a difficult issue," said David Sobel, legal counsel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington. "Can you assign value to a newsgroup posting? Because most of the computer crime statutes assume you're ripping off something of value." A spokesman for the FBI in Washington said he was unaware of any federal investigation of the incident, although it is the agency's policy not to comment on investigations. While some of the deleted messages have been restored on certain servers, where operators have retrieved them from backup copies of their disks, users of other servers where the messages haven't been restored will never be able to read them. The fact that a user can stamp out the words of someone else is an artifact of the original design of the Internet, begun as a Department of Defense project in 1969. The Internet consists of tens of thousands of computers, called servers, that act as repositories for public messages, private electronic mail and World Wide Web home pages. Servers throughout the world are interconnected through telephone lines so they can exchange information and route messages to the individual users, or clients, of a given server. Each server stores a copy of the constantly changing contents of newsgroups, which function as giant electronic bulletin boards dedicated to particular subjects. There are thousands of them, covering everything from particle physics to soap operas. Any Internet user is free to post a contribution to nearly any newsgroup, and the posting is rapidly copied from one server to another, so the contents of a newsgroup are identical on every server. Almost the only form of control over postings, including their content, is voluntary adherence to informal behavior rules known as "netiquette." The idea of cancelbots originated when the Internet and its newsgroups were almost exclusively the domain of university and government scientists and researchers. Their purpose was to allow individuals to rescind messages they later discovered to contain an error. The action took the form of an automatic program, itself in the form of a message, because it would be impossible for an individual to find and delete every copy of the posting on every Internet server. But the Usenet software running on servers doesn't verify that the cancel message actually comes from the person who created the original posting. All a malicious user need do is replace their actual e-mail address with that of someone else to fool Usenet into deleting a message. That counterfeiting is as simple as changing an option in the browser software most people use to connect to the Internet. "It's pretty easy. There's no authentication in the Usenet. So anybody can pretend to be anybody else," Gilmore said. It takes only slightly more sophistication to create a program that searches newsgroups for certain keywords, and then issues a cancelbot for any message that contains them. That is how the weekend attack took place. The use of counterfeit cancelbots is not new. The Church of Scientology, embroiled in a legal dispute with former members, last year launched cancelbots against the newsgroup postings of the members. Attorneys for the church claimed the postings violated copyright laws, because they contained the text of Scientology teachings normally available only to longtime members who have paid thousands of dollars. Net users have also turned false cancelbots against those who violate a basic rule of netiquette by "spamming" newsgroups -- that is, posting a message to hundreds or even thousands of newsgroups, usually commercial in nature and unrelated to the newsgroup topic. "This technology has been used for both good and evil," Gilmore said. But an individual launching a wholesale cancelbot attack on postings because of content is considered a serious violation of netiquette -- although one about which there is little recourse at the moment. "For everybody who takes the trouble and time to participate on the Internet in some way, I think it is not acceptable for somebody else to undo those efforts," Sobel said. "But what are the alternatives? Not to pursue this means of communications? Unintended uses and malicious uses seem to be inevitable." What's needed, some say, is a fundamental change in the Internet that forces individual users to "sign" their postings in such a way that everyone has a unique identity that can't be forged. "The fatal flaw is that newsgroups were set up at a time when everybody knew everybody using the system, and you could weed out anybody who did this," Brunton said. "This points out that flaw in the system, and that there are unreasonable people out there who will exploit it." --------------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Nothing was affected in the comp.dcom. telecom newsgroup, nor as far as I know in the a.d.t. or c.d.t.t. groups. To some extent I am able to backup or replace missing items if that were to happen in c.d.t. although it would be a real nuisance. If there were several people involved in this, as the newspaper article would seem to imply, I am curious to find out how they coordinated their efforts. It might very likely have all been the work of just the one person in Oklahoma since cancels can be mailed to other servers just like news items and then redistibuted from the site to which they were mailed. It is pretty sad, watching Usenet falling apart at the seams as it has been doing for quite awhile now. My own cancelbots which are located at a few very well connected news servers are always watching for stuff in c.d.t. which was not correctly approved with my own encryption scheme as the 'approved-by', and they likewise watch for cancels sent by unauthorized parties and notify me of those as well so that the message can be reissued. There was no unusual activity that I saw over the weekend. Of course I guess since we don't use this space to talk in a sympathetic way about gay people and Jews -- nor in an unsympathetic way for that matter; it just is not the theme here -- the vandal(s) saw no reason to bother us. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Some Carriers Slow to Recognize New NPAs Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 01:09:22 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Some Long-Distance Companies Slow to Recognize New Area Codes By Mark Krewatch, Daily Press, Newport News, Va. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Sep. 26--Three months after the 757 area code went into effect, some residents and businesses who heeded Bell Atlantic's advice to start using it right away still aren't getting all their calls. Voluntary use of the code began July 1; 757 will permanently replace 804 for Hampton Roads' customers on Feb. 1. Bell Atlantic, the local phone company for most people in the area, now gives out 757 as the local area code through its directory assistance, but some people report that the area code isn't working for all out-of-state callers. Jim Byrd, a wind tunnel engineer, said his parents in Texas were unable to reach him recently for about two weeks using the code. His family would hear a ring but not even the answering machine would pick up, Byrd said. They didn't realize they weren't getting through until they eventually tried the old 804 code and reached him. Fortunately, there were no family emergencies during the period, but around the region, "I imagine there's been calls missed that were critical," Byrd said. Brenda Epes, spokeswoman for Waters Advertising Agency Inc. of Newport News, said one of the firm's printers, located in Iowa, couldn't place a call to Waters using 757. The printer figured out the problem after calling the client Waters was representing, a Peninsula business still using the 804 code, Epes said. The communication glitch could mean some potential customers are unable to respond to ad materials distributed out of state, though Epes said none of Waters' clients has reported that happening. If out-of-state customers aren't getting through, however, they're unlikely to figure out why and report the trouble, she added, because people don't normally keep up with area code changes in other states. "You're blind -- you don't know there's a problem," Epes said. Paul Miller, a spokeswoman for Bell Atlantic-Virginia, said the problems are generated at the caller's end and are limited in scope. Some 30 new area codes are scheduled to be put in place across the country in the next 18 to 24 months, and though big long-distance companies such as AT&T, MCI and Sprint stay on top of the changes, other smaller companies may not. "There are literally hundreds of long-distance companies in the country; most people think there are only three," Miller said. Even with Bellcore, a company owned by the seven Baby Bells, administering area code changes in North America, there's a chance some long-distance companies haven't gotten the word yet, Miller said, though he guessed "a very small percentage" of residential callers would be affected. Miller said a more prevalent problem is that many businesses have outdated in-house switchboards that can't place calls to the newest area codes -- ones such as Virginia's 540 and 757 that have a middle digit other than a 1 or 0. While Bell Atlantic has informed its own business customers about potential shortcomings of switchboards manufactured before 1992, it can't ensure others outside its territory are aware. "To try to get word to everyone is difficult," Miller said. Bell Atlantic has encouraged customers to begin distributing their numbers with the new area code as early as possible. Miller said it's typical to have some lingering problems at the midpoint of the six-month grace period, and they should be worked out before February. "We never had any problems with 540 with any long-distance carriers after it became mandatory," he said, referring the new code instituted last January in the western and north-central parts of the state. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 01:54:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FTC Seeks Privacy Safeguards In Response To P-TRAK Flap Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Excerpt from Edupage, 24 September 1996 FTC SEEKS PRIVACY SAFEGUARDS IN RESPONSE TO P-TRAK FLAP The Federal Trade Commission has recommended broader privacy protections, responding to public outcry over an information service offered by Lexis-Nexis Inc. that critics say provides individuals' Social Security numbers, mothers' maiden names, and other confidential data to anyone willing to pay a nominal fee. "The ready availability of this information through a tracking service may facilitate identity fraud, credit fraud and other illegal activities," says the FTC. The P-TRAK service says it eliminated access to Social Security numbers earlier this year following consumer complaints, but users can still call up information by typing in a Social Security number. P-TRAK also says it doesn't provide mothers' maiden names (often used by credit card companies as a safeguard against unauthorized access), just individuals' maiden names, as part of its service. The FTC has recommended that credit-reporting agencies would no longer be able to supply this information to database operators such as Lexis. (Wall Street Journal 24 Sep 96 B7) ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Phone Sex Goes Global With Help of Technology Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 20:49:51 -0400 THE WASHINGTON POST There's a boom in exports under way in the poor tropical country of Guyana. Rather, make that X-ports, of a product the world can't seem to get enough of -- phone sex. This year, Guyana's lone telephone company could take in nearly $100 million from its burgeoning trade in specialized information services, such as telephone sex, as dialers in the United States and other countries place international calls to X-rated services in Guyana. New technology often has unforeseen consequences. But few business trends are as strange as what has resulted from the increasing ease and reliability of international calling: Phone sex has gone global. Americans who dial numbers for sexual talk with strangers may be reaching halfway around the world, often without realizing it. This has sent hundreds of millions of dollars flowing out of the United States and other industrial countries, experts said, and into faceless phone sex operations in places such as Guyana, the Philippines, Poland, the Netherlands Antilles islands and the tiny African country of Sao Tome. These telephone services have become an important source of foreign exchange for the smaller countries. It's a huge business for Atlantic Tele-Network Inc., a U.S. company that bought 80 percent of Guyana's national phone company, Guyana Telephone & Telegraph, for $16.5 million in 1991. In 1992 it began making circuits available to those offering "adult" chat, sports scores, weather, horoscopes and other audiotext services. ATN is incorporated in Delaware but has headquarters in the Virgin Islands and operates that country's phone system. "When we bought the [Guyana] phone company, we planned to run it just like a regular old phone company," company spokesman Edwin Crouch said. Then, he said, "audiotext found us," referring to the dozens of service providers in the United States and elsewhere that look for offshore places to handle calls. "We started marketing it and treating it as a serious business." In 1991, Guyana was receiving no audiotext calls from abroad. In 1995, it logged 102 million minutes of calling, according to ATN. That accounted for $91 million of Guyana Telephone & Telegraph's total revenue of $131 million. The figures continue to grow: The count had reached 60 million minutes of international audiotext by June of this year. Estimates differ as to what proportion of international audiotext calls involve sex. The London-based International Telemedia Association, an industry trade group, said only 35 percent, while Jason Kowal of Telegeography Inc., a Washington market research service, said the figure is more than 90 percent. Whatever the split, Guyana now is tied with the Netherlands Antilles as the world leader in a $1.8-billion international market for all types of audiotext services, according to Telegeography. They are followed by the little-known nations of Niue in the South Pacific and Sao Tome. The countries are playing to maximum effect an international payments system set up years ago that splits the cost of handling overseas calls. Under this system, the charges that an American pays for dialing Guyana, or any other country, are shared with that person's American long-distance company and the foreign phone company that picks up the call and routes it to the recipient. For years, many smaller countries have set high per-minute rates for incoming international calls, in hopes of maximizing the revenue they get from abroad. Sometimes this turns out to be counterproductive, because high rates mean that fewer people call the country. But by setting up these chat lines, the economics change. Waves of new calls into the country are generated, placed by people who are willing to pay high per-minute charges. The country's phone company then turns around and shares a portion of that money with the operator of the sex lines. In Guyana's case, U.S. long-distance companies pay Guyana Telephone & Telegraph 85 cents a minute for calls they send