From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Aug 5 09:06:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA14178; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 09:06:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 09:06:09 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708051306.JAA14178@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #201 TELECOM Digest Tue, 5 Aug 97 09:06:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 201 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Los Angeles on Cutting Edge of Public Telecom (Tad Cook) Pay per Use: Three Way Calling (Ken Jongsma) Toronto To get New Area Code (Kevin Smith) BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Judith Oppenheimer) Remote Telephone Line Access (rickch19@sgi.net) External Call Barred Networks (P. Graves) Cell Phone Triangulation (Tom Trottier) Seeking Information on IntraLATA Equal Access (P.B. Schechter) World Telephone Numbering Guide Update is Ready (Dave Leibold) Re: Free Calls in Seattle Area (Michael J. Ellis) Re: Free Calls in Seattle Area (Martin Lucina) Re: Free Calls in Seattle Area (Georg Schwarz) Re: Is VAT Included in Interconnect Access Charges? (Thor Lancelot Simon) Re: Area Code Splits: Long Term Solution? (Mark D. Foster) Re: 351 a Possible NPA for 504 Relief (Dave Perrussel) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Los Angeles on Cutting Edge of Public Telecom Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:25:06 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) INNOVATION L.A. is on cutting edge of public telecom systems BY JONATHAN WEBER Los Angeles Times The notion that government needs to be more entrepreneurial is a popular one in this age of triumphant high-tech capitalism, but the proponents of this idea may not have figured on a little-known agency in the city of Los Angeles bureaucracy taking them quite so seriously. The Information Technology Agency, formed two years ago by the consolidation of three other agencies and led by a veteran information systems manager named John Hwang, is charged with improving city agencies' computer and communications systems, and with using technology to improve the delivery of city services and spur economic development. Hwang and his deputies aim to accomplish these tasks, in part, by getting the city into the telephone business. Already, the city owns an extensive fiber-optic communications network -- some of it installed by the Department of Water and Power to manage utility operations, some of it built to connect city police stations, and some of it designed to improve communications among other city agencies and offices. Now Hwang and his deputies are taking it to the next level, developing plans to create partnerships with the private sector and extend the network to new parts of Los Angeles. It's an effort that puts the city at the forefront of a national trend, and it could both enhance city services and lead to new communications choices for both residents and businesses. But does it really make sense for the city to do something like this? Pacific Bell, for one, doesn't think so. "You have to question whether it's a proper use of taxpayer dollars," says John Donner, Pac Bell's area vice president for Los Angeles. "There is a pretty robust telecom infrastructure in L.A. Why would the city want to enter a very capital-intensive marketplace?" Donner would say that, of course. The city's likely partners are companies that hope to compete with Pac Bell in the local telephone services business. Companies like Worldcom Inc., which recently acquired MFS Communications -- a national leader in developing local phone systems to compete with the entrenched Bell operating companies. Pac Bell's new parent company, SBC Communications Inc., has already shown its willingness to play political hardball in blocking municipal telecom projects. Los Angeles' current foray into the telecommunications business began in the early 1990s, when it struck a deal allowing MFS to use an abandoned, city-controlled oil pipeline as a fiber-optic cable route in exchange for giving the city some of the circuits. Hwang says the city needs to look at expanding its network because the private sector alone isn't doing the job. The federal telecommunications law passed last year was supposed to spur competition in local phone markets, but the results have been very disappointing. And Pac Bell has abandoned an ambitious effort to build a state-of-the-art high-speed network across much of the region. "If you leave it to the private concerns," Hwang said, "they'll perpetuate the distribution problem," building networks only in wealthier parts of the city and widening the gap between the information haves and have-nots. Some people cringe at the idea of public officials second-guessing the market-driven decisions of private businesses. But building telecommunications networks isn't as distant as it seems from the traditional functions of a municipal government. Cities build and maintain all kinds of infrastructure, from roads to ports to electricity grids; in a few places they even own the cable TV system. Fiber-optic communications networks, which use lasers to carry voice and data and video communications at extremely high speeds, are increasingly vital for many types of economic and social activity, and there's no reason in principle that local governments shouldn't be involved. Although the upfront investments can be substantial, there are also plenty of potential revenue sources and financing options. "It's really very similar to municipal utility planning," said David Rozzelle, president of Media Connections Group, a San Francisco telecommunications consulting firm that has worked extensively with cities. The ability to move information is now as essential a service as providing water or power, he argues, and it's logical for government to help build the facilities. A few small California cities are already demonstrating some of the possibilities. Palo Alto is about to complete a 26-mile fiber-optic network that will serve the needs of city agencies and also offer capacity for lease to private businesses. Anaheim has partnered with a San Diego-based start-up company called Spectranet in a remarkably ambitious effort to use a 50-mile fiber-optic network built by the municipal power company as the backbone for a completely new telecom network connecting every business and residence in town. Big cities, though, have declined to take the plunge. Several years ago San Diego set out to build a municipal telecom network, but by the time it was ready to go forward, officials concluded that the phone companies had already installed plenty of capacity. In Texas, Austin was forging ahead with a plan to build a municipal fiber network when it collided head-on with the formidable political power of the local phone company. The state legislature -- acting at the behest of Southwestern Bell, according to Paul Smolen of Austin's office of cable and regulatory affairs -- passed a law that barred any city from owning and operating a telecommunications network. Since Southwestern Bell's parent, SBC, now owns Pacific Bell, the maneuver in Austin stands as a warning to officials in Los Angeles and elsewhere in California that they'd better move carefully. Politics aside, though, the basic question remains: Would the Information Technology Agency's initiative be good for Los Angeles? The agency is preparing a series of requests for proposals from the private sector for various phases of the network, with the first one expected to go out within 60 days. Without knowing a lot more about the exact state of the various communications networks -- both public and private -- that already crisscross Los Angeles, and until companies respond to the ITA's request for proposals, I can't really offer a very strong opinion on what the city should do. But there are a few general guidelines that might be useful in evaluating the effort as it progresses. First, all parties should avoid the temptation to cast the issue in ideological terms. Municipal governments, and especially those that already own power utilities, have a legitimate role to play in developing communications infrastructure. A business that is still heavily regulated and heavily dependent on public rights of way -- such as the local phone business -- isn't entirely a free-market enterprise anyway, and could use some intelligent prodding by government. Second, the city should define clearly what pieces of the project are designed to serve what ends. Improving city services, providing good infrastructure to attract businesses, and increasing the range of telecom services available to businesses and residents by spurring new competition are very different goals. Finally, the various political decision-makers, as well as the public, to the extent possible, will have to sweat the details on all this. There are many possible levels of city involvement, ranging from simple lessor of raw fiber-optic capacity to full-blown network operator and telecommunications service provider. ------------------------------ From: 73115.1041@NOSPAMcompuserve.com (Ken Jongsma) Subject: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 01:09:50 GMT US West mailed out a card to New Mexico subscribers announcing the pending availability of pay per use Three Way Calling. This follows the introduction about a year ago of pay per use Return Call (*69) at .75 per use. The card indicates that Three Way Calling will be billed the same way. I see a major problem here, given the user interface required to activate the feature, i.e. the switchhook flash. I've stumbled over this interface at the office way too many times. I can see many situations where you receive or initiate a call, hang up momentarily and then initiate a new call not realizing that the previous call is still on the line. I dare say the vast majority of residential users are not going to realize what a stutter dialtone is and that it means they've just incurred a .75 charge. I think there's a substantial difference between a feature that requires a specific key initiation sequence and one that could be accidentially initiated. The *very* fine print on the card indicates that pay per use features can be deactivated by calling the billing office, but does not indicate if individual features such as Three Way can be disabled without affecting access to ones such as *69. The same fine print says that modems and fax machines may need to be reprogrammed to force a two second (!) delay between calls. Ken Jongsma 73115.1041@compuserve.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ameritech recently installed this feature on all phones in Skokie, IL among other places. It took me three calls to the business office to get it deactivated on the business phone lines of an associate of mine who accidentally used it a couple times in the interim. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 12:14:21 -0400 From: Kevin Smith Organization: New Link Subject: Toronto To get New Area Code Toronto (Mega City, Ontario) is going to get a new area code. The former cities of (old)-Toronto, York, and East York will keep the 416 area code Etobicoke, North York, and Scarbough will move to the new area code. Bell Canada nor its parent company Bell Canada Enterprises has said what the new area code will be. Maybe another leak at Bellcote will happen as it did with the Montreal split. This area code will be the first of the new type area codes for Ontario. Bell will release the information soon. The split is similar to inner/outer split that London has (171 and 181 split.) ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 08:13:44 -0400 Organization: ICB TOLL FREE - 800/888 news... commentary... consulting... Anyone familiar with 900 service want to comment on this? Seems to me especially if BellSouth has a local monopoly provisioning 900 service, it has no right meddling in how companies or organizations utilize it. Judith Oppenheimer BellSouth Prohibits Charities From Using 1-900 Numbers 1-900 For Psychics, Not Charities It's an uncomfortable position to be in because it looks like we're against something that is compassionate. But you have to make a business decision. Barry Copeland, BellSouth By Steve Visser The Associated Press A T L A N T A Psychics do it, astrologers do it. But charities? BellSouth won't let them use 1-900 numbers to raise money. BellSouth, which provides local service in nine Southern states, says it would be an administrative burden; children calling without parental approval and charities everywhere hoping to use the service. "It's an uncomfortable position to be in because it looks like we're against something that is compassionate and makes sense. But you have to make a business decision," company spokesman Barry Copeland said. Telephone companies that provide service to charities include U.S. West, which serves 14 western states, and Nynex Corp., which serves seven northeastern states. Make Charity Easy A caller can dial the 900 number and have $10 billed to their phone bill. "You see a disaster on television, think `I can afford $10,' and pick up the phone and call," said John Katopodis, a former county commissioner in Birmingham, Ala., who formed a charity foundation. He thought he could make charitable giving easy, impulsive and affordable. Katopodis said he was negotiating with AT&T to be the long-distance carrier for the number, and with the AT&T Foundation to underwrite the costs, when he learned that BellSouth collected bills only for for-profit businesses. ICB TOLL FREE News. http://ICBTOLLFREE.com. Today's regulatory news for tomorrow's marketing decisions. ICB TOLL FREE Consultancy. http://ICBTOLLFREE.com/icbinfo.html. joppenheimer@ICBTOLLFREE.com. 1 800 The Expert. +1 212 684-7210. ------------------------------ From: rickch19@sgi.netxx Subject: Remote Telephone Line Access Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 15:02:42 GMT Organization: Western PA Scanner I am looking for device which I can connect to my telephone line to do the following: 1) Call my line via my 800# 2) Enter a 4-10 Digit Password 3) Device will connect a 2nd line for outbound calls 4) Compatitable with CallerID, VoiceMail, Answering Machines 5) Compatitable with ISDN service to use the 2 POTS ports on some ISDN TA/Routers to accomplish this. (The outbound line would be one of the POTS ports. Inbound would still be POTS, although the ability to use pure ISDN would be a plus. Will AT&T let you assign an 800# to a ISDN DN?) The device would allow me to make local calls to ISP, return calls etc while travelling at my reduced LD rate on my 800# versus using Credit Cards, Dial Direct LD etc.. It also simplfies dialing as some business /pay phones will block out LD 10xxx codes, CC dialing etc. The device when connected with a voicemail/answering machine would let the the voicemail/answering machine answer and if it gets a code like: #*# <- Attention code for device, so voicemail/answering machines will ignore. Some VM/AM will hang up when they get extra DTMF. So the device would need to keep line connected. xxxx <- Password access. At this point you would get dialtone from the second line and could dial outbound. # <. The ability to use the standard "#", ala Calling Card Dialing, key to signal and end to a call and allow another call to be made. *#* <-Hang up Code _____________ Line #1 IN | | To CID/AM/VM devices ----------------------| |-------------------- Line #2 In | | ---------------------|_____________| Any company make such a device? Thanks in advance. ** Remove xx in email address to email me! ** Western Pennsylvania Scanner Frequency Page http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1060/ Radio Scanner Web Ring - Find a scanner web site quickly! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1060/scnrng.htm Spice Girls ! ! http://channel3.vmg.co.uk/spicegirls Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, '227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 23:38:41 -0700 From: P Graves Reply-To: peter.graves@cableinet.co.uk Subject: External Call Barred Networks Organization: Cable Internet (post doesn't reflect views of Cable Internet) Help, I work for a large UK company with many branches nationwide. My present premises was moved quite recently and the phone system changed. Instead of being able to make calls to the outside world, they are limited to other phones on premises or to the other shops (by means of a three digit code). I have found that a BT chargecard can be used but was wondering if it was possible to bypass the barring (all engineers leave a back door)! Any information is welcome, even if it's to tell me it's not possible Thanks, Liam [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If some reader wants to help you learn how to defraud your employer and make unauthorized phone calls on his system, I am sure they will write you directly, however bear in mind your employer probably has the phone system set in such a restrictive way for a good reason. Have you tried asking your supervisor or manager for authorization to make the desired phone calls? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Trottier Subject: Cell Phone Triangulation Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 13:56:39 -0400 There were some comments earlier about whether the cell phone companies could triangulate on phones. There was a story recently in the {Ottawa Citizen} newspaper about it. "Developed by Rankin Research in conjunction with Bell Mobility, a black box no bigger than a television remote control is hidden in a car and can pinpoint its location anywhere in North America where there is a cellular phone network. And designers claim it can do it in under 40 minutes. The way the system works is this: Once a car is reported stolen to police, the owner phones a 1-888 number to activate a personalized search from Rankin's headquarters in Montreal. The box emits a signal which is triangulated down to several city blocks using signals from cell phone towers. An unmarked tracker vehicle (or, in Montreal, one of two helicopters) is dispatched to locate the car to within less than a metre, and call in the law. Since starting up in April, Rankin has recovered 16 cars and acquired more than 2,800 customers, each paying $500 per unit including installation, and $107 in annual monitoring fees. Rankin charges the insurance company a $250 recovery deductible for each car found. Ottawa does not have its own tracker vehicle yet, but Mr. Boulay says it will once enough units are sold. Unlike expensive U.S. systems that read a car's location using Global Positioning System satellites, Rankin claims the Canadian invention "... will work in a garage or metal container and is accurate enough to be used to obtain a search warrant. " http://www.ottawacitizen.com/city/970729/1019031.html Ciao, Tom Trottier, MBA Senior Technical Architect SHL Systemhouse Ltd. Ottawa Global Development Centre 50 O'Connor St. Suite 501, Ottawa K1P 6L2 Canada +1 613 236-6604x5539 fax 232-5182 ttrottier@shl.com ------------------------------ From: pb@morse.Colorado.EDU (PB Schechter) Subject: Seeking Information on IntraLATA Equal Access Date: 4 Aug 1997 18:17:41 GMT Organization: University of Colorado at Boulder I am looking for information on intraLATA equal access. Does anyone have any pointers? I would appreciate pointers to technical as well as policy issues. Also, I assume that int*er*LATA equal access is probably relevant, so I'd be happy to hear about pointers to that topic, as well. Thanks in advance, PB Schechter pb@colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 23:22:25 EDT From: Dave Leibold Subject: World Telephone Numbering Guide Update is Ready The 3 Aug. '97 World Telephone Numbering Guide should now be available for browsing. WTNG is an attempt to track telephone numbering news and resources, particularly with numerous numbering plan changes throughout the planet. WTNG should be reachable on the web at: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/8818/wtng.html The updates generally consist of fixing up broken links and adding bits of news like an overview of the Mexico material some time ago. Reports of broken or missing links are welcome, since many of the references have a tendency to change their file paths or just simply pull the file from web access. :: David Leibold -+- dleibold@else.net ++ aa070@freenet.toronto.on.ca :: ------------------------------ From: Michael J. Ellis Subject: Re: Free Calls in Seattle Area Date: 4 Aug 1997 13:11:23 GMT Organization: Telstra Internet Browse Server > There is a similar service in Europe whereby listening to an > advertisement every 3 minutes, your phone call is free. The service > makes its money from the ads. This is coming to Australia in 1997/1998. Mr. Michael J. Ellis Mobile: 0414 588 266 Voice Mail: 0416 42 92 42 E-Mail: Ellis@y-net.com.au UIN: 1906841 Although I may disagree with what you say, I will defend to the death your right to hear me tell you how wrong you are. ------------------------------ From: Martin Lucina Subject: Re: Free Calls in Seattle Area Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 00:00:00 GMT I heard about this feature, about a couple of months ago, on the program "All Things Considered" which airs on my local National Public Radio station in Los Angeles, KCRW. I don't know the exact country, but it was one of the Scandanavian countries. The web site for KCRW is www.kcrw.org; for NPR, it is www.npr.org. ------------------------------ From: schwarz@physik.tu-berlin.de (Georg Schwarz) Subject: Re: Free Calls in Seattle Area Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 19:43:31 +0200 Organization: Institut f. Theoretische Physik, TU Berlin Afshin David Youssefyeh wrote: > There is a similar service in Europe whereby listening to an > advertisement every 3 minutes, your phone call is free. The service > makes its money from the ads. I wonder if such services can be used for modem connections? (Unfortunately to the best of my knowledge it does not exist in Germany.) Georg Schwarz schwarz@physik.tu-berlin.de, kuroi@cs.tu-berlin.de Institut f=FCr Theoretische Physik +49 30 314-24254, FAX -21130 Technische Universit=E4t Berlin http://home.pages.de/~schwarz/ ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Is VAT Included in Interconnect Access Charges? Date: 04 Aug 1997 23:55:33 -0400 Organization: Panix Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com In article , Rudy Torres wrote: > I have a simple question regarding interconnect access charges and VAT > taxes, and I was wondering what other telco providers do regarding > this question. > If a network carrier (A) charges an interconnect access charge to a > service provider (B) to complete a call for a customer of that service > provider (B), is it usual for the interconnect access charge to > contain VAT (Value Added Taxes/Sales Tax) when charging the service > provider (B)? Even though the over-all charges for the call to the > customer by the Service Provider (B) also contains VAT? Some countries don't *have* VAT, as odd as it might seem to a European. The "sales taxes" we do have generally only apply to specific categories of goods and services, and I can't readily think of an example of a wholesale telecom service such as an access charge on which sales tax is charged. Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?" ------------------------------ From: Mark D. Foster Subject: Re: Area Code Splits: Long Term Solution? Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 00:15:40 -0400 Organization: MDF Associates Relaxing the middle digit was instigated because of a concern about eventual NANP (North American Numbering Plan) exhaust, but the consumption rate of new numbers (actually CO codes) has continued to accelerate since then. Adding new areacodes is due to exhaust of CO codes in an existing areacode and not the result of consuming all of the line numbers in an areacode. There are generally three reasons: continued strong growth in the wireless industry; unanticipated growth in additional lines for fax/data/internet and explosion of ISDN-BRI; and CO code consumption by new competitive LECs (CLECs) preparing for local competition. These factors have been compounded because the existing CO code administrators have not been getting consumption forecasts from all of the CO code holders because it constitutes competitive information -- the CO code administrators are all currently incumbent LECs. Also, the forecasting algorithms have assumed linear consumption rates, which have proven to be more aggressive than that. Mark D. Foster | mdfassoc@mindspring.com MDF Associates | Tel: +1(703) 404-2258 Telecoms Consulting | Fax: +1(703) 404-2591 ------------------------------ From: bbscorner_removethis@juno.com (Dave Perrrussel) Subject: Re: 351 a Possible NPA for 504 Relief Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 12:13:43 GMT Organization: Diamond Mine / BBS Corner John Cropper wrote: > 504-351 is already assigned (my records show New Orleans, but Mark > Cuccia verified it was Hammond, as a cellular prefix), and also > permits 7D dialing across the LATA boundary into the Baton Rouge LATA. If BellSouth did assign 351 as a relief NPA for 504, it wouldn't be the first time a new NPA was an existing prefix in the existing area code. Bell Atlantic, when it recently split 757 from 804 - already had 757 as an assigned prefix on 804 (La Crosse, Virginia). Confusing? Possibly - but hopefully the 757 prefix wasn't near the border of 804/757. There it would cause some confusion! Dave Perrussel ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #201 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Aug 7 09:02:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA27222; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:02:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:02:05 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708071302.JAA27222@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #202 TELECOM Digest Thu, 7 Aug 97 09:02:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 202 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Meridian Maintenance Modem (Louis Raphael) Re: Meridian Maintenance Modem (Christopher W. Boone) Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? (Paula Pettis) Pay Booths For Internet Access (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: BRI -ISDN Key System or PBX Available in North America (acarr@aol.com) "Transport-only" Service (John J. Brassil) Statistics on Digital Switches (Katie Wright) Re: Premature Rejoicing (AOL to Sell Customers Phone Numbers) (Bill Walker) Re: Possible Last Two Miles T1 Airborne? (Enrico Schuerrer) Re: Latest Anti-Spam Technology (Eric Florack) Re: NJ Escort Services Complain Lawyer Calls Hurt Business (Brian Doreste) Switch Partitioning (Scott Yoneyama) Re: Unit to Connect Two POTS Lines (Christopher W. Boone) Re: New Calling Card Surcharges? (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: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: raphael@willy.cs.mcgill.ca (Louis Raphael) Subject: Re: Meridian Maintenance Modem Date: 7 Aug 1997 02:46:27 GMT Organization: McGill University Computing Centre On my USR Courier 14.4K: ATZ^M~~~AT S7=60 E1 &K1 &M4^M~ seems to work