into the country, one of the highest rates in the Caribbean. The Guyana phone company, in turn, pays about 50 cents of that money to the audiotext service provider. In Guyana, the phone company has taken steps to insulate the chat-line business from the country's population. Residents are blocked from calling any of the services, GT&T's Crouch said, and the company has a rule barring service providers from mentioning Guyana in advertisements. Guyanese political and opinion leaders said residents are barely aware of the lucrative revenue stream that flows to the local phone company. "There was some stir about it the year before last, but it soon blew over," said W. Henry Skerrett, editor of Kaieteur News, a weekly in the capital of Georgetown. Instead, he said, people are too concerned with deteriorating social conditions - rampant crime, joblessness and political instability - to worry about the phone system. Pamadath J. Menon, chairman of Guyana's Public Utilities Commission, said his main complaint is that GT&T has not used enough of the earnings from chat services to upgrade the country's phone system. GT&T is fighting Menon's attempts to get the company to reserve 15 percent of its revenue for upgrades. "I'm unhappy that the large cash flows are not being reinvested for the benefit of the people of Guyana," he said. "It doesn't matter to us where the revenue comes from." Crouch said the audiotext revenues "have helped toward the expansion of Guyana's phone system. Guyana certainly has a far better telephone system today than it did five years ago, and audiotext is a significant part." Few Guyanese are employed as sex chatters, experts in the industry said. One reason may be that many international services promise, but do not deliver, truly live conversations. A call to an advertised Guyana number connected to a six-minute recording promising "live" adult-oriented talk, only to refer the caller to a number in Niue, where a seven-minute recording ended with directions to dial a third number. The third number also was a recording. The total bill for the three calls: $71.33. ------------------ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And as often as not -- perhaps more often than not -- the calls is a source of double revenue for the proprietors, since it is quite likely one will find a gay guy from a small town in Iowa chatting with some other gay guy from a small town in North Dakota via the conference bridge in Guyana, both of them paying the $3.99 per minute or whatever rates are in effect. PAT ------------------------------ From: CIR Webmaster Subject: Selling ATM to Cable TV is Like Selling Shoes in Third World Date: 25 Sep 1996 18:11:14 -0400 Organization: Mail to Usenet Gateway [ News release reposted from http://www.cir-inc.com/news/ATMv2.html ] Communications Industry Researchers, Inc. PO Box 5387 Charlottesville, VA 22905 Contact: Lawrence Gasman (804) 984-0245 (804) 984-0247 (fax) Phone: (804) 984 0245 x 11 http://www.cir-inc.com/ e-mail: ldg@cir-inc.com September 23, 1996 Selling ATM to the Cable Television Industry is Like Selling Shoes in the Third World Charlottesville, VA--There is an old story about two shoe marketing executives discussing the potential for selling their products in a particularly poor Third World country, where hardly anyone wears shoes. One executive sees this as a wonderful situation -- a whole country full of people who do not yet have his products. The other executive claims that the situation is hopeless -- everyone knows that no one in the hypothetical country buys shoes. This situation is much like the one that holds in the cable television industry. So says a new report from Communications Industry Researchers, Inc. (CIR), a leading high-tech market research house based here. The new CIR report, ATM Markets: A Vertical Market Analysis -- Volume 2 (see ), points out that, the potential for selling ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) switches to the industry is potentially huge. According to Lawrence D. Gasman, president of CIR and the project manager for this study, "there are 11,000 cable systems in the U.S. and hardly any of them are using ATM. If every one of these systems bought an ATM switch, this segment of the ATM market might actually turn out to be the killer app for ATM." This, of course, is the view of the optimistic executive -- the one who thinks he will sell a lot of shoes. Yet the cable television industry shows no rush to buy ATM switches. ATM Markets: A Vertical Market Analysis -- Volume 2 claims, however, that many cable companies believe that ATM is where they are ultimately headed. The Trials -- And Tribulations -- of ATM The pessimistic executive -- the one who expects to sell no shoes -- will point out that, in practice, there has been very little actual activity in terms of ATM deployment in the cable industry, merely a few trials. And he will tell you that cable companies have been fiddling with ATM for several years, with no major rollouts resulting. Time Warner, which has been the only cable company to make a significant verbal commitment to ATM, has now stepped back quite smartly from its original plans. The contrast between the potential and actual level of ATM deployment in the cable television industry makes for a great deal of uncertainty in projecting the cable television industry's use of ATM. The question is not just when, but if? However, CIR believes good estimates can be made based on the recent behavior of the major players in this market. For example, the potential market for ATM switches in the cable television industry depends on how one assesses the likely future architecture of residential video systems. For the most part ATM in cable systems has been deployed in the form of one centralized ATM switch for a video trial. But CIR says that as ATM moves beyond the trial phase in this industry, networks will become more decentralized with perhaps as many as 10 switches in a single cable system. A Plausible Scenario CIR believes that trials of ATM switches will probably continue for the next three to four years, and ATM deployment will not go much beyond such trials, so that the deployment will not reach much more than 0.5 percent during that period. However, what happens after that point is far from clear. There seems a widespread belief, however, even among those who are skeptical about the future deployment of ATM in the cable television industry, that ATM switches will eventually take hold in this industry. A plausible scenario -- and the one that is adopted in ATM Markets: A Vertical Market Analysis -- Volume 2 -- that the market begins to take off in 2001 with the top 1,000 systems being ATM-based by the end of the forecasting period. This would represent approximately 6,000 switches, or 10 percent of the market. The adoption of ATM by cable television companies must be seen in the context of other changes, in particular the efforts of cable companies to emerge as suppliers of a broad range of interactive multimedia services including video-on-demand, consumer information services, home shopping/banking, etc. ATM is just one component of the future cable architectures that will supply such services and may turn out to be an unnecessary component. ATM Markets: A Vertical Market Analysis -- Volume 2 provides an in-depth analysis of ATM deployment in the cable television industry with detailed ten-year forecasts of switch shipments to the industry by type of switch and in volume and value terms. ATM Markets: A Vertical Market Analysis -- Volume 2 also provides similar analysis and forecasts for the telephone industry and the Internet Service Provider industry. A summary of CIR's forecasts for the all three industries is provided below. ATM Markets: A Vertical Market Analysis -- Volume 2 is part of a two-volume study of the ATM business. ATM Markets: A Vertical Market Analysis -- Volume 1 (see ), which was also just published, looks at the use of ATM in five end user industries: financial services, health care, education and training, and retail and wholesale. Each volume is priced at $5,000 and provides detailed volume and value forecasts and also case studies on leading network users. Further details of these studies can be obtained from Robert Nolan at 617-484-2077. Communications Industry Researchers, Inc. has been in business since 1979 and publishes market studies and newsletters and carries out demanding custom market research assignments on the commercial aspects of new communications technologies. EDITORS PLEASE NOTE: AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND GRAPHICS FOR THIS REPORT CAN BE OBTAINED ON REQUEST TO LAWRENCE GASMAN AT 804-984-0245 X 11 OR ldg@cir-inc.com, OR ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB AT . ------------------------------ From: elana@netcom.com (Elana Beach) Subject: Like, INVITE Someone to Phreak, Willya? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:45:13 GMT Sometimes ya GOT to wonder if they are simply askin' for it ... Somewhere in downtown Portland Oregon, located at a parking lot located kitty-corner from one of the bigger buildings around here (I ain't sayin' NUTHIN' more cluewise than that!) is an ordinary light-pole with a small phone box attached to it ... and not one, but TWO new phone cords complete with new phone plugs hanging from it ... just waiting for someone with a nice, handy phone to come along and plug them plugs right into their phone and call Madagascar or something. I can't believe it. One wouldn't even have to buy alligator clips. The lines are for some particular bus or RV that seems to park there sometimes. It's not there all the time. I really HOPE that they have some sort of long-distance blocking on those lines. Or SOMEthing. Sheesh! I mean, it's right there on a busy corner by day, where anyone can see the situation and go "Hmmmmm ...!" Situation: Should I do the right thing and attach a note to the line saying: "To whoever owns this line, this is a STOOOOOOOPID idea!!!" or should I ignore it, let stupidity have it's own reward and let the hackers and the phreakers give them a clue instead? Elana [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Up to your old tricks again I see, Elana. I remember when you were scoping out the phones in Union Station in Chicago, checking out the phones on people's desks in the customer service area. While I agree that the configuration you describe is not very clever on the part of whoever put it there, you might want to go in on the line and see *if you actually get anywhere* before you put up a note to them, etc. You may find it is just a tie-line to the bus company garage or an extension from the switchboard at the bus company offices or something like that and it is limited to about two places it can reach. In Chicago for many years the city busses did not have radio links to security and maintainence as they do now. Now every bus here has a regular phone receiver on armored cable attached to something hanging on the wall next to the driver which is a two-way radio. He can lift the receiver and talk to the garage, etc. But before they had that, the drivers would communicate via 'regular' phones which were in weather-proof, metal boxes attached to telephone poles every six or eight blocks. The boxes were supposedly locked and could only be opened with a 'CTA key' (a master key the CTA issues its drivers to open the door of their private bathrooms at the end of the line on their route in the turn-around zones, etc, as well as the telephone boxes and a few other things.) People thought it was smart to break into the phone boxes in some cases just to vandalize them and in other cases to make free calls. Imagine their surprise when they found out the phones were just extensions on a PAX, a little switchboard somewhere that connected all the various CTA offices, garages, security agents, etc, with no connection to outside lines at all. I would be surprised if the people are as dumb as they look, and if those handy-dandy connection points were any more than one termination of a ring-down to somewhere or an extension on the bus company PBX. That's just my guess. Followup and let us know, won't you? :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #513 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Sep 26 22:03:28 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA08983; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 22:03:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 22:03:28 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609270203.WAA08983@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #514 TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 Sep 96 22:03:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 514 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 214/972 Split Observations (Mark Tenenbaum) Re: 214/972 Confusion (John Cropper) Re: Signal Propagation (Bill Newkirk) Lucent Technologies: To Speak to a Webmaster, Press 1 (Robert McMillin) LATA Area Codes and Prefixes (Michael D. Emerson) ISDN in Argentina and Chile (Jefe Oficina Planeacion) Marathon Takeover by Nortel? (david@eop.ie) New French Numbers (Erratum) (Marc Zirnheld) Re: They Are Even More Stupid! (was Re: Stupid Spamster Tricks) (J. Levin) Telephone Scam Referring to 809 (But What About Splits?) (Ray Normandeau) Re: Is Undesirable Internet Advertising Increasing? (Craig Nordin) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 26 Sep 96 10:24:47 -0500 From: Mark Tenenbaum Subject: 214/972 Split Observations Mr. Townson: We're almost two weeks into the 214/972 split in the Dallas area and I have a few very random PERSONAL (not company for as you can see I do work for GTE) observations, questions and experiences to relate: 1) As is human nature, though all media, telephone company correspondence, etc. says to do so, I still have not re-programmed my speed dials either at home or at work. 2) I think I recall that only new cellulars and pagers will have 972. Now tell me this, in the future, if I am told to page someone at XXX-XXXX, how in the heck am I going to know which area code to use? I guess if I know the person has had the particular pager for a long time, I'd try 214 first. I see frustration ahead ... 3) What are Caller ID boxes showing for cross area code calls: ten digits with the new area code? Ten digits with the old area code? Only seven digits? Does it even matter because you're getting the person's name anyway? 4) Why is it that even though I have changed the appropriate 214s to 972 on some fax lists that I use from my computer, I am getting the faxes back undelivered? I changed those lists back to 214 and no problem. I wonder if this has anything to do with the fax machines on the other end needing to be re-programmed. 5) Because I am familiar with D/FW geography, I am not running into much difficulty in knowing when to dial ten digits (in my case when I call 214) or seven (in my case to any 972). Just in case, I have posted a list of 214 exchanges on the bulletin board next to one of my phones at home for possible reference. Haven't had to even look at it yet. I can just imagine what difficulties the geographically challenged D/FW tele-consumer is facing and certainly will face when the permissive period ends. Not to mention the frustrations out-of-towners will encounter. 6) One of the most common arguments against geographic splits is that businesses will have to have new stationery, business cards, etc. made. Just driving around town, I've noticed that another major expense for businesses will have to be re-painting their fleets to reflect correct area codes on the phone number on the sides of their trucks/cars. 7) How's this for confusing? My PLANO BASED burglar alarm monitoring company informs its customers that to reach them we need to dial 214-XXX-XXXX. Hello! Let's really try to confuse our customers! 8) Not only did the City of Plano (referring to my local government) change area code, but also due to growth beyond its phone system, its exchange changed as well. I must say, they handled the necessary PR very well -- apprising the citizens of both the exchange and area code change at the same time. Nice job. 9) The local sports call in station is very often running a "If you're in the new 972 area code, remember to put a 214 in front of our number." However, the sports jockeys are not getting the hang of using 214 in front of their number the 30 times an hour they state it. 10) When I hear someone complain about having to remember ten digits, I quickly remind them of something I picked up in TELECOM Digest. "No, you don't have to remember ten, just seven. You need only to remember what to put in front of the seven -- either 214 which you already know or 972 which will soon become second nature." 11) I think that it is kind of funny that to call Dallas from Irving where I work, say maybe two miles in distance, I have to dial ten digits (well eleven with the 9 to get an outside line), but to call my wife at home in Plano -- 20 miles away -- I only need to dial seven (well eight). 12) The world did not come to an end when the split occurred. 13) You'll note my new sign off as a result of the split. Comments welcome. Mark D. Tenenbaum Plano, TX (972, at least til the next split!) ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: 214/972 Confusion Date: 25 Sep 1996 22:52:57 GMT Organization: Pipeline On Sep 25, 1996 03:44:12 in article , 'DAmos@why.net (D. Larry Martin)' wrote: > psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) wrote: >> On Sep 10, 1996 21:00:00, 'gordon@sneaky.lerctr.org (Gordon Burditt)' >> wrote: >>> 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. > Here's something even more confusing. I dialed my home (now in the > 972 NPA) from my office (in the 214 NPA) using seven digits (forgot to > change my speed dial) and got through. I thought after the change > that you HAD to dial ten digits when crossing NPA's. BTW, my wife > confirmed that it works the other way around as well. So does that > mean that some of the outlying offices may not have been fully > converted yet? BINGO! Most of the conversions of outlying areas will not be completed until late October or early November. That, coupled with an expected addition of as many as fourty duplicate prefixes before the end of permissive dialing, and you can see what a headache this is going to be for SBC, especially in the billing department! Congratulations to Patrick Townson & * John Cropper, NiS / NexComm Telecom Digest on their 15th * PO Box 277 anniversary of public service. * Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 ************************************** Inside NJ: 6o9.637.9434 Check out Telecom Digest Online! * Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/ * Fax : 6o9.637.943o telecom-archives/ * email: psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: Signal Propagation Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 18:44:32 -0400 Organization: Rockwell Avionics/Collins Reply-To: wenewkirk@rodes.cca.rockwell.com dstott@uswest.com wrote: > In TELECOM Digest #507, Brett Frankenberger writes: >> Most airlines (i.e. any that I've flown) ban everything during >> takeoff and once aloft, ban everything designed to transmit or >> receive radio signals. This is all of their own accord -- the >> government doesn't have any requirements in this area (except >> the FCC ban on cell phone usage). > Does anyone know of any airline that requires a person to turn off > their pager during take off or landing? It seems like that is a radio > reciever. I know my Skypager has gone off on a flight before; we were > at 32,000 feet somewhere over the Midwest, heading for Chicago. Then > I used the GTE Airphone to return the call, and that's a radio > transmitter. > Except for the cell phones, sounds kind of arbitrary to me. Ah, but the airphone system is a system designed to work on the aircraft in harmony with the other equipment on board. It's specif- ically designed for use in the aircraft and there's been system testing done to show that the airphone system works w/o interfering with or receiving interference from other equipment on the aircraft. The problem with receivers is that the VHF navigation band is immediately above the end of the VHF FM broadcast band. One of the fears is that the person using the radio will have a high-side injection local oscillator that will end up being tuned to the same frequency as the navigation system frequency the aircraft is trying to use. The frequency setup for the pager's superhet receiver shouldn't present a problem. bill n. ------------------------------ From: rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin) Subject: Lucent Technologies: To Speak to a Webmaster, Press 1 Organization: Charlie Don't CERF Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 07:05:00 GMT I have spent a good deal of time brushing up on telephony technology lately, and in particular, the merging of voice and data, mainly because my company is going to make the big switch to T1 and I'm in a position to make both purchase and engineering decisions. I know that Lucent is the hardware end of AT&T, and that they make a number of products that might be useful to me. However ... a trip to http://www.lucent.com yields next to no information on this subject, unless I want to buy a 5ESS. (Even if I did, it provides nowhere near enough on that, either!) What about their Paradyne modems and CSU/DSUs? (Does Lucent make those? They don't say.) I pointed out earlier in this forum that Lucent's space ads in the {Wall Street Journal} (among other publications) make no mention of their website. Could that be because they don't think about the Internet much? Here's a great example of a giant company that could be really helped by serious Internet presence, yet they're still way, way behind the curve. Here's a free clue, if anyone at Lucent is listening: surf the sites put up by 3Com, Ascend, or (even) Cisco as an example of what to do, or in the latter case, where to start. Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: domingo7@cyberg8t.com (Michael D. Emerson) Subject: LATA Area Codes and Prefixes Date: 27 Sep 1996 01:12:22 GMT Organization: Cyberg8t Internet Services (800) 399-4NET Reply-To: domingo7@cyberg8t.com Hello, I'm developing a call accounting system for my company and need to determine the area codes and prefixes contained within a given LATA. I've tried the local carrier office (GTE) without success. If anyone has a source for such information I would appreciate it greatly. Also, I'm curious about who determines what constitutes a LATA? Thanks for the help. Michael D. Emerson domingo7@cyberg8t.com ------------------------------ From: JEFE OFICINA PLANEACION Subject: ISDN in Argentina and Chile Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 11:45:27 -0500 Hello you all, I am very interested in knowing the current situation of the ISDN market in Chile and Argentina, including national availability of ISDN BRIs and PRIs, number of ISDN ports, standards supported, type of services provided, etc. Any information or pointers to written or on-line sources will be appreciated. Best regards, Mario A. Castano Director, Planning Office CINTEL Centro de Investigaci=F3n de las Telecomunicaciones Av. 9 118-85 Bogota Colombia Telefax: +57 1 6208307/6208178=20 Email: m.a.castano@ieee.org ------------------------------ From: European On-Line Partners Subject: Marathon Takeover by Nortel? Date: 26 Sep 1996 18:19:23 GMT Organization: European On-Line Partners Hi, Did I hear on the grapevine today that Nortel are taking over Marathon? If so can anyone from either of these companies tell me if they are going to support the Marathon multiplexors through Nortel. Thanks in advance, David ------------------------------ From: Marc.Zirnheld@teaser.fr (Marc Zirnheld) Subject: New French Numbers (Erratum) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 15:20:14 GMT Reply-To: Marc.Zirnheld@teaser.fr There were some mistakes in the long list of changes to French phone numbers ... 19 33 12 ccc Intl Directory assistance 00 19 33 12 ccc is, of course, wrong, and should be read as follow : 19 33 12 ccc Intl Directory assistance 00 33 12 ccc (Thanks to John R. Levine ) 36 05 xx xx Tl, toll-free 08 36 xx xx should be read : 36 05 xx xx Tl, toll-free 08 36 05 xx xx (Thanks to Patrick Raffin ) Also, here is a few additionnal information regarding the (actual) "36" slice of the numbering plan. Info courtesy of Patrick Raffin . 36 02 Transpac 2400, 4800 bps 36 02 36 03 Transpac X32 ? 36 03 36 06 xx xx Transpac, variable speed ? 08 36 06 xx xx 36 07 xx xx Tl, test acces point 08 36 07 xx xx 36 08 xx xx Transpac <-> ISDN Gateway ? 08 36 08 xx xx 36 09 xx xx Tl, messaging 08 36 09 xx xx 36 43 xx xx Tl, access point from not to be called Foreign countries from France ? 36 58 salespeople, billing information 36 58 36 60 xx xx Mb, pagers, alphapage 08 36 60 xx xx 36 61 xx xx Mb, pagers, "operator"(TM) 08 36 61 xx xx 36 73 xx xx Public voice mail, same as 36 72 but for remote access 08 36 73 xx xx 36 88 Wake-up service 36 88 36 89 xx xx Conference service 08 36 89 xx xx 36 92 Directory assistance (multiple/unusual research) 36 92 36 99 Hour service 36 99 Marc Zirnheld AdressE: Marc.Zirnheld@teaser.fr (ISO-8859-1/Latin-1) Dazibaobab: http://www.teaser.fr/~mzirnheld/ Telecopie: [+33](1)60192380 - 18 oct. 96: [+33]0160192380 ------------------------------ From: levin@bbn.com (Joel B Levin) Subject: Re: They Are Even More Stupid! (was Re: Stupid Spamster Tricks) Date: 26 Sep 1996 16:04:56 +0000 Organization: BBN Systems and Technologies In article wolf.paul@aut.alcatel. at (Wolf Paul) writes: > Comments: Authenticated sender is Then Pat adds the following comment: > Remember, spamming and junk mailing on the net will cease when the > perception that there is profit to be made by doing so is gone. The > spammers long ago learned they dare not give a valid email address > in their messages ... Then this response: > But you see, the guy's provider DID insert the valid email address in > the "Comments:" line I retained in the quote above, and I am sure this > nice operator of advertising services would not at all object to > people sending lots of inquiries about his services to that > authenticated sender address so thoughtfully provided in the header. > (Although, since he is using Pegasus, which by default does not show a > lot of headers, he probably is not aware that his real address got out > after all!) Doesn't matter. Many of these guys are using throwaway accounts, so they don't care what comes back -- the business reply is either a maildrop address or web server elsewhere, or it's a phone number or snailmail address. Interramp no longer gives out free trial account, though some are still hanging around. Still, I've heard that there are spammers paying for accounts to throw away in this fashion -- the setup plus one month fee is apparently worth it to them. JBL Internet: levin@bbn.com | USPS: BBN Systems and Technologies or jbl@levin.mv.com | Mail Stop 6/2D Telco: (617)873-3463 | 10 Moulton Street ARS: KD1ON | Cambridge, MA 02138 ------------------------------ Subject: Telephone Scam Referring to 809 (But What About Splits?) From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: Thu, 26 Sep 96 19:06:00 -0500 Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York NY - 212-274-8110 Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) > Now, if they are running *newspaper advertising* asking people to call > an 809 number then that is a somewhat different situation, but how > many people do you know, seriously, who would respond to a help-wanted > ad in the paper involving a long distance number that was not toll-free? > They must be hard up for a job I guess. PAT] Such ads are being run in NEW YORK CITY right now. For both Mystery Shoppers (stores and restaurants) and Movie Theater watchers. The ad says to call an 818 number which I did call for about twelve cents. A recording then tells you to call an 809 number which I did not call. Why did I call? I am an actor (same for my wife) with a lot of lime on our hands between acting jobs. We have both been invited this year to a free meals at restaurants as part of training for their employees before public opening. I have been in the past a PAID "mystery shopper". We have in the past been invited to film previews where I suspect audience reaction is being watched. We have been in the past PAID participants in focus groups. So I thought that there was a good possibility that the offers were legit. What I found strange was that you would call a California (818) number for a NYC ad, but then Pinkertons (who also hire for restaurant and bar U/C work) have you apply inter-state. Ray Normandeau, Rita Frazier Normandeau ray.normandeau@factory.com http://www.buzznyc.com/actors/res.normandeau.raymond.html http://www.buzznyc.com/actors/res.frazier.rita.html ------------------------------ From: cnordin@vni.net (Craig Nordin) Subject: Re: Is Undesirable Internet Advertising Increasing? Date: 25 Sep 1996 01:41:42 -0400 Organization: Virtual Networks I've closed down approximately 40 e-mail spammers and here are the tools and tactics I use: * whois queries, find contact mailing addresses ... * recursive whois queries based on domain name of nameservers, find more contact mailing addresses ... * traceroutes to what is being offered (web pages or mail addresses) recording providers of spam offer domain. Use whois to grab more mailing addresses. * bounce (not forward) copies of e-mail spam to all found e-mail addresses. Either one of two things happens: * provisioners of spam master like spam, so should "eat what they support" or * provisioners outraged that their own customers are mail spamming and so talk to them or shut them down. What I like about this approach is that it takes me far less time than drafting some special note. I also really can't be blamed for much as I'm sending the provisioners just the same type of junk-crap that their network is supporting. Using my elm "Bounce" technique, you have to really eyeball the header to find the "Sender:" line which identifies me -- that way the outrage at the mail spammer can be expressed more directly and appropriately :). Please do this as well. Nothing like the network admin receiving 550 copies of the same dastardly spam from their customer ... Jobs - Graphic Arts - Commercial Production -> http://studio.vni.net/jobs/ Virtual Networks Premier Internet Services cnordin@vnii.net Indianapolis Indianapolis Indianapolis Metro http://www.vnii.net/ Indiana Indiana Indiana Washington DC Washington DC Washington DC Metro http://www.vni.net/ Virtual Networks Incorporated Virtual Networks of Indiana, Incorporated ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #514 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Sep 