wonders. Then again, a plain "ATZ" would probably work just as well. If you've got voice-mail with stutter dial-tone, put "X0" ("ATX0") in there, which will make the modem ignore the absence of dial-tone. Also, I've never had much success in answering with "ATA". I find that it's better to set "ATS0=1" instead. Maybe you're waiting for a RING and issuing an ATA? (And since we're on the subject of modems, I'll insert a shameless plug for the comm software I use - Telix, version 3.12, copyright 10-30-88... and I *still* haven't found anything worth upgrading to...) Louis ##rdavidwhite@worldnet.att.net remove the ## above to respond (spam avoidance) ------------------------------ From: Christopher W. Boone Subject: Re: Meridian Maintenance Modem Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 18:56:55 -0500 Organization: ABC Radio Networks Engineering Dept - Dallas, Texas Reply-To: cboone@earthlink.net David White wrote: > I have an Option 61 and would like to upgrade the maintenance modem > from an ancient 300 baud. I have changed the switches on the SDI card > but cannot get US Robotics modem to work. Does anyone know the correct > initialization string for a US Robotics Courier? I would just use ATZ on it ... did you reinit the switch after resetting the dip switches? (Damn Meridian almost always needs it for the little things!) Our modem is running at 9600 baud (7E1). Chris ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: Paula Pettis Subject: Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 22:28:36 -0400 I've had conversations with several of my local BellSouth reps regarding running full duplex data over T-1's. According to them the total COMBINED 2-way throughput on a T-1 is 1.544 Mbps. They say that if you are transmitting at a rate of say 1 Mbps, you can only receive data at a rate of 0.544 Mbps because the bandwidth is shared between the transmit and receive channels. So in the true sense of "full duplex", a T-1 is NOT full duplex. This seems to meet the definition of half duplex. I was under the impression that since this was a 4 wire circuit (1 transmit pair and 1 receive pair) you could transmit at 1.544 Mbps and receive at 1.544 Mbps simultaneously without one path interrupting the other. Thus a combined aggregate throughput of 3.088 Mbps. Does anyone have any information which would support or dispute this theory of "shared bandwidth" on a T-1 ? What do you call this pseudo "full duplex" transmission medium? Paula Pettis Stuff Software 1249 Silver Palm Drive Altamonte Springs, FL 32714 Voice: (407) 290-2301 Fax: (407) 290-0079 www.stuffsoftware.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 20:42:46 -0400 From: Judith Oppenheimer Organization: ICB TOLL FREE - 800/888 news... commentary... consulting... Subject: Pay Booths For Internet Access Too cool. And I don't impress that easy. Judith ONLINE / Pay Booths For Internet Access Atcom/Info, a vender of public Internet access systems, says it has perfected an access device that fits into a public payphone, for people who absolutely must check in for e-mail, stock market quotes or to conduct other Internet-based tasks. The access system, called a Payphone Cyberbooth, replaces standard pay telephones in locations such as airports. Neil Senturia, the firm's chief executive officer, described the system as ideal where demand has risen for access to Internet services but space is limited. http://www.atcominfo.com ----------- ICB TOLL FREE News. http://ICBTOLLFREE.com. Today's regulatory news for tomorrow's marketing decisions. ICB TOLL FREE Consultancy. http://ICBTOLLFREE.com/icbinfo.html. joppenheimer@ICBTOLLFREE.com. 1 800 The Expert. +1 212 684-7210. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 22:12:28 -0400 From: acarr@aol.com Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: BRI -ISDN Key System or PBX Available in North America? Rolm had a BRI Key system at one point. I don't think it supported plugging in other ISDN devices such as a Bitsurfer. ------------------------------ From: John J. Brassil Reply-To: John.J.Brassil@vanderbilt.edu Subject: "Transport-only" Service Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 05:34:07 -0500 I happened to be sitting nearby (working on the NMS) when a conference call of the Vandy bigwigs dicussing I2 broke up. Turning to me, they said, "What do we need in order to connect transport-only service into our backbone?" I'll be the first to admit that my wide-area background is fairly weak, so it wasn't too big of a blow to my ego to have to admit that I didn't have the faintest idea. We have an ATM backbone here (newly installed FORE gear), so I have some idea of how to provision circuits using ATM, but from what I understand, the "transport-only" service they are considering is in lieu of a much more expensive WAN ATM pipe, so we would need to bridge the gap at some point. Again, the details were a bit sketchy, but apparently we'd be given a certain amout of bandwidth and the rest would be up to us. A couple of questions arise from this: I assume the option under discussion is some sort of SONET-only capability. Where can I go to find out how bandwidth is allocated at that level? Is that even an appropriate question? More to the point, what sort of binding/interface is needed to tie the campus ATM backbone into this type of service. For example, can I buy a WAN card for a FORE switch that would bring the service "up the stack" at whatever point the TO fibers are terminated? Any pointers you can think of would be greatly appreciated. John J. Brassil | Network Manager, Vanderbilt ACIS Networks | 615.322.2496 ------------------------------ From: Katie Wright Subject: Statistics on Digital Switches Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 03:45:23 -0300 Organization: University of New Brunswick I am doing research on digital switches and I would like to know how many digital switches (not number of users or lines) are in use in the US and in the rest of the world. I am mostly focusing my research on Nortel (DMS-100, DMS-200, etc) and Lucent (5ESS) switches but would appreciated statistics on other switches as well. Thank you, Katie Wright Katie.Wright@asg.unb.ca ------------------------------ From: Bill_Walker@qualcomm.com (Bill Walker) Subject: Re: Premature Rejoicing (AOL to Sell Customers' Phone Numbers) Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 00:53:44 -0700 Organization: QUALCOMM, Inc. In article , Brownsta@concentric.net (Stan Brown) wrote: > So how exactly is this any kind of victory for consumers? Seems to me > if you're getting telemarketing calls on behalf of non-AOL companies, > just because you're an AOL customer, it doesn't matter who makes the > calls. And since you have a business relationship with AOL, I believe > you can't even ask to be put on their do-not-call list. AOL has an "opt-out" list for telemarketing calls and junk mail (keyword: MARKETING PREFERENCES for you AOLers out there), which I've been led to believe applies whether or not the calls are on the behalf of a non-AOL company. Bill Walker, QUALCOMM, Inc., San Diego, CA USA Bill_Walker@qualcomm.com Support the anti-spam amendment. Join at ------------------------------ From: enrico.sch@magnet.at (Enrico Schuerrer) Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 01:45:12 +0200 Subject: Re: Possible Last Two Miles T1 Airborne? Organization: Magnet Online Service Here in Austria is a company called Datentechnik, which has an optoelectronic link (4 different optical links parallel) up to STM-1 (155 MBit/s) and up to 5 km (appr. 3.1 miles). The equipment has an optical in-/output, which have to be connected with optical modems on both sides - so you can define the bandwith from 1.56 MBit/s up to 155 MBit/s. If you are interested in this equipment don't hesitate to mail me. Enrico ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 06:02:40 PDT From: Eric Florack Subject: Re: Anti-Spam Technology In #198, Kriston J. Rehberg posted: >> For the benefit of Spambots everywhere: >> webmaster@localhost >> abuse@localhost >> postmaster@localhost >> I'm told it works like a charm, too. > > And it will work until the next release of the spambot software. > Don't you believe that spambots already filter out these kinds of > obviously bogus emails? Hi, Kriston, Well, perhaps /some/ do. It'd be illogical for me to suggest else. But I think you over-estimate the technical expertise of most spam artists, if you think that's the /general/ situation. You're logically correct in that some spam generators will adjust for this, of course, but not all ... and those I can help take out, I will help take out. And while they're adjusting I'm adjusting, too. I'm currently treating SPAM as one would a virus ... you have to keep updating your strings to stay ahead of the game. > And don't they already filter "NOSPAM" and translate "user at blah dot > com" from email addresses, too? Isn't this a trivial change, indeed? Of course ... but then most Spambots are pretty trivial in programming, from what I've seen. > I use various UNIXes as well as Windows. Of course, procmail works > great on UNIX. On Windows, Forte (www.forteinc.com) has just released > version 1.5 of Agent, which has a plain language *AND* a regular > expression filter for incoming email. Individual filters can be > applied to any header field in the message, the message body, and the > entire raw unformatted message as a whole. The filter creation dialog > is straightforward and easy to understand. But, good as that is, that utterly fails to solve the problem of the noise level on my incoming line, to say nothing of lowering the noise level (nee, bandwidth waste) on the net as a whole. And as I recall, that's well over half the issue, and what my solution attempts to directly attack. I'm not being unrealistic here; I doubt I've significantly lowered the amount of spam directly coming my way, but I think I can guarantee that at least one if not more, spam mailers have been shut down by their repective Domain masters, which was my purpose. Call it a public service. Do you suppose this would be less of an issue were more people to take a similar approach? I'd like to think so. I wonder (and perhaps Pat can address this more directly) how much bandwidth is being wasted by spammers? I'm willing to gamble that the number isn't trivial. Side note: Your comments about MS's mail tools are well-taken; I'm on OUTLOOK at home, and the old-style MS-MAIL here at work, because of the way Xerox's Mail system works; they're not running SNTP here, inside the system. (Though if needed I can send via SNTP... that's another story.) OUTLOOK is nice, but falls to the ground when dealing with SNTP in a lot of areas, such as text formatting conventions. Given that failure of what I consider to be a fairly simple function, I'd not expect it to be fully 'on' when dealing with more complex issues, such as spam control. /E ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 06:49:11 EDT From: Brian Albert Doreste Subject: Re: NJ Escort Services Complain Lawyer Calls Hurt Business Organization: University of Delaware In article Mark Naftel wrote: > The owner of the escort service, who lived in Arizona, also refused to > accept a new number and was very rude to the service representatives > and me - unusual as the proprietors of these types of business were > usually very polite and among our best customers, given their > dependence on telephone service. We ended up giving both customers > new numbers and imposing a split intercept. When a call was made to > the disputed number, a live operator would come on the line and > inquire "who are you calling, please?" The appropriate new number > would then be given. Here is another story about a split intercept that Bell Atlantic-DE (Diamond State Tel) had to do for me last September. Last school year, I had to set up phone service for my new apartment at school. I had requested that I be given a phone number that ended in 3669 because that is what my number at my house in New Jersey ends with. Anyway, my service was set up with the phone number (302) 456-3669. Since there was a month in between when I had the service set up to when I actually moved into the apartment with my roommates, I decided to set up my answering machine on the line for a month to see what kind of calls I would receive. When I checked my machine at the end of the month when I moved in for school, I had about a dozen messages, but curiously enough, they were all for different people. That was only the beginning of my problems. For the first two weeks of school, I was consistently getting about half-a-dozen calls _daily_ for this local pharmaceutical company; usually the first call at around 8:30 am (ugggh - I didn't have class until 11 am) It turned out that their phone number is (800) 456-3669, and as these calls were showing up, they were local to the calling area, and I just thought that these people were mistakenly dialing NPA 302 instead of 800 since 456 is a local exchange. (is it common to dial an 800 number as a local number when the 800 number has a local prefix? please follow up if anyone else has heard of this) Not until about a week later, one afternoon, some number from Kansas showed up on my box (btw, only the number came up, no name) and this lady asked for the same pharmaceutical company. I naturally asked if she dialed 800 instead of 302, and she assured me that she did indeed dial 302. It turned out that she was a nurse at this hospital in Kansas and the pharmacist at the hospital looked up the number in some directory for pharmaceutical companies, and it was mistakenly printed as _my_ number. Of course I didn't let her go until I