27 11:29:24 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA03083; Fri, 27 Sep 1996 11:29:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 11:29:24 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609271529.LAA03083@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #515 TELECOM Digest Fri, 27 Sep 96 11:29:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 515 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Second Line Wiring Problem (Chris Barr) Re: Excel Telecommunications Offer to School (Phil Stanley) Re: Internet Phone Petition (Michael R. Ward) Re: Is Undesirable Internet Advertising Increasing? (Andrew C. Green) Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street (Andrew C. Green) Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: Help Needed With Mexico Band Rates (Keith Brown) Re: Kevin Poulson Update (Rich & Katy Mulvey) Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Re: Dave Rhodes and Make Money Fast (rolf@clark.net) A Reader Annoyed With My Commentary (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cbarr@world.std.com (Chris Barr) Subject: Second Line Wiring Problem Organization: Aarathorn Enterprise Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 01:41:59 GMT Is there a FAQ or book about possible pairings and wire colors? I'll plan on getting the AT&T tester mentioned in another thread. We've got *old* wiring. A second line was put in a few years ago, using, I was told, the second pair from the street -- although as I look at incoming wires now, it's not at all that simple. Noises occured on the first line. A repairman came and clipped off connections to a jack for the second line in a far corner of the house, which I was no longer using. Now -- surprise -- I'd like to use that jack again for line two, for my modem, etc. Line one still works there. Two jacks exist. I tried connecting some likely-looking pairs to no good effect. Even lost all the good jacks for a while. Some of these have three-wire connections. No nice switch box, just the little clear crimp-down connectors. The main line comes in and goes to three hot jacks. Second line goes to one hot jack, with yellow and black unconnected (cut). Thanks, in advance, Chris Barr Boston, MA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The yellow/black should be the second pair however from the way you describe things, at some point in the past a technician may have 'improvised' somewhat to get around some bad wiring. You may want to simply install new wiring from the point where you can pick up the second line rather than attempt to use what is there presently given the noise problems you had earlier which the technician fixed by cutting the wires, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Phil Stanley Subject: Re: Excel Telecommunications Offer to School Date: 26 Sep 1996 02:38:49 GMT Organization: MagicNet, Inc. Reply-To: travlr@magicnet.net John R Levine wrote: >> A rep from Excel Telecommunications was the guest speaker at a >> "Parents for Riverside Drive School" meeting that I recently >> attended. The pitch was something like this: If we (the board of >> directors of the school) could get every parent to switch their long >> distance carrier to Excel every month 5% of every person's long >> distance phone calls would go to the school! What a great and easy >> way to raise money for the school. Excel would charge us a $25.00 >> sign-up fee and give us a 90 day written guarantee. >> I know very little about Excel and what they are offering -- is this a >> good deal? Are there any other companies doing this? What questions >> should we be asking? I once was curious about Excels' offerings myself. Since it cost nothing to try the service, why don't you try it before recommending it to your organiztion. This way, you don't have to take other people's opinions. You can always switch back if the service and rates don't appeal to you. I found them to be excellent myself after I tried it. Just because a company is MLM or has been fined doesn't make them a bad deal for you. All the carriers have been fined. Most more than Excel. In the end, the service you recieve and the cost are what counts. Give them a try and see what you get. Professional World Wide Web Hosting & Development Adgrafix Virtual Servers|http://www.adgrafix.com/info/pstanley 407-870-2526|1-800-683-1802 Pin 2438 Phil Stanley|pstanley@adgrafix.com ------------------------------ From: Michael R. Ward Subject: Re: Internet Phone Petition Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 09:13:52 -0500 Organization: University of Illinois Reed Miller wrote: > I also interviewed reps from the Big Three long distance > carriers in early August for a story I did on I-phones, and they said > they're not concerned that the phones might wipe out regular long > distance. MCI and AT&T even said they would consider offering Internet > phones to customers if the FCC made a strong stand against regulating > voice calls on the Net. MCI added that it's testing an I-phone. > This stance by the Big Three sounded strange to me, but I > guess it shows just how far they're willing to go to keep their ISP > customers happy. They're buying big chunks of bandwidth, after > all. Any other theories on why they'd take this position? If the 'big three', or any facilities based carrier, gets reimbursed equally for transmiting the signal either way, they should be indifferent to internet phone availability. If I make a traditional call, I pay them directly. If I use the Internet, somewhere down the chain, someone is leasing LD facilities. The LD rates for the first method are much higher because: LD carriers must pay access charges to local telcos; as a retail rather than wholesale product, selling and marketing expenses are higher; as customers are smaller and tend to be less knowledgable, profits may be higher. That is to say, reimbursement rates are likely not equal across technologies and we might expect some LD resistance to internet phones. Since ACTA members typically are not facilities based carriers, the see no benefits from internet phones and their resistance is understandably more adament. The response by Reed Hundt encourages the 'big three' to hold their tongues. Rather than ban internet phone technology, he has indicated a willingness to reduce access charges paid to local telcos to put traditional LD carriage on an equal footing with internet phones (i.e., change the old rules to the new technology). Since access charges comprise about 40% of the cost of LD service, even with some callers substituting towards internet phones, the LD industry stands to gain from a general increase in demand for their services if access charges were reduced. This could be worth lobbying for. Just my $0.02, Michael R. Ward (217) 244-5667 Dept. of Ag. and Consumer Econ. ward1@uiuc.edu University of Illinois http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/ward1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 01:26:15 -0500 From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Re: Is Undesirable Internet Advertising Increasing? hancock4@cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) writes: > But lately it seems every non moderated newsgroup gets a daily "MAKE > MONEY FAST!" ad. Getting unsolicited ads in my email used to be rare, > now I get several every day. > Is there anything that can be done to discourage this sort of thing? It depends. In Usenet newsgroups, certain types of postings such as MMF, spams and excessive crossposts above generally-agreed-upon thresholds get Cancel Advisories issued in the control newsgroup by one or more of several participating organizations around the world. Sites that honor these advisory messages will cancel the offending posts; possibly your particular site chooses to ignore them, which results in significantly more advertising, as you've seen. Your local postmaster or SysAdmin should be able to tell you whether Cancel Advisories are honored at your site. Junk email is harder to stop, although you have some recourse after the fact if you want to take the time. Certain domain names can be associated with known junk email and scam outfits such as moneyworld and cyberpromo, and inbound email from those domain names can be bounced or ignored at your site's firewall, such that you never see it at all. If you do receive it, examining the headers of the message can reveal something about who sent it and where it came from (simply reading the "From:" address is not likely to tell you much; it's often faked), identifying in the Path which domains have handled the email along the way, and you can forward copies of the offending email to the Postmaster or Abuse accounts at the original domain. Sometimes the originating site was set up simply for junk email, and action would have to come from their provider, the next step up the chain. As for how they get your address in the first place, I'd have to say that in my experience, it still seems to come primarily from Usenet. My address appears here and on several web pages around the world, and yet the only time I get junk email is when an article of mine appears in comp.dcom.telecom via Telecom Digest, and is picked up by someone's skimming software. Keeping a low profile on Usenet seems to be a way to minimize (though not eliminate) junk email. Recently some posters have tried deliberately mangling their return addresses in some machine-unfriendly way (e.g. "acg@dlogics.remove.this.to.email.me.com") but I have no idea how effective that strategy is. Finally, let me publicly acknowledge one outfit which seems to be using TELECOM Digest poster info in a more responsible manner: Dataprobe, Inc. of Paramus, NJ. Seems that every time something of mine appears in TELECOM Digest, they lift my postal address from my .sig line below and send me via First Class mail a spiffy new catalog of their products. I have five copies so far. :-) Andrew C. Green (312) 266-4431 Datalogics, Inc. 441 W. Huron Internet: acg@dlogics.com Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not like the idea of any company collecting email addresses (or actual street addresses) which appear in the Digest and using them for their own commercial purposes. The only reason addresses of any sort appear in the Digest is to facilitate correspondence between participants; it is not to facilitate anyone building a mailing list. I do not know what, as a practical matter I can do about it other than to remove all email addresses and .signature lines entirely, requiring everyone who wants to respond to someone else to come through me. :( PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 08:39:59 -0500 From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Re: Illegal Phone Access Sold on the Street Robert Sinclair writes: > Yes and in my area the price of admission to unlimited "free" phone > service is a 1/2" socket and a phone set! Think they'd lock those > cabinets wouldn't you? *splutter* You'd be surprised. I was. A couple of weeks ago my doorbell rings, and it's a new neighbor who was referred to me by another neighbor for some help with his phone wiring. It seems he'd called Ameritech to get his townhouse service connected, and settled for a minimum hookup at the demarc, whereupon he'd take care of the inside wiring. Ameritech's men had of course shown up while they were out of the house for about .4 nanoseconds, and left the usual "Sorry We Missed You!" card on the doorknob. It did, however, indicate that they'd verified service up to the demarc ... which was not on his townhouse, or even his building, but was behind #910 at the end of the building next door, about seven units away. Guided there by the address scribbled on the card, we did indeed find the box, opened it (it doesn't lock), and found a helpful paper tag attached to the terminals we were to use and the wires we (?) were to connect. The interesting thing was that this box served both his building and #910; a fat cable runs through the basements of both, diverting pairs as required to each unit. If we wanted, we would have been free to, well, you get the idea. The only conclusion I can draw here is that Ameritech seems to be banking on security through anonymity in some way, relying on our, well, good nature, or something, to not mess around with the other lines, and trusting that strangers to the area would not recognize the anonymous little box for what it was. Andrew C. Green (312) 266-4431 Datalogics, Inc. 441 W. Huron Internet: acg@dlogics.com Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted Date: 26 Sep 1996 12:31:25 GMT Organization: University of South Florida Spencer Roedder (roedder@netcom.com) wrote: > David Siegel (David-Siegel@deshaw.com) wrote: >> I'm looking for a home phone system. I'm going to be installing up to >> 16 phones (a mixture of regular phones, modems, fax machines, intercoms >> (on exterior doors) and answering machines). I'd like the system to >> support both analog phones, and "feature phones", that are specific to >> the system. The functions that I need include the following: > This is a vague answer, but I would suggest looking in the various > home automation catalogs. In one I got recently (it's at home now so > I don't have the name) there was a Panasonic 16-line 6-trunk PBX that > took feature and regular phones and had lots of smarts. And about 8 > years ago some of my co-workers used and swore by the small Panasonic > PBXs. A company called BBS makes a 16x4 PBX for this market. Black Box is private labelling it as a "modem switch" (!), for less than I'd heard that BBS was selling it for (!!). They want a grand, roughly. It uses standard phones, although I gather there are keysets available, too. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us Member of the Technical Staff Junk Mail Will Be Billed For. The Suncoast Freenet *FLASH: Craig Shergold aw'better now; send no cards!* Tampa Bay, Florida *Call 800-215-1333x184 for the whole scoop* +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ From: Keith Brown Subject: Re: Help Needed With Mexico Band Rates Date: 26 Sep 1996 00:41:57 GMT Organization: CallCom International Diego Betancor wrote in article : > Anyone have the information or database that shows which Mexican area > codes belong to which band rate? Diego: Here you go! Prefix=Band 100-119=7 120-122=6 123=5 124-126=6 127=5 128-139=6 140-145=4 146-149=5 150-153=6 154=5 155=4 156=5 157=4 158-159=5 160=4 161-166=1 167-169=4 170-179=5 180-189=6 190-231=7 232=8 233-237=7 238=8 239-270=7 271-272=8 273-282=7 283-289=8 290-370=7 371=6 372-377=7 378=6 379-400=7 401=6 402-418=7 419=6 420-460=7 461-468=6 469-471=7 472-487=6 488=5 489-497=5 498=5 499=6 500-608=7 609=4 610-619=7 620=6 621=4 622=5 623=4 624-630=5 631=1 632-636=3 637=4 638-639=3 640-649=5 650-656=1 657=4 658-665=1 666=4 667=3 668-669=1 670-673=6 674-679=7 680-683=6 684=3 685=5 686-687=6 688-740=7 741-748=8 744=7 745-746=8 747=7 748=8 749-771=7 772=6 773-781=7 782=7 783=8 784-785=6 786-799=7 800-822=4 823-824=3 825-826=4 827=1 826-860=4 861=3 862=2 863-869=4 870-894=1 895-899=2 900-999=8 ----- --------- --------- Keith Brown CallCom International URL: http://www.callcom.com ------------------------------ From: mulveyr@ll.aa2ys.ampr.org (Rich & Katy Mulvey) Subject: Re: Kevin Poulson Update Date: 26 Sep 1996 00:49:44 GMT Organization: Mulvey Home Node Reply-To: mulveyr@frontiernet.net On Wed, 25 Sep 96 11:46:25 PDT, Mark Lottor wrote: >> It's not forever. It's only three years in which to break some bad >> habits and an focus which has been unhealthy for him. It's an >> opportunity to change, and he should enter a new phase. He can always >> go back later. > I think you forgot that he already spent a lot of time in jail. Why > three more years of punishment? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They are adding that three years to > make sure that all their theories on recidivism come true and that > they get him back in prison again. You can't be letting people who get > out of prison after a few years have the tools and wherewithal to > rebuild their lives. Law enforcement in the USA does not work that > way. The punishment must go on and on. Ask any vindictive prosecutor > or police officer if you don't beleive me. PAT] Come on -- statements like that are simply paranoid. Putting convicts on probation after serving time in prison is standard procedure - and with very good reason. As I stated before, it's a good bet that very few people believe that criminals are reformed in prison. As such, it makes sense to supervise them for varying lengths of time when they get out. You're conveniently ignoring the fact that the job of a probation officer is not simply to keep a checklist of when the criminals report in to him. His job is also to see they they receive as much assistance as possible in completing ( or starting, for that matter ) an education, finding a job, locating housing, and so on. Have you ever actually met a probation officer, or spent more than ten minutes discussing their jobs? I have -- and the ones I have spoken to are uniformly concerned about making sure that their clients are getting every chance possible to succeed. The problem comes in when the clients themselves don't want to succeed. And since probation officers are uniformly overworked, they have to concentrate on the people who have a reasonable chance of being helped. It's through no fault of their own that some of the former criminals are too sociopathic to ever have a hope of being redeemed. Rich ------------------------------ From: kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Home PBX or Key System Wanted Date: 26 Sep 1996 20:06:19 -0400 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. In article , Tom Thiel wrote: > Seriously consider the AT&T (Lucent) Partner Plus or Partner II Telephone > Systems. They will do everything you specify and more. I don't sell them, > but I do install them, and have found it to be a very reliable, flexible, > expandable system. I'll second that one. I found the Partner Plus to be a joy to both install and to program. One hint though -- if you're going to be programming it get at least one MLS-10D phone. From what I remember the Partner Plus will take the AT&T phones (MLS-5, MLS-10(D), MLS-34(D) etc.) which use a two pair setup (analog voice/data), and any other phone so long as you program the port properly. And the nice thing is it's VERY expandable. On the other hand while I think the Lucent Definity switches are great the 7410 digital sets aren't worth the plastic they're made out of. Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com ------------------------------ From: rolf@clark.net Subject: Re: Dave Rhodes and Make Money Fast Date: 26 Sep 1996 01:38:10 GMT Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc., Ellicott City, MD USA tad@ssc.com wrote: > 'Make Money Fast' Chain Letter Nets On-line Users > By James Romenesko , Saint Paul Pioneer Press, Minn. > Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News > All attempts to stop the MMF phenomonon over the years have failed. A > "Make Money Fast Hall of Humiliation" Web page was intended to shame > those who've spammed the Net with the posts, but its keeper eventually > gave up; he had too many names and too little time. Imagine my surprise when I read this! I haven't updated the page in more than a week, but I certainly hasn't given up. The writer is correct on one point; "too many names and too little time" definitely applies. The URL for said page is in my sig. Rolf e-mail: rolf@clark.net MMF Hall of Humiliation: http://www.clark.net/pub/rolf/mmf/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 02:21:20 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: A Reader Annoyed With My Commentary In an issue of the Digest on Thursday, Elana Beach, a long time reader/correspondent in the Digest sent a note about finding telephone jacks in a public place that apparently anyone could use/abuse. Seeing the note reminded me of a message from Elana about a trip to Chicago and Union Station which had been published here a couple years ago. In that earlier message, Elana had mentioned that a phone was available in a waiting area which anyone could use without any restrictions on the places called. When the message appeared here yesterday I added a sort of unthinking, meant be humorous comment about Elana 'being up to your old tricks again' and referenced the Union Station messages which had appeared here long ago. Elana was offended by this and after an exchange of correspondence on Thursday evening I extended my apologies for any unintentional distress which was caused. I told Elana that I would publish my apology in the Digest so that any archives or message/name- gathering services on the net which saw the original message would also see my retraction of the comments about 'being up to old tricks again.' Elana is concerned that with the growing number of services which archive old messages and make them available, those comments could be taken out of context, with the implication being that Elana has in the past stolen phone service or committed phone fraud. I am sure nothing could be further from the truth. So Elana, I am sorry for the offense taken. Certainly none was intended on this end. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #515 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Sep 27 13:52:16 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA08963; Fri, 27 Sep 1996 12:09:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 12:09:02 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199609271609.MAA08963@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Bcc: Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #516 TELECOM Digest Fri, 27 Sep 96 12:09:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 516 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Software Has No Time for Chat (Stan Schwartz) Switch 64 == X.21? (in Brazil and Argentina) (movers@vaherdon1.btna.com) Voice Response System Advice Needed - Please Help (Meir I. Green) Multilink PPP on Win3.11? (Dick Tam) Re: Cancelbots Flood Net; Thousands of Messages Lost (Evan Champion) Re: Cancelbots Flood Net; Thousands of Messages Lost (Marc Farnum Rendino) Re: 214/972 Split Observations (Kevin Autrey) Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name (Rishab Ghosh) Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name (Dan Herrick) Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name (lr@access4.net) Re: BA-NJ Proposes "Overlay" in 609 Area Code (John Cropper) Re: Exchange -> Location Map Wanted; NYNEX Still Ignorant (Rob Wood) Re: Text Processing Under Windows (Jeremy Parsons) Re: Text Processing Under Windows (Stan Brown) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stan Schwartz Subject: New Software Has No Time for Chat Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 22:25:30 -0400 Newsday, 9/24/96 By Tom Incantalupo. STAFF WRITER "Welcome to NYNEX directory assistance," says an unwaveringly polite voice. "What town?" Don't be nervous: answer the question. If you're not sure, just say so. Don't worry if you hem, haw or hesitate. NYNEX' newly automated directory assistance system, now in effect everywhere in the company's service area, will edit most of the "uhs" and "ums" and dead time out of your request. The system's not entirely automated, though. And while it may give the impression that you're talking with a computer, that's only partly true. What you say is recorded and played back in edited form into the headphones of an operator -- probably a person in Port Jefferson, Hempstead or Patchogue, if you're requesting a listing in Nassau or Suffolk Counties, says NYNEX spokesman John Bonomo. The operator then keys your request into the console as before and the number is relayed to you in the choppy, computer-constructed form we've gotten used to. You might or might not talk to an operator at all before the number is relayed to you; it depends largely, says Bonomo, on whether the operator needs more information to provide the proper number -- the spelling of the name, for example. Inaugurated in June in Manhattan, the system has been phased in throughout NYNEX' territory, which covers all or part of seven states. Some other regional phone companies also use it. The intent, says Bonomo, is to handle more calls without more operators. In essence, it does that via computer software called Store and Forward that removes redundant speech and compresses dead time. So, says Bonomo, it might record the first "um" but the remainder will be edited out. NYNEX estimates that the time savings will allow operators, who now handle about 950 calls a day, to take about 75 a day more. Bonomo says it seems to be working. "I think we're at that level or at least getting close to it," he said. Bonomo says it's OK to say so if you're not sure of the answer to the question "What town?" Whatever you say - "Somewhere in Nassau," or "I think Levittown," for example - will be followed by the question "What listing?" And you can, at any time, press "O" to be connected immediately to an operator, although Bonomo says that is intended primarily for emergencies and is not encouraged. About 400 people, mostly operators but also including some supervisory personnel, staff the three Long Island facilities. Bonomo says the system enables operators to spend less time talking on the phone, although, if they are handling more requests for information, they also are typing more. An official of the union representing operators says, however, that they are worried about how the system could affect their job security. "They're kind of concerned about it," said Larry Mancino, the Manhattan-based vice president of District One of the Communications Workers of America. He said operators also believe that customers prefer speaking to a person rather than a machine and that the immediate availability of an operator is particularly important in emergencies. ------------------------------ From: mouers@vaherndon1.btna.com Subject: Switch 64 == X.21? (in Brazil and Argentina) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 14:55:18 GMT Organization: BT Visual Images Hello all, I was recently asked to get one of our video conferencing systems working in South America (Brazil and Argentina) the customer said the ISDN wasn't readily available and we would have to use "Switched 64". After asking around the office I was told that it was most likely an X.21 interface. Well X.21 is a 15 pin interface, and I wondered if a PTT would provide a 15 pin interface coming out the wall (like a POTS line). The answer I got was no/yes, an RJ-45 or RJ-11 would come out the wall and the PTT would provide a adapter box that had a X.21 interface and the customer would plug his equipment into the adapter. So the PTT does provide the customer with an X.21 interface. So my questions are: 1. Is the above correct? 2. Is switched 64 another name for X.21, if not what is "Switched 64"? 3. Is the assumption correct that ISDN is not readily available in most Latin America counties. Thanks a bunch in advance. You can post a reply on these newsgroups or email me: mouers@vaherndon1.btna.com Simon ------------------------------ From: mgreen@world.std.com (Meir I Green) Subject: Voice Response System Advice Needed - Please Help Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 14:48:50 GMT My company is adding Touch Tone telephone access with Interactive Voice Response to our product line. We are looking for the following: - text to speech, but light duty initially. - We will want FAX capability soon as well. - The system must be scalable and expandable to handle more lines and throughput, but only a couple of lines initially. - We prefer a PC based application, which runs under Win95 and NT. - We are looking for a high level application generator, to allow speedy development and modification of the product, preferably without coding. e.g. something with functional object modules that can be tied together and perhaps an outline/flow editing of the prompt logic, etc. - Access to the code should be possible in order to add new functionality to the system and integrate with our products, e.g. Visual Basic or equivalent. - The product should be able to access a database using a standard interface e.g. ODBC or equivalent. - Should interface to standard telephony device, e.g. TAPI, Dialogic, etc. I would greatly appreciate your comments and recommendations as well as any experiences with VBVoice Win32, ShowNTel, VoiceKonnects, or any suitable product. Thank you very much! Meir I Green Internet & WWW Specialist, Programmer, Technician ------------------------------ From: thetam@unixg.ubc.ca (Dick Tam) Subject: Multilink PPP on Win3.11? Date: 27 Sep 1996 07:27:43 GMT Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada I've just read about the multilink PPP connection feature on NT and was rather interested in trying it out. However, I'm only running Win3.11 with an Intel 14.4 and USR 33.6. What should I do (or is it possible) to enable this feature on a Win3.11 machine? Thanks! Dick Tam thetam@unixg.ubc.ca http://web.ucs.ubc.ca/thetam ------------------------------ From: Evan Champion Subject: Re: Cancelbots Flood Net; Thousands of Messages Lost Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 19:52:37 -0400 Organization: Synapse Internet [www.synapse.net] Tad Cook wrote: > "There's nothing you can do as an individual user to prevent someone > from canceling your message," said John Gilmore, a computer security > expert in San Francisco. "We need something added to Usenet's software > that would only allow a cancellation from the originator." I'm sure this won't comfort anyone who had their messages cancelled, but you can set up INN 1.5, which is just about to go in to its first public beta, to ignore cancels completely. The only problem is that its usefulness will be very limited unless your provider also ignores cancels. I would love it if the default behaviour had INN ignore cancels but I'm not sure that I'll be able to convince the maintainer to make that change. People have been talking about authenticated cancels for a long time now on news.software.nntp, but unfortunately it seems that no one really has the desire to dive right in and write an Internet draft and produce a patch set for INN to do it. If anyone is interested, I encourage you to visit DejaNews and dig up the old threads from news.software.nntp. Evan Champion * Director, Network Operations mailto:evanc@synapse.net * Directeur, Exploitation du reseau http://www.synapse.net/ * Synapse Internet ------------------------------ From: mvgfr@netcom.com (Marc Farnum Rendino) Subject: Re: Cancelbots Flood Net; Thousands of Messages Lost Organization: mvgfr Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 13:06:21 