found out the name of the company that printed the directory, and relayed this information over to the guy in charge of the switches over at the pharmaceutical company. I then got a hold of the BA-DE business office and spoke to an extremely helpful rep that went out of her way to set up a split intercept with a special operator for me, since I had already had checks printed with my new telephone number, and the student directory had already been printed. The she was so nice that she even reversed the $25 charge for choosing the 3669 number, and let me choose a new number for free; with the same last digits (6040 - real easy for everyone to remember; even my new prefix is a palindrome of my old one!) of the number I had in my dorm room for the previous two years. I think I like my new number better... Brian A Doreste * Remove |REMOVE_THIS| in address to reply * 85 Kershaw Street my email address: bdoreste 'at' brahms.udel.edu Newark, DE 19711-2244 USA Univ of Delaware Civil Engineering Undergraduate Usual disclaimers apply Delaware Dept of Transportation - Div of Planning ------------------------------ From: Scott Yoneyama Subject: Switch Partitioning Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 01:26:14 -0700 Organization: Starcom Service Corporation Reply-To: yone@wolfenet.COM I'm doing some research and need help. If we were to install a switch (say a DMS) and fund some of it by partitioning it for the use of other L.D. companies, what would be a fair price for a port? Any ideas? Please respond to my e-mail address below. Thanks for the help! Scott Yoneyama yone@wolfenet.com ------------------------------ From: Christopher W. Boone Subject: Re: Unit to Connect Two POTS Lines Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 06:55:36 -0500 Organization: ABC Radio Networks Engineering Dept - Dallas, Texas Reply-To: cboone@earthlink.net Joe, Teltone sells the M106E ... fully programmable and security passwords ... works on Loop or ground start lines ... about $600 or so. Also Viking sells a cheaper version (the RAD-1) ... sells for about $150 or so ... does use password but NOT as secure as the Teltone. Only problem with the Teltone is the DTMF decoder in it is sometimes too easy to talk off and causes the box to hang up ... tried to change a resistor Teltone suggested but it didnt help. IF they would supply me a schematic, I could have figured it out myself. Its probably too much audio hitting the DTMF chip. BTW this box is still in use at my former company ... tied two analog extns on a ROLM CBX together ... (DISA on the ROLM doesnt allow hookflash and conferencing. The M106E does, and also recall dialtone for another call without hangup!) Chris ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: New Calling Card Surcharges? Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 01:44:28 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com > billing (after the first minute). He told me that he had never heard > of such a thing and besides, "Starting next week, all calling card > calls made from a pay phone will be billed an extra 30 to 35 cent > surcharge, no matter which company you get your calling card from. All the confusion is a direct result of the FCC's payphone compensation rules, which IIRC were struck down in court, and the FCC has to rewrite them. AT&T and BellSouth/GA have already started tacking on surcharges for calling card calls from payphones -- 35c for AT&T, and 25c for BellSouth. AT&T is also surcharging PIN-billed 500 calls made from payphones with the same 35c/call. The question looming is, though: Will payphone compensation be passed directly onto business 800 customers, paging providers, etc. (by imposing a surcharge of 35c/call or whatever from each call from a payphone to a specific 800 number), or will carriers average the compensation into their overall rates (the better choice, IMHO)? I expected most carriers to average the payphone compensation crap into *all* their rates, instead of explicitly surcharging. I expect that at least some carriers will make small adjustments in overall rates to deal with the payphone compensation, but others will pass the surcharge directly on to those calling from payphones. > This is to cover costs that were previously absorbed by the phone > company. (Of course MCI already has this built into their rate, so > there will be no additional charges from us...)" MCI may take a loss on their normal surcharge to cover the payphone providers. As stated earlier, AT&T and BellSouth are *not* doing this. Never mind that IMO, the compensation to payphone owners is far too much, especially given what some of them have raked in from AOSleaze commissions and local-call overcharges. Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! CLLI MRTTGAMA42G NPA 770 #5ESS ** (wk) scline(at)mindspring.net (hm) roamer1(at)pobox.com ** http://scline.home.mindspring.com/ **NO SPAM!** http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ and http://www.cauce.org/ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #202 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sat Aug 9 09:27:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA25985; Sat, 9 Aug 1997 09:27:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 09:27:53 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708091327.JAA25985@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #203 TELECOM Digest Sat, 9 Aug 97 09:25:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 203 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson CPUC News Release re: Slamming (Anthony Argyriou) GSM Alliance in North America (J.F. Mezei) Book Review: "Linux Network Adminisrator's Guide" by Kirch (Rob Slade) 602 Overlay? (Dave Stott) FCC to Reform International Toll Rates (Tad Cook) Book Review: "Financial Professional's Internet Guide" (Rob Slade) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Nicholas Marino) BellSouth Creates New Subsidiary (Mike King) Bogus Directory Assistance Provider (P. Thomson) Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling (Hillary Gorman) Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling (Moe Kunkle) Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling (Sean E. Williams) Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling (Lee Winson) Re: Toronto To Get New Area Code (Chris Farrar) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 22:37:24 -0700 From: Anthony Argyriou Subject: CPUC News Release re: Slamming California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102-3298 CONTACT: Armando Rend August 1, 1997 CPUC-072 415-703-1366 (A96-03-007) CPUC SEEKS TO TOUGHEN RULES ON SLAMMING; ISSUES 'ZERO TOLERANCE' WARNING TO TELCOS Warning telephone companies it has "zero tolerance" for slamming, the unauthorized switching of a consumer's long distance service, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today opened a full-scale inquiry to fashion tougher rules that will better protect the state's consumers from such predatory practices. A workshop and pre-hearing conference is set for Thursday, September 4, at 9:00 a.m. in the State Office Building, 505 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco. A CPUC Administrative Law Judge will preside and issue a schedule for the rest of the proceeding. In issuing today's order, the Commission stated: "we would like to make California the most hospitable place to do utility business, ... but entrants into this market ought to know, that we have zero tolerance for business strategies that are abusive of consumer rights." To protect customer choice and ensure a strong, competitive market, the order added, detection must take place earlier in order to trigger corrective action more quickly. Today's order invites comments to a series of questions covering various aspects of the slamming issue. Pre-hearing conference statements noting issues that parties would like to address in the proceeding should be filed by August 28 with the CPUC Docket Office. The set of questions may be obtained by writing or calling 415-703-2669 or off the CPUC WebPage: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov. The Commission cited four recent cases involving slamming allegations. Sonic Communications was prosecuted for numerous slamming violations in order to obtain refunds for customers but it filed for federal bankruptcy protection. In September 1996, Cherry Communications was ordered to cease operations for two years and pay $20 each to customers that had disputed their change of service. In May 1997, the Commission suspended Communications Telesystems International (CTS) permit for three years, fined the company $2 million and ordered it to refund another $2 million to its customers. CTS had over 56,000 disputes filed against it, and apparently had targeted other-than-English speaking consumers. In December 1996, the Commission ordered Heartline Communications and its affiliate, Total National Telecommunications, to suspend retail operations for 40 months after more than 34,000 consumers alleged that their services were switched by TNT without their authorization. Prosecuting these cases was expensive and time-consuming, largely due to the incomplete data available on the rate at which slamming was occurring. At present, customers who believe they've been slammed can be returned to their carrier of choice by a request either directly to their old carrier or to their local phone company. Only requests to the local phone company alleging an illegal switch are logged as instances of slamming, so only part of the problem is exposed. The Commission seeks comment on the effectiveness of SB 1140, which became law January 1, and added new language in Public Utilities Code Section 2889.5, that requires independent third party verification of a change in long distance service. Some of the other key questions are: Do any CPUC rules and policies need changing in order to assure the law is effectively and efficiently applied? Should the Commission adopt rules specifically applicable to sales agents and marketers? Are specific rules needed for soliciting customers who are other-than-English speaking? Also, exactly who may validly authorize a change in long distance carrier? and, in what way? Should a customer receive notice before a change becomes effective? If so, how? Should the CPUC require local phone companies and long distance carriers to file standard dispute reports? If so, how often and in what form? Should the fees charged to long distance carriers for disputed switches be increased to make slamming less attractive? Should rules adopted in this proceeding apply to local exchange carriers and competitive local carriers? Several other questions deal with penalties and reporting duties. ------------------------------ From: jf mezei <[non-spam]jfmezei@videotron.ca> Subject: GSM Alliance in North America Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 22:16:40 -0500 Organization: VTL Reply-To: [non-spam]jfmezei@videotron.ca Reuters had an interesting article about GSM in North America. http://www.yahoo.com/headlines/970805/tech/stories/wireless_1.html An alliance was formed of GSM operators in Northe America, and this alliance was supposedly backed by Intel. Members of the GSM Alliance include Aerial Communications, BellSouth's Mobility DCS unit, Microcell Telecommunications Inc. , Omnipoint Corp's Communications unit, SBC Communications' Pacific Bell Mobile Services, Powertel and Western Wireless. Microcell (Fido) has also indicated to me that a deal with "Pocket" in the ST-Louis area would be in effect by the end of September. Another interesting tidbit: GSM in the USA supposedly has about 646,000 subscribers; CDMA in the USA supposedly has about 420,000 subscribers. It would be interesting to see if this market share ratio is similar in Canada where Fido/Microcell was almost a year ahead of Cantel in introducing PCS services (Bell Mobility still does not have a service). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 23:01:42 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Linux Network Adminisrator's Guide" by Kirch BKLNXNAG.RVW 970302 "Linux Network Administrator's Guide", Olaf Kirch, 1994, 0-916151-75-1 %A Olaf Kirch %C P. O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155 %D 1994 %G 0-916151-75-1 %I Specialized Systems Consultants, Inc. (SSC) %O 206-FOR-UNIX 206-527-3385 fax: 206-527-2806 sales@ssc.com %P 289 %T "Linux Network Administrator's Guide" Linux is gaining popularity in all kinds of areas. Most frequently, though, I hear people speaking of it in connection with the idea of grabbing an old 386 from somewhere and setting up a trial Internet hub, router, server, firewall, or other such network beast. If that is your area of interest, Kirch's guide (part of the Linux Documentation Project) will be immensely helpful. The work covers all the bases; networking concepts, TCP/IP issues, hardware, configuration, name service, protocols, applications, Network Information System (NIS), Network File System (NFS), UUCP, email, sendmail, and news. In other reviews, I have talked about the relative value of buying a printed copy of a file freely available online, so I won't reiterate that here. I do, however, find this book to be somewhat confusing in that regard. The Preface mentions an O'Reilly and Associates version which I haven't seen -- it doesn't mention SSC. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKLNXNAG.RVW 970302 ====================== roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 02:11:12 -0500 From: Dave Stott Subject: 602 Overlay? In a recent (8/6/97) {Tempe (AZ) Tribune}, there is a page one story on the next 602 split. The AZ Corporation Commission will hold a public meeting on August 13th at 9am to discuss a geographic split vs an overlay. David Janofsky, the Commission's assistant director in the utilities division, is reported to have said that the ACC has no preference at this time. My personal opinion is that no matter what the public or the industry wants, the ACC will opt for a split using the Salt River as the 602/new NPA boundary. I don't think that there are too many CO's serving both sides of the river anymore (at least in the heavily populated area of the Valley) since our 3 'hundred-year floods' a decade ago. Also, I expect the north side of the river will get to keep 602 since most state, county, and city government is there, as well as all of Sun City, Scottsdale, and Paradise Valley -- the most conservative (and monied) parts of the valley. Most large businesses are located north of the river as well. We'll see. Since so many people associate 10-digit dialing with long distance, it should be interesting to see how U S WEST handles the split. Dave Stott *********************************** * RCKT MN -- Drive fast, have fun * *********************************** ------------------------------ Subject: FCC to Reform International Toll Rates Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 02:57:33 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) FCC adopts plan to drive international phone rates down BY JEANNINE AVERSA Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal regulators adopted a plan today intended eventually to lower international telephone rates and possibly save American callers billions of dollars. Chairman Reed Hundt of the Federal Communications Commission extolled the plan as a monumental achievement that will over time create "a radical, radical drop in prices." The FCC voted 4-0 to approve the plan. The plan is designed to bring international phone rates closer to the actual costs of providing calls by setting benchmarks above which U.S. companies would not pay foreign carriers. After a phase-in period, U.S. companies would not pay developed countries like members of the European Union, Japan or Singapore more than 15 cents a minute to complete calls. For less-developed countries like Mexico, U.S. companies would not pay more than 19 cents a minute to complete calls. For developing countries like some in Africa, U.S. carriers would not pay more than 23 cents a minute. The FCC says U.S. consumers pay more than they should for international calls because foreign telephone companies, on average, charge American phone companies fees at least 50 percent above costs for completing calls. U.S. consumers on average pay 99 cents a minute for international calls. about $60 billion a year is spent on international calls worldwide. The FCC's plan doesn't specify what action, if any, the U.S. government would take if a foreign carrier charges higher than the benchmark rates. "We've left that open," an FCC attorney said, speaking on condition of anonymity. U.S. carriers sending calls to wealthy countries, such as the United Kingdom, could try to negotiate new rates starting Jan. 1, 1999, or one year after the rule's adoption, FCC attorneys said. U.S. carriers sending calls to upper middle-income countries like Greece or Brazil would have two years after the rule is adopted to negotiate new rates. The new rates deadline would be three years after adoption of the rule for lower middle-income countries such as Turkey, four years for low income countries such as India and five years for the poorest developed countries in Africa. If foreign governments, however, adopt rules bringing international phone rates closer to costs and yielding results similar to the FCC's, "then we're happy to go with that," a commission attorney said. Separately, the FCC carried out a mandate from Congress by adopting rules requiring television broadcasters and cable TV providers to air closed captions -- subtitles -- with programs. Most carriers have already voluntarily begun using closed captions. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 10:42:16 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Financial Professional's Internet Guide" BKFNPRIG.RVW 970308 "Financial Professional's Internet Guide", John Graves/Kim Hill Torrence, 1996, 0-57398-044-6, U$39.95 %A John Graves johng@kentis.kent.oh.us %A Kim Hill Torrence khill@mail.concentric.net us002405@interramp.com %C 155 N. Water St., Suite 205, Kent, OH 44240 %D 1996 %G 0-57398-044-6 %I Kent Information Services Inc./Peer-to-Peer Communications, Inc. %O U$39.95 +1-330-673-1300 fax: +1-330-673-6310 email@kentis.com %O http://www.kentis.com 800-420-2677 fax: 408-435-0895 info@peer-to-peer.com %T "Financial Professional's Internet Guide" More and more professions and specialty groups are becoming wired, and are therefore needing guides to the net dedicated to their niche. Financial professionals already have "Free Business Stuff on the Internet" (cf. BKFRBUST.RVW) and maybe "How to Grow Your Business on the Internet" (cf. BKHGYBOI.RVW) but there is still room for additional works. Although, maybe, not this one. Most specialty books do include a general section on using the Internet. This work, though, goes rather overboard in that regard. I was willing to overlook some of the errors (Novell does not make antiviral software; you can't use boolean search terms with archie) in a quick guide. The content seemed a bit terse, with numerous important omissions, but I figured that this could, again, be forgiven in an overview. After all, the important thing is the accounting information, right? Wrong, apparently. The generic Internet guide, lame as it is, comprises about ninety percent of the book. The section on accounting resources, in fact, is shorter than the list of ISPs. The resource listings are fairly extensive but only marginally annotated, and are mostly Websites of unknown usefulness. Seen as a general Internet guide, this book is unsatisfactory. As far as a reference for financial resources, it is limited in usefulness. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKFNPRIG.RVW 970308 Please note the Peterson story - http://www.freivald.org/~padgett/trial.htm Genesis 4:9/Proverbs 24: 11,12 - your choice ------------------------------ From: Nicholas Marino Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 11:54:36 -0400 I've been in the 900 business for 10 years, so I think I can explain the basis for BS's decision. Way back in the early 1990's, there were a few 900 information providers that were ripping people off. It wasn't a major problem, and it was a very small percentage of all 900 lines, but various politicians got hold of the issue and made a big deal about it. The result of this big stink can be seen on you local phone bill, if you happen to have made a 900 call during the month. On the page that lists the charge for the 900 call, you will see an FCC-mandated statement that basically says: "We know you made this call to a 900 number, but you really don't have to pay for it because there's no way that this telephone company can disconnect your service for failure to pay a 900 number bill." Anyone who calls a 900 number can call their local telephone company and have the charge taken off. You don't even have to deny making the call, although many people do and the telco doesn't question it. You can also say that you didn't think you got your money's worth from the call. You can say just about anything. But that's not the end of it. Even when a person gets his 900 bill reversed, the local and long distance telcos do not lose any money. They collect the 'transport and billing' charge for the call regardless of whether they collect any money. It's the 900 information provider that gets screwed. If I set up a $10 donation line, I pay the telcos about 50 cents per call. If 1000 people call the line, and they all refuse to pay when they get the bill, I still have to shell out $500 for billing and transport. The telcos can't lose. The upshot of all this? The telcos have no incentive to encourage people to pay for 900 calls. They get their share of the call regardless of whether the customer pays. It's not unusual for 900 IPs to have a 40% uncollectable rate. The reason that Bell South allows for-profit 900 numbers and disallows charity 900 numbers is that they are perfectly willing to screw a for-profit 900 IP out of the money, but they are ethically unwilling to screw a charity. Did I read that right, BellSouth? So you can thank your elected representatives for enacting knee-jerk legislation to combat "phone sex", thereby killing a perfectly good application for 900 services. ------------------------------ Subject: BellSouth Creates New Subsidiary Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 12:33:24 PDT From: mk@nospam.wco.com (Mike King) Reply-To: mk@wco.com ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 09:42:29 -0400 (EDT) From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH CREATES NEW SUBSIDIARY BELLSOUTH CREATES NEW SUBSIDIARY; INTENDS TO FILE AS COMPETITIVE LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIER ATLANTA -- BellSouth Corporation announced today that it has created a new subsidiary that intends to file for competitive local exchange certification to allow it to achieve the same pricing and geographical flexibility as its competitors. Pending regulatory approval, the new company will be another way for BellSouth to offer its customers an integrated BellSouth package of services, including local service, long distance service, wireless communications, Internet, cable TV and entertainment services but with enhanced pricing freedom and the ability to offer the services in more areas than its traditional primary operating territory. The new BellSouth subsidiary will soon file for certification as a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) in states inside and outside BellSouth's traditional nine-state market. It will allow the company to meet new telecommunications competitors on equal footing, buying communications services from the incumbent providers and combining them in fully integrated and innovative packages. Subject to state approval from state regulators, the new subsidiary is expected to be fully operational by mid-1998. "Currently, we must file and seek approval of complicated pricing tariffs before adjusting prices," said Dick Anderson, vice president of marketing for BellSouth. "As a CLEC, we would be able to react to market conditions just as our competitors do," said Anderson. "Furthermore, the new subsidiary would allow us to extend service to select markets throughout the Southern U.S. that we don't currently serve, and give us the ability to follow our customers to markets outside the Southern U.S. where those customers need integrated communications service." The new subsidiary will be headquartered in Atlanta but is also expected to have offices elsewhere in the Southeast, with staffing levels to be determined over the next few months. BellSouth (NYSE:BLS) is a $19 billion communications services company. It provides telecommunications, wireless communications, directory advertising and publishing, video, Internet and information services to more than 28 million customers in 20 countries worldwide. For more information about BellSouth, visit the BellSouth Web page at http://www.bellsouth.com. Also, BellSouth news releases dating back one year are available by fax at no charge by calling 1-800-758-5804, ext. 095650. For more information, contact: Kevin Doyle: 404-249-2793 doyle.kevin@bsc.bellsouth.net Tim Klein: 404-249-4135 klein.tim@bsc.bellsouth.net --------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk (at) wco (dot) com ------------------------------ From: P. Thomson Subject: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 14:43:00 -0400 Organization: Mid Hudson Valley Network Reply-To: mmommsen@mhv.net I wrote to Mark Cuccia: > I have a problem. > Years ago our company had a main number of > (914)XXX-XXXX. About 4 years ago a restructuring resulted in new > numbers for different branches, and we dropped the XXXX number. For > a year or so, the LEC (NYNEX) provided a message giving a new number, > then that service expired. > Now the XXXX number has been re-issued to a homeowner a couple of > miles down the road, and she complains that she gets numerous calls > every day for our company. She says "directory assistance" gives out > that number to people asking for our company. > Well, I immediately called our NYNEX contact, and he verified that all > our records show the new number, (914)YYY-YYYY. He did a scan of > their directory assistance database, and found no occurences of XXXX > under our name. > When I call +1 914 555 1212 (default carrier is LDDS/Worldcom) I > usually get NYNEX's automated "Directory Assistance, what city?" > message, and if I specify my city and company name, I get the > correct (new) number. HOWEVER, about 1 time out of 10 I get a > human operator, and about 1 in three of those give me the old number! > The question is: WHO are the other direcory assistance providers, and > HOW can they be reached directly to correct a listing? > Any hints? Mark then responded to me: Well ... I've posted this many times before, but AT&T does _NOT_ route NPA-555-1212 calls to the GENUINE local telco's directory for that called NPA - at least AT&T doesn't do this on _most_ (interstate) calls to directory assistance for NPA's within the 50-states/DC (and that includes AK & HI). I know that via Sprint and MCI, I have always gone to a genuine LEC for their directory assistance. It seems that LDDS/Worldcom sends their 'overflow' traffic to AT&T, OR your PBX is sending some 'overflow' to AT&T. The BOGUS SCHLOCKY company that AT&T uses is "ExcelAgency". The last time someone I know checked, they are in Arizona (Phonenix and Tempe), at 800-553-8163. AT&T's HQ's in Bernardsville NJ takes complaints, most of them on ExcelAgency. Call them COLLECT as a '0-' call via an AT&T operator (they do accept collect calls made via the AT&T network), at 908-221-4191. Make SURE you get a LIVE AT&T operator on the line (try 800-321-0288, and then enter 0# to get a live operator, and tell her to stay on the line to announce the call collect LIVE). This 908-221 number is NOT changing to NPA 732. It is answered first by a machine that states that it accepts collect calls placed via the AT&T network, therefore you need to get a live AT&T opr to announce the collect call LIVE. Then you sit on hold, until someone takes your complaint. Personally, I hope someone brings regulatory and/or legal complaints (maybe a lawsuit) against AT&T for this PHONY/BOGUS/SCHLOCKY 555-1212 'service' (?) that they have been using. ExcelAgency gets their listings NOT from the local telco, but from other resources, including credit reporting agencies (TRW, Equifax, Transunion), and others. I've heard that they even give out NON-pub's! Since they don't really access the local telco's listings database, they have no real way of knowing if a number has been changed, is nonpublished, and likewise, new customers' numbers can take FOREVER to get into their database. This past Spring, USA-Today did an expose' on AT&T and ExcelAgency. ExcelAgency - we do NOT live up to our name! The real problem is when calling from non-Equal Access areas, such as from rural parts of the US or Canada - unless you know how to use Sprint/MCI (but from Canada?) with a card (using 800-COLLECT for MCI or 800-210-CARD for Sprint). From such non-Equal-Access areas, calls 'default' to AT&T, which means ExcelAgency for 555-1212. I wonder what happens when calling US directory from overseas, whether +1-NPA-555-1212 is allowed for customer access directly from foreign (non-NANP) countries or if not, via the operator in the calling non-NANP country? ----------- MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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: hillary@hillary.net (Hillary Gorman) Subject: Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling Date: 8 Aug 1997 15:10:20 GMT Organization: You LART'em, we cart 'em In , Ken Jongsma <73115.1041@NOSPAMcompuserve.com>, told thousands of people: > I see a major problem here, given the user interface required to > activate the feature, i.e. the switchhook flash. I've stumbled over > this interface at the office way too many times. I can see many > situations where you receive or initiate a call, hang up momentarily > and then initiate a new call not realizing that the previous call is > still on the line. I dare say the vast majority of residential users > are not going to realize what a stutter dialtone is and that it means > they've just incurred a .75 charge. Yes, this is definitely a problem. I have 3-way calling on my home phone line, and I do this all the time. However, we pay a monthly fee to Bell Atlantic, PA, for the privilege of unlimited 3-way calls, so it's not a big deal. If it were a pay per use item, I'd be royally pissed off. The thing is, a lot of times I'll have the phone at arm's length when I'm hanging up/dialing the new number, and I don't hear if it is a stutter or regular dial tone. hillary gorman...........Official Token Female..........hillary@netaxs.com "So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?" hillary@hillary.net: for debugging your net or deworming your pet Net Access...The NSP for ISPs....The NOC that rocks around the clock. ------------------------------ From: moe@ro.com (Moe Kunkle) Subject: Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 11:09:30 +0700 Organization: Renaissance Internet Services Reply-To: moe@ro.com FWIW, Bellsouth installed this in N. Alabama. I didn't realize it until I found several 3-way call charges on my bill. It seems that my wife was doing some banking and when her max time was reached, she hung up and went off hook rather fast (flashhook) to redial. Bellsouth removed it within two hours of my request. I was credited for the mistaken 3-way calls. I bet they make a lot of money on those who don't realize thay accidently activated a 3-way call. Moe Kunkle ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling Date: Fri, 8 Aug 97 13:44:24 -0500 From: Sean E. Williams 73115.1041@NOSPAMcompuserve.com (Ken Jongsma) wrote: > I see a major problem here, given the user interface required to > activate the feature, i.e. the switchhook flash. Here in RochesterTel / Frontier-land, the feature works a bit differently. Users who are not monthly subscribers to the Three-Way calling feature must enter a two-digit star code after pressing the "flash" key. Attempting to dial a second party without first pressing the star code will not result in a Three-Way call. Of course, those users who are subscribers to Three-Way calling simply press flash, dial the second party, then press flash to bring the initial party back into the conversation. Sean E. Williams |sew@dos.nortel.com (Internet) | Information Systems|sew@nhmbs1f.humb.nt.com (Intranet)|N O R T E L Rochester, NY USA |+1 716 224-7850 (ESN 432) |Northern Telecom Mailstop R11-113 |+1 716 654-2881 (FAX) | ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling Date: 8 Aug 1997 23:04:05 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS I can definitely see disadvantages of activating 3-way calling with merely a hookswitch flash, especially when the subscriber doesn't know it's available. A lot of every day people who don't work for large companies are unaware of 3-way calling and the meaning of a stutter dial tone. I can see a lot of unnecessary long distance billings as a line is kept open unintentionally. More troublesome, someone could set up a 3-way and not be aware of it, and discuss something with person "B" unaware that person "A" is still on the line and listening. This could be quite embarrassing in social calls, and downright unacceptable in business calls (for example, when price negotiations are going on, or in discussions by a lawyer with different sides.) However, on the flip side, as a POTS user, I would love the occassional use of 3-way calling on a pay-as-you-go basis. Even at 75c a month (originally 25c not long ago), I love 1169-Return Call--I use it 2-3 times a month, and it beats $6/month for caller ID. What local companies offer it as pay-as-you-go? Another feature I'd like on an a la carte basis is Call Forward. This is something I'd use very occassionally, but there are times when I need it, such as expecting a critical phone call, and having to be in another location for equally critical reasons. My local phone directory is confusing on this -- I think I have it for calls _coming from a _specific_ number_, I'd want it for all calls coming from _any_ number. ------------------------------ From: Chris Farrar Subject: Re: Toronto To Get New Area Code Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 16:51:57 -0400 Organization: Sympatico Reply-To: cfarrar@sympatico.ca Kevin Smith wrote: > Toronto (Mega City, Ontario) is going to get a new area code. The > former cities of (old)-Toronto, York, and East York will keep the 416 > area code Etobicoke, North York, and Scarbough will move to the new > area code. > Bell Canada nor its parent company Bell Canada Enterprises has said > what the new area code will be. Maybe another leak at Bellcote will > happen as it did with the Montreal split. This area code will be the > first of the new type area codes for Ontario. Bell will release the > information soon. > The split is similar to inner/outer split that London has (171 and 181 > split.) Do you have a source on this? It was previously announced by Bell that 416 was getting an overlay, not a split. Chris Farrar | cfarrar@sympatico.ca | Amateur Radio, a VE3CFX | fax +1-905-457-8236 | national resource PGPkey Fingerprint = 3B 64 28 7A 8C F8 4E 71 AE E8 85 31 35 B9 44 B2 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #203 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sat Aug 9 14:00:01 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA08925; Sat, 9 Aug 1997 14:00:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 14:00:01 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708091800.OAA08925@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #204 TELECOM Digest Sat, 9 Aug 97 14:00:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 204 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Sprint Jacks Up Rates, Doesn't Tell Customers (David W. Tamkin) Colorado PUC Mandates 303 Overlay, Stresses Conservation (Donald Heiberg) Serenity, Savetrees, and Spam - Good News For Jerks (Robert A. Pierce) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 14:50:04 CDT From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: Sprint Jacks Up Rates, Doesn't Tell Customers Reply-To: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Organization: TIPFKAG [World-Wide Access, Chicago, Illinois 60606-2804] Charles Earley wrote: > Sprint raised the cost of using their phone cards from .25/min. to > .30/min and did not tell their customers. I discovered this when I > got my bill this month. When I called, I was told that Sprint is not > required to tell customers when they raise their rates. That is fine, > but what about common courtesy or customer service? They also > informed me of a new surcharge of .30/call to be added to the cost of > using a Sprint phone card. It may be too late for Mr. Earley (pun unintended, but what the hey), but on July 31 I received a postal card from Sprint announcing the very rate change that had surprised him on that bill (and also the new per-call surcharge amount). In fact, it begins, "At Sprint, we are committed to keeping you completely informed about your account." However, it says that the change is effective August 1, 1997, so if it has been applied to calls that Mr. Earley has already placed, something is amiss. ------------------------------ From: Donald M. Heiberg Subject: Colorado PUC Mandates 303 Overlay, Stresses Conservation Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:47:36 -0600 Full decision may be downloaded from http://www.puc.state.co.us/docket/97a103t.html [...] indicated portions omitted below. Also, all footnotes were omitted. ---------------------------------------------- Decision No. C97-761 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO DOCKET NO. 97A-103T IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION AND FINAL RECOMMENDATION OF THE NUMBERING PLAN ADMINISTRATOR FOR RELIEF OF THE 303 AREA CODE. DECISION AND ORDER Mailed Date: July 31, 1997 Adopted Date: July 29, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS [...] I. BY THE COMMISSION A. Procedural Background [...] B. Ruling on Outstanding Motions [...] C. Public Participation [...] D. The 303 NPA Relief Options [...] 4. It should be noted initially that the reason the Administrator believes area code relief for the 303 NPA is necessary is not because of a lack of 303 numbers, but rather a lack of or rapid consumption of NXX codes, which are the three digit prefixes that immediately follow the area code in each telephone number. The remaining supply of available NXX codes is being rapidly consumed in part because of the current configuration and use of NXX codes. NXX codes are associated with specific points in the telecommunications network known as rate centers and are, therefore, limited in use to the specific area surrounding the rate center. There are presently 42 rate centers in the 303 NPA. As a result of this configuration, new telecommunications service providers, including wireless, paging, and competitive local exchange companies ("CLECs"), in many cases are each assigned 303-NXX codes which correspond to each rate center in which they intend to offer service or to each distinct type of service, like wireless or paging. Many of these NXX codes, each of which contains 10,000 numbers are, under current practice, being assigned up to 20 NXX codes at a time to providers that may have only a few customers and may have foreseeable use for only a small fraction of the assigned blocks of numbers. The result is that NXX codes are being assigned long before the telecommunications service provider has put to use any significant portion of the 10,000 associated with each NXX code. E. 303 NPA Relief Should Be Implemented Through The Overlay Method 1. The Commission finds first that the overlay method (Option 2) should be used to relieve the 303 NPA at the time that such relief is needed. While there are still many numbers available in the 303 NPA, the exhaust of available 303-NXX codes, if the current pace of assigning seven to eight 303-NXX codes per month were to continue, would occur within one year. Conservation measures, as more fully described below, may indefinitely, and should significantly, delay the introduction of the new NPA from the perspective of the end user by lengthening the expected life of the 303 NPA; however, it is prudent for the Commission to select a relief option in this proceeding so that appropriate preparation can begin. 2. The Commission's selection of the overlay plan is based on a weighing of the myriad of positive and negative factors associated with the options presented. For the reasons set forth below, the Commission finds that the overlay method best comports with the interest of the public of the State of Colorado and best comports with national trends in telecommunications. 