GMT > The incident further illustrates the shaky security foundation of the > Internet... Horse hockey. And alarmism. What _needs_ to be secure _is_ (or the admin in charge isn't doing the job properly) and what isn't secure doesn't need to be. The answer to the _real_ question is education - users need to know what's secure (by design) and what's not (by design). Email, usenet, etc. are not secure, nor were they designed to be. The sky is not falling. Marc ------------------------------ From: exukev@exu.ericsson.se (Kevin Autrey) Subject: Re: 214/972 Split Observations Date: 27 Sep 1996 11:21:52 GMT Organization: Ericsson North America Inc. What is even more interesting about the 214/972 split is its apparent lack of consistency among the two companies that serve the D/FW area (GTE and Southwestern Bell (SBC)). Both my work and a friend's house are in the new 972 area code. My home is in 214. If I call home from my work (where both are SBC exchanges), I only have to dial 7 digits (although 10 does work as well). If I call home from my friend's house (which is a GTE exchange), I get a message informing me that that number is no longer in service. I never really thought that the whole area-code split was going to be too much of a problem -- but that was before I realized how much of a mess the phone companies could make out of it. \/ Kevin Autrey | exukev@exu.ericsson.se | +1 972 997-6865 Ericsson Inc. (USA), Richardson, TX Radio Systems - Research & Development EUS/RD/KD Design Services - Design and Verification Tools ------------------------------ From: rishab@CERF.NET (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Subject: Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name Date: 26 Sep 1996 02:55:31 -0700 Organization: CERFnet Dial 'n' CERF Customer Bob Goudreau (goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com) wrote: > It's odd that the International Olympic Committee is able to overcome > this hurdle where the ITU is not. In the Olympic Games, the team from > Taiwan competes under the name "Chinese Taipei". Perhaps the ITU > could use the same moniker for the island to which +886 is assigned? The IOC is not an organization of governments. And it would, I presume, be difficult for the ITU to grant some official recognition of "Chinese Taipei" without allowing Taiwan to participate in other ITU activities. OTOH all sorts of funny uses are made of country codes, so assigning one to a city in an indeterminate country may well be a way out -- except that Taiwan itself could object. First Monday - The Peer-Reviewed Journal on the Internet http://www.firstmonday.dk/ Munksgaard International Publishers, Copenhagen International Editor - Rishab Aiyer Ghosh (rishab@dxm.org) Pager +91 11 9622 162187; Fax +91 11 2209608 or 2426453 or 2224058 A4/204 Ekta Vihar, 9 Indraprastha Extn, New Delhi 110092 INDIA ------------------------------ From: daniel lance herrick Subject: Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 12:04:33 -0400 Organization: Allen-Bradley Company Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote: > Vincent Kuo (vincent_kuo@stsl.siemens.com.tw) wrote: >> Although Taiwan is every bit an independent country, has 21 million >> people and plays a significant role in the world, we remain anonymous >> in official occasions. This is just unfair. Maybe nobody can change > I would like to point out that this is at least partly due to the > "official" position of Taiwan's own government -- that it does not > represent an independent country, and is the true government of all > China. This fits in very conveniently with Communist China's bosses, > who think _they_ are the government of all China. I know this is off topic, Pat, but you might have some fun with it on your soapbox: I've thought for a few years now that Her Majesty's government should return Hong Kong to the government in exile when the lease expires in 1997. The government of China in Taiwan has more continuity with the government of China that wrote the lease and would be likely to allay the fears of those who are eye-ing the exits and wondering how they can get out. Of course, the government in Taiwan might be willing to renew the lease for another term. If Tom Clancy reads the TELECOM Digest, he is welcome to share the idea with President Ryan. dan dlh@dlh.com ------------------------------ From: lr@access4.digex.net Subject: Re: The Story Behind a Country Code Without a Country Name Date: 26 Sep 1996 16:51:33 GMT Organization: Intentionally Left Blank Bob Goudreau (goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com) wrote: > It's odd that the International Olympic Committee is able to overcome > this hurdle where the ITU is not. In the Olympic Games, the team from > Taiwan competes under the name "Chinese Taipei". Perhaps the ITU > could use the same moniker for the island to which +886 is assigned? Yes, but it caused Taiwan a lot of heartburn because they want to appear under "Republic of China" and there was a big stink over that in the 70's. Frankly, I'm not sure of the UN's position. Certainly, there are UN member nations who both claim to own rights to the same piece of land (there are even stranger recognitions made in the case of the middle east) and the mainland government was certainly recognized by virtue of a permanent seat on the security council long before Taiwan was replaced in the General Assembly. Ron ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 21:31:37 GMT Subject: Re: BA-NJ Proposes "Overlay" in 609 Area Code From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) On Sep 25, 1996 17:44:19, 'Carl Moore ' wrote: > You have said 201 was created in 1951 and 609 in 1963. > This disagrees with the setup of area codes in 1947, and > I have 1958 for setup of area 609. For 609, notice the > following New York Times reference: > 201/609 New Jersey, 1958 (New York Times, page B4, 27 April 1989) The closest info I can provide on this is a 'late winter' implementation of relief in NJ in 1958. My guesstimate is in the NPA.XLS (Feb), issued monthly to my mailing list. Eventually, this will be converted to a kind of web document; I am gathering bids for service at this time. Target date is the first of the year ... Remember Carl, we are dealing with the press, who thinks Clinton is the best thing since sliced bread . John Cropper, NiS / NexComm PO Box 277 Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 Inside NJ: 6o9.637.9434 Toll Free: 888.NPA.NFO2 (672.6362) Fax : 6o9.637.943o email : psyber@usa.pipeline.com ------------------------------ From: Rob Wood Organization: Rob Wood - Minnetonka, MN USA Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 09:29:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Exchange -> Location Map Wanted; NYNEX Still Ignorant James W. Anderson worte: "That is kind of odd that NYNEX doesn't seem to have an exchange location map. I assume you want to know the extent of the coverage of a particular exchange. "An example is that I live in Provo, Utah where part of the city has one set of exchanges and another part of the city (the north end) has other exchanges separate from the rest of the city. I have not seen an actual map here but in another example there at one time was a listing of the exchange names and which NXX's were in them (and a schematic map) showing roughly where those exchange names were and what they covered in the Minneapolis/St. Paul phone book years ago. I remember that that was a US WEST published book also." And I can see where this might be useful. The Twin Cities area directories still contain that detailed map of the calling area and an extensive list of prefizes and their locations as well. In fact, I lost phone service for a few hours on Monday. My next-door neighbor did as well (the CO I'm connected to covers the 906, 934, 937, 949, and 975 NXX's). Knowing where the boundary was between service areas of CO's was located pointed me to a payphone from which I could call repair (that CO services the 401, 470, and 474 NXX's). I was able to convince one of the managers at US West to move this repair up on the priority list, based on the potential for an emergency to require a line from that area. I had no idea how many lines were out, perhaps a few, perhaps five NXXs' worth. Service was back a few hours later. Rob Wood robwoo19@skypoint.com Minnetonka MN USA http://www.skypoint.com/~robwoo19 ------------------------------ From: Jeremy Parsons Subject: Re: Text Processing Under Windows Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 12:48:17 -0400 I can't believe how many people took time to respond with advice, information and offers of help. Some I have replied to, but may I reply generally here and say thank you all? Although I found a few shareware or freeware awk implementations, I have finally decided to follow the recommendation of several of you and get myself Perl, from ftp.perl.hip.com, which looks like exactly what I want (short of installing a UNIX variant such as LINUX). If I were willing to pay for a more full commercial solution, I would definitely have gone for MKS Toolkit (http://www.mks.com), which is what I used some years ago but had forgotten until some of you reminded me. For $349 you get a Windows 95 implementation of Korn shell plus almost 200 UNIX utilities including awk, sed and the other key text processing tools. I was directed to several shareware sets of similar tools, including a number on http://www.winsite.com, None of these quite did enough of what I wanted (a number of utilities designed for DOS crashed when I tried them under Windows 95). Finally I am going to keep an eye on the CYGWIN32 project (http://www.cygnus.com/misc/gnu-win32/) to put GNU programs onto Win32 (including Windows 95) - GNU is another UNIX-inspired system. Thanks again to all who took the time to help -- I really appreciate it. Jeremy Parsons ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 19:27:53 -0400 From: stbrown@nacs.net (Stan Brown) Subject: Re: Text Processing Under Windows Reply-To: stbrown@nacs.net In article was written: > I only have access to a Windows machine, and while just about everything I > want to do can be done in time by Microsoft Word, it's always tedious and > often error-prone. This is frustrating when I know exactly how to do what > I want using one of the common UNIX shells and some of the standard tools > (especially awk). You're in luck. There are DOS-hosted tools to do many UNIX tasks. In particular, there's an AWK at http://www.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/txtutl/awk320.zip There's also an excellent vi clone, Vim (VI IMproved), http://www.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/editor/vim42p32.zip which runs in DOS or in a DOS box under Windows. Both are free. I have used AWK somewhat and use Vim many times every day. The URL I gave is for the version of Vim that runs in protected mode, so it can process really big files. Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio USA email: stbrown@nacs.net Web: http://www.nacs.net/~stbrown/ Can't find FAQ lists? See my Web page for instructions, or email me. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #516 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Sep 30 22:01:22 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA11069; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 22:01:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 22:01:22 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199610010201.WAA11069@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #517 TELECOM Digest Mon, 30 Sep 96 22:01:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 517 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson NPA-NXX Data For 4Q96 (John Cropper) Pacific Telesis Declares 3rd Quarter Dividend (Mike King) Caller ID From Europe (Ed Hew) Big Changes at Bell Atlantic (Tad Cook) Omaha Exchange Name History, etc. (Jack Winslade) "Just Say Yes" (Mike King) Phone News From Chattanooga (Updates) (Stanley Cline) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 15:38:37 GMT Subject: NPA-NXX Data For 4Q96 From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) In the traditions of David Esan, who used to regularly analyze NPA/NXX information and release a report (usually) quarterly, here is my analysis data for the 4th quarter of 1996. The top 20, and their activity since last quarter - NPA NXXs CHG NPA NXXs CHG NPA NXXs CHG NPA NXXs CHG 713: 767 +24 619: 707 + 2 403: 669 + 5 617: 637 +40 214: 763 + 7 809: 701 +31 817: 665 +12 410: 628 +16 804: 761 +13 212: 692 + 5 414: 655 + 6 415: 623 +12 312: 725 +22 310: 691 + 7 412: 648 + 6 916: 620 +15 604: 722 --- 501: 675 + 2 407: 637 +23 201: 616 +21 206: 616 +17 NPA/NXX USAGE RANKING AS OF OCTOBER 1, 1996 (for letter designations, see notes below) NPA NXXs NPA NXXs NPA NXXs NPA NXXs NPA NXXs a 713: 767 h 408: 530 404: 421 715: 337 807: 110 c 214: 763 h 801: 530 406: 420 903: 328 242: 51 c 804: 761 303: 528 503: 414 812: 327 246: 27 c 312: 725 516: 527 217: 411 954: 326 441: 20 c 604: 722 209: 524 703: 408 218: 321 268: 9 a 619: 707 913: 524 615: 407 901: 319 758: 9 d 809: 701 910: 523 203: 406 509: 318 345: 6 212: 692 h 908: 520 701: 406 315: 317 869: 5 a 310: 691 972: 519 519: 402 518: 316 562: 4 501: 675 h 301: 516 605: 399 814: 312 664: 3 h 403: 669 770: 513 419: 396 712: 310 240: 1 b 817: 665 205: 512 909: 396 507: 302 443: 1 a 414: 655 704: 512 517: 395 902: 302 626: 1 f 412: 648 h 213: 511 418: 392 705: 301 760: 1 c 407: 637 402: 505 250: 388 573: 298 248: h 617: 637 504: 504 905: 387 706: 298 253: f 410: 628 515: 493 304: 386 309: 295 264: a 415: 623 716: 490 618: 385 608: 293 284: a 916: 620 416: 487 207: 384 603: 289 340: h 201: 616 616: 486 409: 384 937: 288 425: b 206: 616 306: 472 630: 384 806: 287 440: 717: 610 305: 469 204: 383 561: 286 473: a 317: 609 512: 466 540: 378 970: 283 530: 405: 609 h 610: 462 917: 378 707: 277 649: b 210: 600 847: 462 941: 377 709: 276 650: c 513: 596 919: 460 808: 376 787: 274 670: 816: 582 914: 459 757: 373 719: 249 671: h 818: 580 314: 458 319: 372 417: 248 724: h 508: 577 805: 456 541: 370 773: 248 765: h 514: 575 219: 453 334: 368 864: 247 767: a 810: 570 502: 452 423: 368 308: 223 781: h 215: 565 708: 451 915: 367 506: 216 784: h 714: 564 216: 450 208: 366 307: 208 843: 612: 557 907: 447 860: 366 802: 196 867: 904: 554 h 702: 444 815: 363 320: 195 868: h 510: 551 912: 438 360: 356 607: 194 876: 601: 545 318: 432 918: 356 401: 187 978: h 313: 543 505: 431 202: 353 302: 177 614: 542 316: 430 613: 346 352: 172 h 803: 540 h 609: 427 606: 345 413: 162 718: 535 520: 424 330: 340 906: 120 602: 531 813: 424 819: 340 281: 118 Notes: a - singular split planned; number will be reduced by split b - multiple splits planned; number will be reduced by splits c - singular split in progress; number will be reduced by split d - multiple splits in progress; number will be reduced by splits e - unknown form of relief planned f - overlay planned; number will peak just before overlay g - overlay code active in conjunction with; minor changes expected h - method of relief under review by state regulators and/or LEC Items of interest: You might want to gear up for a SECOND split in 1997 on the following (already) split (in 1995) NPAs: * CO - 303 (528 NXXs assigned as of 10/1) * AZ - 602 (531 NXXs assigned as of 10/1) * MN - 612 (557 NXXs assigned as of 10/1, JUST SPLIT IN 03/96!!) * FL - 305 (460 NXXs assigned as of 10/1) * FL - 904 (551 NXXs assigned as of 10/1, OVER 70% FULL!) * TX - 972 (519 NXXs assigned as of 10/1, STILL IN PERMISSIVE!!) Those are just the *critical* ones (as per OLD BellCore notes on the subject ... a few others are starting to move rather quickly as well: * PA - 215 (565 NXXs, split in 1994, 610 is close behind with 462 NXXs) * GA - 770 (513 NXXs, split in 1995) * IL - 847 (462 NXXs, split in January, mandatory in April) * NC - 910 (523 NXXs, split in 1993, 919 is close behind with 460 NXXs) 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: Mike King Subject: Pacific Telesis Declares 3rd Quarter Dividend Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 00:15:52 PDT Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 12:00:00 -0800 From: Marcia.Flint@pactel.com (TELESIS.EA_SF_PO:Marcia Flint) Subject: Pacific Telesis Declares 3rd Quarter Dividend Pacific Telesis Board of Directors today approved a third quarter dividend of 31.5 cents per share. The dividend is payable on November 1 to shareowners of record on October 9. Pacific Telesis Declares 3rd Quarter Dividend Pacific Telesis Board of Directors today approved a third quarter dividend of 31.5 cents per share. The dividend is payable on November 1 to shareowners of record on October 9. --------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: edhew@xenitec.xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew) Subject: Caller ID From Europe Reply-To: vances@motivity.ca Organization: Motivity Telecom Inc. Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 07:19:06 GMT Recently callers from Europe have been showing up on my phone with thier calling telephone numbers intact. I have received calls from Switzerland and Germany with the full international number being displayed (eg. 41xxxxxxx). I believe this has been coincident with Teleglobe (Canada's international monopoly carrier) having upgraded signaling links to these countries to CCS7 ISUP signaling. I have an ISDN telephone on my desk which I thought might be the only way these numbers were visible so I asked a caller to call again on my house line. I have a Nortel Vista 350 telephone, their most current residential product, aquired only one month ago. The number did show up but not quite right. The set seemed to have decided from the "long distance indicator" (the phone rang with that special ring Bell gives to identify long distance callers) that it should place a '1' in front of the number. The number displayed was "1-412-xxx-xxxx". The last digit was missing as well. You can imagine the fun I'm going to have with Bell when I complain about this telephone's CLID not working properly. :) Vance [I'm in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada] ------------------------------ Subject: Big Changes at Bell Atlantic Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 10:37:02 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Big Changes in Store for Bell Atlantic By Otesa Middleton, Richmond Times-Dispatch, Va. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News NORFOLK--Sep. 28--Bell Atlantic Corp. is poised to enter new markets, accept competition, merge with Nynex Corp. and grow rapidly, according to Raymond W. Smith, the company's chairman and chief executive officer. Smith was in Norfolk yesterday to speak at the opening of the Consortium of Information and Telecommunications Executives' conference. Customers continue to want enhanced services, Smith said, which has the company playing catch-up. Use of ISDN, high-speed data telephone lines, has gone up 60 percent; customers added 800,000 second lines this year, and Smith expects one million second telephone lines to be installed next year. Smith also talked to the group about Bell Atlantic's planned merger with Nynex. Bell Atlantic's shareholders will vote on the merger at Richmond's Landmark Theater on Nov. 8. Ironically, the consortium's conference came a week after 48 black Bell Atlantic employees filed a lawsuit in Washington, accusing the company of racism in its training and promoting practices. "We take (the accusations) very seriously," Smith said. "If employees feel something is wrong, enough to take action, and if there is something wrong, we'll fix it. "Equal opportunity in a diverse work force is not an altruistic issue," he said. "It is vital. We have a huge African-American employee body and customer base ... We've made very good progress, but I'm still not satisfied." Maurice Brown, president of the consortium, said he was happy to have the group's only white member welcome the organization for its annual meeting. ------------------------------ From: jsw@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Omaha Exchange Name History, etc. Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 23:44:37 CDT I recently ran across some notes regarding Omaha's conversion from named exchanges to numbered prefixes. The cutover apparently occurred in the fall of 1960. Prior to 1960, Omaha used a 2-4 scheme with the first two letters of the exchange name being used. Omaha went to an all-number scheme in 1960 where the numbered prefixes had no correlation to the former names. I was quite surprised at the low number of dialable prefixes that were in service at the time. Omaha ain't BosWash, but it currently has well over 100 dialable prefixes in the local calling area. This simply shows how the phone system has grown faster than the human population. Here's the chart, showing the CO locations and the prefixes after the cut in 1960. The numbered notes are mine, compiled from odd sources. ;-) Downtown Omaha office, 19th & Douglas: (new) 221 (new) 271 (1) (new) 281 (1) ATlantic 341 (2) JAckson 342 EXpress 344 HArney 345 WEbster 346 (3) YEllowstone 347 (3) (new) 348 West Central Omaha, 45th & Izard: WAlnut 551 GLendale 553 REgent 556 CApitol 558 North Omaha, 30th & Fowler: PLeasant 451 PRospect 453 KEnwood 455 (4) South Omaha, 23rd & O: MArket 731 ORchard 733 West Omaha, 90th & Western: TErrace 391 HUdson 393 Bellevue, NE: BEllevue 291 CDOs added to local calling area: (Millard) 334 (Papillion) 339 Notes: 1. 271 and 281 are kind of enigmatic to local phone buffs. Of the two, only 271 exists today. They were used to service Union Pacific's step DID system. Although any extension could be dialed with either prefix, 281 was listed for the main UP numbers, and 271 was listed for the individual departments. 281 disappeared in the 1980's when UP went to a newer system. 2. ATlantic was Ma Bell's first full-scale panel switch installation. Cutover was in 1921. See story in Telecom Archives. 3. Notice that WEbster and YEllowstone are both dialed with the numerical sequence 93. Yep, same prefix, different name. WEbster served downtown Omaha while YEllowstone served the community of Carter Lake, IA. Carter Lake is geographically on the Nebraska side of the river, but politically in Iowa. In 1960, WEbster was given 346 and YEllowstone was given 347. An occasionally recurring topic here in the Digest is the speculation that the 347 prefix could be dialed for a while using either the 402 or 712 area code. But wait! There's more! This story has another twist that I recently learned. In the 1940's, Carter Lake was dialed using LAke. Note that LAke has the same two digits as JAckson, (52) another in the downtown Omaha area. Sometime before 1960, all phones in Carter Lake were apparently switched from JAckson-LAke to WEbster-YEllowstone. The reason for this will be an exercise for the student. ;-) (I have NO idea.) 4. This was the last Omaha area office to be converted from manual to dial service in the late 1950's. Another note is that Council Bluffs, IA was at the time a toll call and not dialable directly. Calls between Omaha and Council Bluffs finally became toll free in 1971. Good day JSW ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: "Just Say Yes" Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 00:08:00 PDT Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 08:34:49 -0700 From: sqlgate@list.pactel.com Subject: "Just Say Yes" FOR MORE INFORMATION: Dave Miller (916) 972-2811 dnmille@legal.pactel.com "Just Say Yes" Pacific Bell Expands Express Call Completion Service For 4-1-1 SACRAMENTO -- More than 1 million consumers and businesses in 18 Northern and Central California counties can `let their fingers do the talking' -- or simply say `yes' -- to use the newly expanded Pacific Bell Directory Assistance Express Call Completion service, which automatically connects calls to 4-1-1 to the requested phone number. The service is now being offered in all or portions of Sacramento, Yolo, El Dorado, Placer, Sutter, Solano and Nevada counties. When customers in those areas call 4-1-1 for directory assistance, they will hear a recorded voice announcement offering automatic call connection following receipt of their requested number. Among the communities where the service is now available are downtown Sacramento, Fair Oaks, Orangevale, Rancho Cordova, Folsom and Rio Linda in Sacramento County; West Sacramento, Davis and Woodland in Yolo County; Lincoln, Loomis, Newcastle, Dutch Flat, Auburn, Truckee, Soda Springs, Tahoe City and Brockway in Placer County; South Lake Tahoe, Meyers, Shingle Springs, Diamond Springs, Camino, Pollock Pines, Kyburz and Placerville in El Dorado County; Yuba City, Live Oak, Meridian and North Yuba in Sutter County; Smartsville and Wheatland in Yuba County; Dixon in Solano County and Nevada City and Grass Valley in Nevada County. To use the service, callers need to press 1 on their telephone keypad or say `yes' in response to a recorded voice prompt. With recent improvements in voice recognition technology, customers with rotary dial phones also can use the service by responding to a recorded voice prompt. The service costs 35 cents per call completion, but there is no charge for uncompleted calls because of a busy line or no answer. "We're offering this service as an added convenience for our customers," said Rick Bradley, vice president and general manager of Pacific Bell Operator Services. "We know some customers may be in a hurry, have their hands full or standing at a pay phone when calling directory assistance. Having the ability to automatically connect your call will undoubtedly be helpful to people in a variety of situations, not the least of which are those who don't have a pen and paper handy to write the number down." Bradley said customers can bill the 35 cent charge to their home phone, a calling card, a third number, make it collect or use coins if they're calling from a pay phone. The service blocks all calls to 900 and 976 pay-per-call programs. The next expansion phase for the service is scheduled for October in the San Joaquin Valley, where parts of Modesto, Fresno and Stockton will be added as well as all of Lodi, Tracy and Escalon in San Joaquin County; Riverbank, Turlock and Oakdale in Stanislaus County; San Andreas, Mokelumne Hill, Arnold, Murphys, Angels Camp, Bear Valley and Valley Springs in Calaveras County; Sutter Creek, Plymouth, Jackson and Ione in Amador County; La Grange, Groveland, Sonora, Twain Harte, Pinecrest and Jamestown in Tuolumne County; Coulterville in Mariposa County; Caruthers, Selma, Riverdale, Kingsburg, Parlier, Orange Cove, Del Rey and Laton in Fresno County; Avenal, Lemoore and Hanford in Kings County; Los Banos, Gustine, Newman, Atwater and Merced in Merced County; Goshen, Orosi, Porterville, Tulare, Visalia and Dinuba in Tulare County and Madera in Madera County. The service, which first became available in parts of Alameda and Contra Costa counties in 1990, is expected to be very successful and a customer favorite because of the convenience factor and the busy California lifestyle, Bradley said. "In the Bay Area, the service is one of the most popular we have -- rivaling some of our more established custom calling features that have been around for years." Bradley said he expects use of the service to grow rapidly because 5,000 Pacific Bell Directory Assistance operators handle several million 4-1-1 calls each day, although specific projections are not being disclosed for competitive reasons. "While we can't divulge exact numbers, we expect the service to mirror the nationwide industry average, which is up to 20 percent," he said. The service, which connects calls placed and completed within the same service area, will continue to be deployed in other parts of the state as equipment is upgraded and new software features are added to company call processing centers. Pacific Bell is a subsidiary of Pacific Telesis Group, a San Francisco-based diversified telecommunications corporation. ------------------ Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Phone News From Chattanooga (Updates) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 21:34:26 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: scline@usit.net Last Friday was a rather interesting day for telephony in the Chattanooga area -- mainly, BellSouth is now offering Call Waiting Caller ID, BellSouth Mobility (finally) announced a "statewide" calling plan (while at the same time charging interLATA LD rates for calls that are local from landline phones in Chattanooga), and the Georgia PSC has decided to investigate the Trenton [GA]/Chattanooga phone situation (which I wrote about in the Digest a few weeks ago.) BellSouth (the LEC) =================== They're now offering Call Waiting Caller ID in (at least) the #5ESS switches in this area. This includes me (for some strange reason I *thought* that I was on a DMS-100, but we're actually on a #5E. There *are* some DMS's scattered around, though.) The Rossville, GA CO (split-state, #5E) is getting "native" ISDN capability within two weeks, according to a BellSouth regional rep. (I also found out that when they FX'd lines out ["ANSA"] to other CO's in cases where ISDN is not "native," that they *do* assign a number in the area code of the customer -- unless remote call forwarding is requested, etc. In this case, they're probably using the Brainerd [706-891, 423-510/855/89x/954] CO.) BellSouth Mobility ================== Starting last week, they now offer statewide "local" calling throughout Tennessee, much as CellularOne has done for the past six months or so ... 1) Calls from Chattanooga to anywhere in Tennessee (or the north Georgia areas local to Chattanooga, of course) no longer incur a long distance charge. 2) Calls from anywhere in Tennessee [outside the Chattanooga system] to anywhere in Tennessee (and the north Georgia areas local to Chattanooga) are billed at "home" airtime rates; there is no long distance charge for calls received or placed. **This applies even in US "Hell"ular areas (Knoxville and Shelbyville)!!!** :^) 3) The $3.50 monthly "roamer administration fee" charged to BellSouth customers when they roam outside of BellSouth markets is waived for all Tennessee markets. (That is, all of Tennessee is considered "BellSouth" for purposes of imposing the fee.) There are two caveats to this, though: 1) Customer must subscribe to BellSouth Long Distance (not everyone quite yet; I switched as soon as they began offering it!) (This really sounds like a bit of a ploy to get customers to switch to BSLD...for one, this appears to have nothing to do with how calls *placed from* non-BellSouth areas are handled.) 