3. The overlay method's primary benefit is that no portion of an existing telephone number in the 303 NPA will need to change, [...] Moreover, disruption of the ordinary course of business in the greater Denver metropolitan area will be largely prevented. Once the new NPA is actually introduced, consumers will need to dial the NPA in front of the seven-digits presently dialed to place a local call. As such, ten-digit dialing will be required to complete a local call in those areas served by the 303 NPA following the conclusion of the permissive dialing period. This is the principal change affecting consumers under the overlay, and it will only become mandatory after the 303 NPA is exhausted and the new NPA is introduced. 4. Additionally, the introduction of number portability, whether within a rate center or on a nationwide basis, beginning as early as July 1, 1998, and the movement towards a national ten-digit dialing pattern will make the relief option selected by the Commission more convenient to end users in the long run. Colorado consumers will be well prepared for these changes through the customer education and technical preparation which will occur as a result of this Decision and Order. [...] 7. Since the overlay method utilizes NXX codes with new NPA for growth codes only, the effect of the overlaid NPA will not become apparent until the first NXX code in the new NPA is either required or requested. This is another benefit of selecting the overlay method of relief. Under the overlay, the effect on end users could be delayed well into the future with the implementation of conservation measures, and certainly will not occur prior to May 31, 1998. Contrarily, under the double split option, the new NPAs would have been activated on December 1, 1997, even though permissive dialing, whereby all calls could still be completed by the use of seven-digit dialing, would last for at least six months. Thus, by selecting the overlay method of relief, the status quo (one NPA and seven-digit dialing, albeit permissive) will not end on December 1, 1997, and could potentially last well beyond May 31, 1998. By maintaining the status quo for at least an additional seven months, there is a much greater potential for successfully implementing one or more of the conservation measures described in Part H of this Decision, thereby even further delaying the actual introduction of the new NPA. [...] F. This Overlay Plan Is Not Anti-Competitive [...] G. Coordinated Customer Education Effort Is Required [...] 5. Since the local dialing pattern will be changing, the Commission finds that, at a minimum, a six-month permissive dialing period is needed. It is hoped that permissive dialing could commence on December 1, 1997. During the following six month period, customers would have an opportunity to get accustomed to ten-digit local dialing, even though a local call placed using only seven digits would still be connected, while knowing that the first three-digits are 3-0-3. Additionally, this period of time would be used for reprogramming, if needed, of autodialing equipment, fax machines, modems, alarm boxes, etc.; teaching those in need of special assistance of the change; and reprinting stationary and modifying advertising. Emphasis should be on making the necessary changes/adjustments as soon after the commencement of permissive dialing as possible due to the lack of a finite date for the end of the permissive dialing period. Then, once the industry knows it will need to introduce a telephone number assigned to the new NPA, the permissive dialing period would end at the time of that requirement. It is hoped that permissive dialing could continue for longer than six months through the conservation measures described in Part H below. 6. To the extent the Commission and industry believe that the nationwide uniform dialing pattern will convert to a ten-digit pattern, the Commission desires the parties to consider and report the benefits and drawbacks to introducing permissive ten-digit local dialing on a statewide basis simultaneously with the introduction of permissive ten-digit dialing in the 303 NPA. As presently conceived, the permissive dialing period for all three NPAs in Colorado would last until the need to actually overlay a new NPA over an existing or subsequently geographically divided NPA. 7. Finally, as part of the conversion to a ten-digit as opposed to a seven-digit number, it will be necessary for all affected telephone directories to contain each customer's entire ten-digit number. If possible this should be accomplished prior to the commencement of permissive dialing, i.e., prior to December 1, 1997. Additionally, both local and long distance directory assistance shall be unified whereby a single call can be used to obtain telephone numbers in either of the overlaid NPAs. In this manner a person dialing 1-303-555-1212 to obtain long distance directory assistance shall be able to obtain a number commencing with the new NPA and vice versa. H. Conservation Measures Regarding NXX Code Assignments Shall Begin Immediately 1. The evidence in this docket clearly demonstrates that relief for the 303 NPA is needed because of the present method for assigning NXX codes, as exacerbated by the advent of competition in the local exchange market, and not because nearly all of the 7.92 million possible numbers in the 303 NPA are in use. While only 124 NXX codes, representing a possible 1.24 million telephone numbers, are unused or unassigned in the 303 NPA, it is estimated that there are more than 3 million unused telephone numbers available in the 303 NPA. To alleviate this problem, minimize customer disruption, and to potentially delay the introduction of a telephone number with the new NPA, the Commission finds that immediate consideration of and prompt implementation of NXX code conservation measures is required. The import of the need to implement conservation measures is clearly set forth in the unopposed motion of the OCC to open a docket to investigate number conservation measures; however, this motion will only be partially granted in that the Commission will impose an even more aggressive timetable. 2. The Commission is particularly interested in the following types of NXX code conservation measures: -- recapturing of unused NXX codes that have already been assigned or codes used for special purposes such as testing -- requiring the assignment of numbers in an existing NXX code to be limited to each 1000 number block until exhaust of that block (including addressing the impact on the assignment of "vanity" numbers) -- assigning new NXX codes as NXX-X (even though the remaining NXX-X codes in that particular NXX would, at the present time, be unavailable except to the same provider) -- rate center consolidation -- number pooling (including, central office code sharing at the "thousands' digit level, also referred to as NXX-X) -- the return by ILECs of previously assigned NXX codes if service provider number portability and/or NXX-X assigning is available prior to June 1998. -- the impact of service provider number portability which should be implemented on or before July 1, 1998 in the Denver Metropolitan Statistical Area -- the impact of service provider number portability throughout the geographic area defined by the 303 NPA -- the impact of a prohibition of snap-back/the use of numbers made available through churn.20 Additionally, the Administrator, in conjunction with the industry, should consider whether to initially use the new NPA only for test codes, special industry purposes, "transparent" phone numbers such as those which make up a hunt group, and/or in a "transparent" overlay as described in Exhibit 1 to the OCC's motion to open an investigatory docket on conservation measures. In this manner, additional 303-NXX codes could potentially be freed up and the date for introducing the new NPA and commencing mandatory 10-digit dialing could be moved out on an incremental basis. 3. To assure that competition is not impeded by an unavailability of 303 numbers, conservation measures proposed to be implemented must make available the remaining 303 numbers, as conserved, first to CLECs so that facilities-based local exchange competition is neither constrained nor disadvantaged. 4. In order to further this end, the Administrator shall be required to file a report as more fully described in Ordering Paragraph No. II.A.10 below. The Administrator shall consult with other holders of NXX codes in preparing this report and include their comments, where applicable, to show alternative viewpoints. As a result, the report should present the view of the industry and not just the Administrator. 5. Additionally, in order for the Commission to monitor number utilization and conservation, the Administrator shall require all holders of NXX codes to submit to him a monthly report detailing the utilization rate for each NXX assigned to that provider. The Administrator, in turn, shall compile this information and file a report with the Commission. 6. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the Commission finds that the public interest requires the Administrator to apply all implemented conservation measures to all holders of NXX codes. Successful conservation, with the resulting benefit of minimizing customer disruption, will only be realized if every NXX code holder cooperates. II. ORDER A. The Commission Orders That: [...] 6. The overlay method, as proposed in this docket and fully described in this Decision, shall be implemented as the relief plan for the 303 Numbering Plan Area. 7. All parties to this docket, excpet for the City and County of Denver and the Elizabeth Area Chamber of Commerce, shall form a committee to generate an "Implementation Plan" focusing on the necessary customer education required to implement the overlay ordered herein. Additionally, all other providers of telecommunications services, especially cellular, personal communications service and paging providers, holding or planning to hold 303-NXX codes should participate and share in the cost of the customer education effort. The first meeting of this committee should be set up and facilitated by Jack Ott, the Numbering Plan Administrator for Colorado. The "Implementation Plan" shall be filed in this docket for informational purposes on or before September 4, 1997. The "Implementation Plan" shall, at a minimum, fully describe the scope (statewide, nationwide), methods, and estimated cost of the customer education effort, identify the allocation of costs of the education program between the contributing entities, set forth a calendar through the introduction of the first number with the new NPA (May 1, 1998 at the earliest), identify the necessary changes to the telephone directories, and address the notion of permissive ten-digit dialing on a statewide basis. 8. All affected telephone directories shall set forth the entire ten-digit telephone number for all customers. This shall be accomplished wherever possible prior to the start of permissive dialing on December 1, 1997. Additionally, prior to the introduction of the new numbering plan area, local and long distance directory assistance shall be unified such that the inquiring party is not affected by the overlay. In this manner, both 303-NXX-XXXX numbers and new-NPA-NXX-XXXX numbers shall be available from the same inquiry. To the extent necessary, this information should be set forth in the next edition of the telephone directory. 9. The motion of the Colorado Office of Consumer Counsel to open a docket to investigate number conservation measures, as supplemented, is granted to the extent it is consistent with this Decision. 10. On or before August 29, 1997, the Numbering Plan Administrator for Colorado, Jack Ott, shall file a report identifying the various conservation measures set forth in the discussion above, as well as any additional proposals to conserve NXX codes, in rank order of preference with specific estimated implementation dates and costs. Within each measure, all sub-elements and respective dates and costs should be identified. The report should also identify for how long the permissive dialing period could be extended through the timely implementation of the various conservation measures identified. The report shall identify any limiting legal, technological, or economic factors associated with each conservation measure. All analysis in the report shall be Colorado specific, and if necessary, may also include a discussion of the impacts of any national studies, timetables, etc. This report shall be filed as an application seeking authority to implement all feasible conservation measures. Per the above discussion, this report shall include comments from other holders of NXX codes. 11. Commencing on September 1, 1997, and monthly thereafter, the Numbering Plan Administrator for Colorado, Jack Ott, shall be in receipt of NXX code utilization information from all holders of NXX codes. The Numbering Plan Administrator for Colorado shall then compile this information and file a report with the Commission no later than the 15th of each month. These reports shall be filed monthly until the Commission finds them unnecessary in a future order. 12. To the extent future supervision by the Commission concerning customer education, implementation schedules, conservation measures, etc. is necessary, the Commission will conduct appropriate proceedings, including but not limited to status conferences, and/or the filing of additional reports. 13. The 20-day period provided for in A7 40-6-114(1), C.R.S., within which to file applications for rehearing, reargument, or reconsideration begins on the first day following the mailed date of this Decision and Order. 