2) Customer must be on a price plan that is > $20 monthly (almost everyone, except for some "special" promotional rates. My current employer's "corporate" rate is $24.95/mo + 25c/min, but I'm still on an old "traditional" price plan [higher monthly rate, lots of free airtime], mainly because I was grandfathered into that rate plan and a related discount offering.) I hoped that they'd eliminate long-distance charges to Atlanta (where BellSouth provides service in most of the huge LATA), but they instead decided to counter CellOne's pricing. What really surprises me is that they could be *losing* money for those who roam in non-BellSouth areas heavily -- it is VERY hard for me to believe that USCC (especially) or other carriers would undercut their (usually ridiculously high) rates so much. (For example, I would be charged 38c/min for a call from Knoxville to Chattanooga. Figuring that they pay around 8c/min for LD, that's 30c/min "airtime" rate; with the 25c/min "corporate" users, that's 17c/min!) There are still bad points to the BellSouth plan: the BSLD restriction (whose rates are *not* all that great) and the fact that coverage in certain non-BellSouth areas (read: US Cellular's) is still abysmal ... still no coverage in Ocoee, along I-75 north of Knoxville, etc. But it's certainly better than before. Am I giving up my CellOne number? Not yet -- until *USCC* cleans up their coverage, I am loath to. ... BTW, BellSouth Mobility is again(?) charging *intERLATA* long distance on some otherwise *intRALATA, LOCAL* calls! Specifically, they are sending calls from the Chattanooga system to Villanow, GA [706-397] through IXC trunks, *even though* the area is WITHIN the Chattanooga LATA and is a *LOCAL* call from landline phones in Chattanooga, and from CellOne phones. Villanow can call TO most BellSouth prefixes as local, but the cellular can't call the landline (I could dial 0 [the LEC operator] and bill to a calling card, I guess, to prevent paying per-minute LD charges if I wished.) I asked a BellSouth rep about this (again; I was originally told to "dial 10 digits; we won't charge long distance"); he said that "it may be local on landline, but not on our system." I think this is BS ; I have called ALLTEL (the LEC in Villanow and adjoining areas which ARE local calls) twice, but they have never called me back. They've done this on other intraLATA calls (to Ocoee/Copperhill); I believe they are using a rather strict definition of "local" -- if the area does not have a *cell site*, then it is not "local" and is handled as interLATA. But under that definition, Spring City, Jasper, and Decatur, TN (where coverage is either poor or nonexistent) would all become "interLATA long distance" as well. Something is wrong here! ... Last week BellSouth began offering a Nokia (forgot the model number) digital phone for $99.95 (with new activation, includes "up to" 1500 minutes of free airtime, which can be used anywhere in Tennessee.) BellSouth Chattanooga, though, isn't even up and running on TDMA yet; the rep I spoke to said they were "trying to get phones in the customers' hands" first) and that they would probably *not* be offering lower airtime rates for digital traffic, or an upgrade path from analog to digital (he referred to digital as the "Cadillac of cellular") -- even though digital reduces fraud problems and improves cell site efficiency. IMHO this is no way to prepare for the onslaught of PCS next year -- they aren't doing much for existing customers, who may be lured away to PCS, cloned, or whatever! Trenton Telephone ================= I mentioned a few weeks back about customers of Trenton Telephone Co. (about 15 miles from Chattanooga) having to pay for FX lines in a CO eight miles away (at a cost of ~$70/mo) for "unlimited" local calling to and from Chattanooga. About this time, I also sent a short inquiry letter to the Georgia PSC in Atlanta -- just to find out what action (if any) was being taken on this. Today, I received a response from the PSC: They have ordered a traffic/cost study for calls between Chattanooga and Trenton, and have formally requested that Trenton Telephone provide at least a one-way (TO-Chattanooga) calling option, *without* the ridiculous, unnecessary FX charges. (This appears unrelated to my inquiry; it appears to be coincidence.) It seems to me that the PSC has probably been *inundated* with complaints about the high pricing. ... Oh well, the cable company's working in my neighborhood this week; we just got about 15 more channels -- now I'm looking forward to *cable modems* next year! This will probably be a really good week ... :^) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #517 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Oct 1 00:23:04 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA24988; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:23:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:23:04 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199610010423.AAA24988@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #518 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Oct 96 00:23:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 518 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Rejects TX Request For Wireless Overlays (John Cropper) BellSouth.net Internet Service Launches in Four New Markets (Mike King) SBC's 972 Press Release (John Cropper) Ongoing Wrong Numbers. Arrrrrgh! (pheel@sprynet.com) An Overview of NSFNET 4090 Awards 1986-1996 (Tim Bass) Emergency Radio Interoperability (Joe Hersey) PCS and Cellular Tariffs in the USA (Mariana Sanchez) Does Radio Shack Wireless Phone Extension Work With Modem? (B. Weissborn) 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. * ************************************************************************* --- additionally --- ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from ** NTR ** * * Nationwide Telecommunications Resources, a nationwide resource for * * contract services, job placement and executive recruitment. If you * * are looking for a job or to fill a position: Fax resumes/requests to * * 510-673-0953; email resumes/requests to tech@ntr-usa.com; or call us * * at 510-673-9066. Watch this space for our website URL. * * NTR specializes in providing the highest quality engineers and * * IT professionals to the Telecom Industry * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com Subject: FCC Rejects TX Request For Wireless Overlays Date: 30 Sep 1996 13:50:26 GMT Organization: Pipeline From the Texas PUC: FCC rejects PUC's proposal for wireless only area codes AUSTIN, Sept. 11 -- The Federal Communications Commission has rejected Texas' request for area codes to serve wireless customers in the Dallas and Houston areas. In action taken today, the three commissioners at the Texas Public Utility Commission agreed not to appeal the case. In February, the Texas PUC voted to split the existing Dallas 214 and Houston 713 calling areas in two and add an another area code for each area for wireless uses such as cellular and mobile phones and pagers. The additional wireless codes would have been implemented as overlays in the current calling areas, and would have relieved the exhaustion of numbers by several years. The proposal was based on widespread public support for the concept in numerous public hearings held by commissioners in Dallas and Houston in January. "We were listening to the citizens of Texas when we proposed the wireless overlay," said PUC Commissioner Judy Walsh. "During the nine public hearings that we attended in both calling areas last winter, the comment we heard most frequently was: 'Why not assign the cellular and pager numbers to a separate area code, since the demand for these numbers is what is creating the need for new area codes?' " The FCC's order did not affect the implementation of new areas codes for the 214 and 713 areas. Still set to go are plans to introduce the new 972 code in Dallas and 281 in Houston in donut-shaped geographic splits around the metro areas of the cities. The new 972 area code is scheduled for implementation on Saturday in the existing 214 Dallas area. A six-month permissive dialing period extending until March 14, 1997, will give customers time to adjust to the change and still complete calls without dialing the new area code. The 281 area code is scheduled for implementation in the existing 713 Houston area on Nov. 2, with permissive dialing extending until May 3, 1997. Both of these codes were implemented through a traditional geographic split, in which the geographic area using an existing area code is split into two parts, and roughly half of the telephone customers continue to be served through the existing area code, while the other half changes to the new code. Both areas have been at number exhaustion for so long that many prefixes will be duplicated in the two areas at the time of implementation. In the Dallas area, 53 prefixes will be duplicated on Saturday affecting about 170,000 customers, and in Houston the number of duplicated exchanges is estimated to be about 200. The commissioners voted to follow the traditional approach to implementing the two new codes until a more permanent solution to number exhaust becomes feasible, such as permanent number portability. In its order approving implementation of the new codes, the PUC included plans for wireless overlays as a means of extending the life of the new codes and postponing future number exhaustion. "We believed the wireless overlay would have given the people of Dallas and Houston years of additional relief," stated Commissioner Robert Gee. With an overlay, the new area code covers the same geographic area as an existing area code. Customers in that area may thus be served through either code, although ten-digit dialing would be necessary for all customers in the areas. "We thought our plan for a service-specific overlay was an innovative approach that balanced the interest, benefits, and burdens of all interested parties," noted Chairman Pat Wood III. A wireless overlay was devised in the Chicago area in 1993 by Ameritech, Southwestern Bell's counterpart in Illinois, but was found to be anticompetitive by the FCC. No other state has attempted to use an overlay for wireless carriers since that decision. In light of the FCC's Ameritech Order, the commissioners asked the FCC for further clarification of the federal and state role in numbering. The PUC's request for a declaratory order was filed after the North American Numbering Plan Administrator (Bellcore) refused Southwestern Bell's request for new area codes for prospective wireless overlays in both Houston and Dallas. The Commission specifically requested that the "FCC clarify the states' role in number administration by expanding on statements in the Ameritech Order and elsewhere regarding the balance of authority between the FCC and the states." In the FCC's Order 96-333 issued August 8, 1996, the FCC found that the Texas Commission's wireless-only overlay violates the FCC's Ameritech Order and the prohibition on wireless-only overlays. "Like the plan proposed in the Ameritech Order, the Texas Commission's plan would unreasonably discriminate against wireless carriers," the order states. The Aug. 8 order cited elements of exclusion, segregation, and take-back of numbers as reasons for rejecting the Commission's wireless overlay plan. At the same time, the FCC found that the states could continue to implement area codes because "they are uniquely positioned to understand the local conditions and what effect the new area codes will have on those conditions." They went on to say that each state is subject to FCC guidelines, including the guidelines in the Ameritech Order. New area codes are becoming a fact of life in the United States. Since January 1995, more than 25 new area codes have been implemented across the country, and the need for new telephone numbers continues to grow with the explosive demand for cellular phones, mobile phones, fax machines and pagers. Texas' started out with five area codes and added four more in 38 years from 1947 through 1995. The Dallas and Houston codes will expand Texas' area codes to 11 this year. Plans are currently underway to implement new area codes in 1997 in two other areas of Texas: the 817 area that includes Fort Worth, Wichita Falls, and Waco; and also in the 210 area that includes San Antonio, Brownsville, Laredo, and Kerrville. The Public Utility Commission regulates 155 electric and telephone utilities in Texas to ensure that rates, operations and services are just and reasonable for both consumers and the utility industries that serve the state. 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: Mike King Subject: BellSouth.net Internet Service Launches in Four New Markets Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 00:15:09 PDT Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 12:10:55 -0400 (EDT) From: BellSouth Subject: BellSouth.net Internet Service Launches in Four New Markets For Information Contact: Lyn BressBill Anderson BellSouthGCI/Atlanta (770) 391-2484(404) 870-6783 BellSouth.net SM Internet Service Launches in Four New Markets Ahead of Schedule BellSouth Builds Record of Early Success ATLANTA, September 26, 1996 -- BellSouth today launched its Internet service, BellSouth.netSM service, for four new markets two weeks ahead of schedule. The company pointed to its early success and smooth launch in Atlanta and New Orleans in late August as the reasons for launching the service in Orlando, Jacksonville, Nashville and Memphis earlier than expected. "We've had thousands of calls for the service, and we're answering the phones for service ordering and technical support very quickly," says John Robinson, president of BellSouth.net Inc. "Unlike some large companies entering this business for the first time, we have had a very smooth launch. Our systems have worked flawlessly, and our response times have been excellent. We're delivering the high levels of service quality our customers have come to expect from BellSouth." In addition to Internet access, BellSouth.net service offers a customized version of Netscape Navigator, electronic mail, an optional site-blocking feature, and an easy-to-use Web site that points to local information on Internet sites of businesses and institutions in their community. "BellSouth.net service is locally focused and globally connected," says Robinson. "We will help our customers find useful and interesting information on the Internet while focusing on providing them with easy access to information about their individual city. BellSouth will provide a much needed connection between consumers and businesses locally and globally." BellSouth already offers Internet services for larger businesses, called CommerceLink SM services, in all ten markets. BellSouth.net service offers two attractively priced plans: 1) an unlimited usage plan priced at $19.95 per month; and 2) an hourly plan that provides ten hours of access per month for $9.95, plus $1 for each additional hour. BellSouth will offer customers who sign up for the service in 1996 one free month of service, and the one-time service set-up charge of $10.00 will be waived. Customers can have the service billed to their BellSouth telephone bill or charged to a credit card. Customers can order the software to sign up for the service by calling 1-800-4DOTNET (368638), or they can download the software by visiting the Web site, www.bellsouth.net. --------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com Subject: S