14. This Order is effective upon its Mailed Date. B. ADOPTED IN COMMISSIONERS' DELIBERATIONS MEETING July 29, 1997. THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO Commissioners ------------------------------ From: no-spam@pobox.com (Robert A. Pierce) Subject: Serenity, Savetrees, and Spam - Good News For Jerks Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 14:10:20 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. Reply-To: no-spam@pobox.com This was recently noted on a mailing list dealing with spammers. You can add serenityworld to the list of domains to filter out. AOL kicked you off,and Hotmail cancelled your service? Then this is for you! This was announced via a bcc spam attack, of course: >From: Serenity@serenityworld.com >Date sent: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 02:35:20 -0700 >To: fryourinfo@savetrees.com >Send reply to: Serenity@serenityworld.com >Subject: [may be junkmail -pobox] NEWSFLASH!! Press Release! (FREE GOLD GIVEAWAY!) [some snipping] > NETWORK MARKETING MAGAZINE names Company of the MONTH!!!! > HOTTEST NEW MLM ON THE NET! > 1. No products to sell Huh? Even Amway expects to sell products, even if some distributors don't. >To get complete info RIGHT NOW our Autoresponder will send back info to you >within minutes. Please put SEND INFO in subject area. > Send to: GENERAL101@ANSWERME.COM > http://worldofserenity.com > Bullet Proof Web Hosting and Web Creations I checked out their web page and found this: > SERENITY PINMAIL - SECURE EMAIL SERVICES (p1 of 2) > [INLINE] > Safe-Secure Email > We at Serenity understand a need to be able to contact prospective > customers without the added worry or concern of the possible > consequences of accidently giving your home Email address to one of > those undesireables out there that seem to no have no life and plenty > of time to hazzle your ISP, whether it be AOL or some other provider. How DARE people take offense at spamming! > This has nothing to do with legalities, but most ISP's are too busy to > deal with hassling and derogatory email that come from a few of those > undesireables out there in the Cyber World. So if you are involved > with Mass Emailing the chances of you getting your Internet service > shut off is more than just slight. I am crying so hard my keyboard is arcing and sparking! > Those FEW people who seem to have no life to speak of seem to have > plenty of time to spend hours creating large and foul Email to send to > your ISP. Wait -- are they talking about themselves here? > "FORWARD or PICKUP" your Email to your home base without exposing your > location and a place where you can "SEND" email also without them > knowing where you truly are located. This can be a lifetime Email > So whether you are into Mass Email marketing or just someone who wants > the same Email address not matter who your ISP address is Serenity > Only $20.00 U.S. per Year! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #204 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Aug 11 08:55:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA19649; Mon, 11 Aug 1997 08:55:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 08:55:09 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708111255.IAA19649@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #205 TELECOM Digest Mon, 11 Aug 97 08:55:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 205 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Halifax Exchange History (David Leibold) Revenge Spam Pretends to be From a Lawyer (Fred R. Goldstein) SWBell Fiber Cut Clogs Houston's Interoffice Tandems (Bill Garfield) What Happens When You Forget the 1-800/888- in Front (David Leibold) Connecticut's New Area Codes: 475 and 959 (Greg Monti) Telephone Pioneers Web Site (David Leibold) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Jude Crouch) Re: Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? (Frank Weatherford) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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, 10 Aug 1997 21:28:49 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Halifax Exchange History Halifax, Nova Scotia Exchange History 10 August 1997 This is an attempt to trace the telephone exchange history of the Halifax, Nova Scotia region, including the adjoining communities of Dartmouth and Bedford. This should indicate the approximate timelines of development for the manual and automatic telephone systems in the region. A sampling of telephone directories serving the Halifax area were checked from old telephone and city directories (as available at Halifax or Dartmouth libraries). A few of the earliest directories (1880-86) were available on the Bell Canada microforms. Some information has not been analysed thoroughly, nor have various topics been fully documented. For instance, not every single change to the communities listed in each directory may be tracked. Some directory editions were not available for consultation. Research time constraints meant that many intermediate years were omitted; an attempt was made to follow five-year intervals when consulting telephone or city directories. This means findings for a given year may have actually occurred a few years earlier. The directory coverage areas have also changed over time. Please send correspondence and contributions regarding this history to David Leibold: aa070@freenet.toronto.on.ca or dleibold@else.net. The timeline begins with the earliest-encountered telephone listings ... 1880 - "Bell Telephone Exchange" list of subscribers. - 35 entries, listed in no particular order. 19 May 1880 - Dominion Telegraph Co. was the exchange operator. - More entries than the prior 1880 list, but still not much alphabetical order. Mar 1886 - 26 pages - Bell Telephone Company of Canada operated the exchange at that time. - Halifax exchange was in the Hesslein Building, Hollis Street, 3rd floor. It was open "both day and night". - Alphabetic order was used now, with a new page for each new starting letter. - Windsor exchange was noted (Windsor, Wentworth, Hantsport, Falmouth). - Hants and Halifax Tel. Co. was noted. - Rates included a Halifax to all other offices rate of 25 cents. It was noted that "Subscribers to Bell Telephone exchanges will have a reduction of 5 cents from above rates". 1911 - McAlpine's Halifax City Directory lists only one exchange. No separate offices were yet noted. 1 Dec 1915 - Halifax District directory, from Maritime Telephone and Telegraph Co. - MT&T Executive Offices: 88-92 Hollis Street. - Manual exchanges: Harbour (Dartmouth), Lorne (Halifax), St Paul (Halifax). - Communities in this directory: Bedford, Hammond Plains, Sackville District (Upper Sackville, Middle Sackville, Beaver Bank), Chezzetcook, Eastern Passage, French Village (Indian Harbour, Tantallon, Boutilliers Cove, Peggy's Cove, Seabright, Head St Margaret's, West Dover), Musquodoboit Harbour (Petpeswick Harbour, West Jeddore, Smith Settlement, Oyster Pond Jeddore, Ostria Lake), Sambroo, St Margaret's, Ship Harbour, Spryfield, Tangier, Wellington. - Manual ring suffixes used: J, L, R, W - Some numbers could have form 243-11 (-11 is type of ring) or 123-J2 (plus exchange name). - Dalhousie College numbers St Paul 3011 (main number), St Paul 800 (President), St Paul 905 (Medical school). - Warning ad in this phone book advises callers not to call up the operator to ask where any fire is. June 1919 - St Paul exchange name changed to Sackville - Lorne and Harbour (Dartmouth) exchanges still in effect - Ring suffixes explained: J & W represent 1 ring, L & R represent 2 rings. - Other listings: Bayside District (central office - Halifax Sackville), Lawrencetown and Mineville District (central office - Dartmouth). - Bay Road exchange ("class H"), Bedford (continuous service), Hammonds Plains District (Bedford central office), Sackville District (service there operated weekdays 7am-9pm, Sunday/holidays 9-10am and 1:30-3pm). - Other listings: Chezzetcook, Eastern Passage, French Village, Musquodoboit Harbour, Sambroo, St Margaret's, Ship Harbour, Spryfield, Tangier, Wellington. Jan 1921 - "Automatic Telephone Service" (dial service) announced, more than two years before Bell Canada's Toronto-GRover dial exchange. - Lorne exchange was converted to dial and exchange name converted to a leading letter e.g. Lorne 5201 would become L5201. - Dial numbers were lettered as follows: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 --- S B L A H W F L.D. Opr. - Numbers on the 'A' exchange were also established, most of these apparently from the Lorne manual exchange area. e.g. A5579 was Lorne 1466W. There appeared to be no noticeable conversion pattern from manual to dial numbers. - Dial customers reaching Harbour or Sackville numbers would dial 6 or 2 respectively, then reach a switchboard operator to complete the call. - Dial Service Numbers: Telephone company: 1000 Information: 1002 Trouble (repair): 1003 Emergency: 19 (ambulance, fire, police) 2-party ringback: 181 multi-party ring: 17## (## was ring suffix number, such as 21) - Hubbard's Exchange, Mount Uniacke, Ship Harbour and Ship Harbour Lake listings added to directory. Dec 1925 - Sackville, Harbour exchanges still manual. - Pink-coloured classified pages included. - Dalhousie University: Sackville 800. Jul 1930 - The A exchange seems to have vanished, possibly absorbed into L (Lorne) exchange. - B exchange (Bishop) is in service. Some old Sackville manual numbers appear to have changed to dial exchange numbers on B. - Emergency numbers: Police: B8181, Ambulance: B6321, Fire: call nearest station. - Classified section now has yellow pages. - Exchanges: Bishop, Harbour, Lorne, Sackville. Jul 1936 - From Halifax dial numbers (B, L), dial 8 to reach suburban exchanges (presumably to an operator to whom the called suburban number is given). - Special services - dial 0. - Long distance - dial 9. - Harbour still manual? - Sackville district - 211 reaches operator. - Bedford dial service available. No letters involved, just 3-digit numbers (followed by a ring suffix digit if applicable). - Ring suffixes to Bedford numbers: -2 2 short -3 3 short -4 4 short -5 1 long 1 short -6 1 long 2 short -7 1 long 3 short -8 1 long 4 short -9 2 long 1 short -0 2 long 2 short - Dalhousie University: B-7495. Jan 1940 - Blue pages for PABX services included. - PABX used 9 for outside line - 9 + number to reach B, L or H numbers. - 9117 from PABXes reached the Bishop office test desk. - 9113 from PABXes reached Directory Assistance, 9114 reached Repair. - 74 from PABXes reached Harbour Office test board - 0 reached PABX operator - 181 other party call, 17## multi-party call remains on general dial system - Emergency Numbers: Police: B8181 (Halifax), B8161 (Halifax after-hours service), H2233 (Dartmouth); Fire: 123 (Halifax), H5151 (Dartmouth); Ambulance: B6321 (Halifax and Dartmouth). - Porter's Lake exchange listings added. - Ship Harbour Lake exchange listings dropped. - Dalhousie University: B-7495. - Lake Charlotte, Porter's Lake listings added. - Ship Harbour Lake listings apparently deleted. Jan 1944 - Conversion to all-number 5-digit format in Halifax and Dartmouth: B(ishop)-xxxx became 3-xxxx L(orne)-xxxx became 4-xxxx H(arbour)-xxxx became 6-xxxx [Dartmouth] - 2-xxxx numbers introduced - apparently expansion on the Bishop exchange territory. - Halifax to Sackville, Beaver Bank - dial 8 then give number to operator. - Dalhousie University: 3-7495. Jun 1954 - Halifax dial numbers: 2-xxxx, 3-xxxx, 4-xxxx, 5-xxxx (5-xxxx exchange was apparently introduced around 1952) - Dartmouth dial numbers: 6-xxxx - Bedford dial service was 4 digits: xxxx - some numbers had ring suffixes: e.g. 4-xxxx-22 where 22 was kind of ringing - Bedford to Halifax calls - dial 9 + number, for "Extended Area" subscribers who paid a premium for the local access - Halifax emergency numbers: Fire 123, Police 3115, Ambulance 2-7371 - Dartmouth emergency numbers: Fire 6-2423, Police 6-2233, Ambulance 2-7371 - Dalhousie University: 2-4406 Jun 1960 - Halifax to Bedford calls - dial 82 + number - Bedford to Halifax calls - dial 9 + number - Bayside District becomes Prospect Road - 9-xxxx apparently new or expansion numbers Dec 1960 - Might's 1960 Halifax city directory contained a note of the dial changes to take place in December 1960. A 7-digit, all-number scheme would be established from the old 5-digit exchanges: 2-xxxx became 422-xxxx 3-xxxx became 423-xxxx 4-xxxx became 454-xxxx 5-xxxx became 455-xxxx 6-xxxx became 466-xxxx 9-xxxx became 469-xxxx Bedford xxxx became 835-xxxx - New 477-xxxx exchange opened for the Spryfield area. 1965 - Might's directory of 1965 listed new 429-xxxx exchange. 27 Jun 1965 - According to MT&T directory, still no DDD, but map of NPAs is available - statement that no area code is required for Prince Edward Island - 113, 114 still used for directory assistance, repair respectively - Bay Road dial exchange - 876 - Bedford dial numbers - 835 - Sackville dial numbers - 865 - manual exchanges: Blandford, Chezzetcook, French Village, Hubbards, Lake Charlotte, Mount Uniacke, Musquodoboit, Prospect Road, St Margaret's, Tangier, Wellington - Ship Harbour now under Lake Charlotte listings 1970 - Might's directory lists these Halifax/Dartmouth NXX: 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 429, 453, 454, 455, 463, 466, 469, 477 - Government of Canada used many 426 numbers 1975 - Might's directory: 434, 435, 443 added since 1970 1980 - Might's directory: 375, 421, 428, 445, 479 added to Halifax/Dartmouth. 1985 - Might's directory - exchanges are now: 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 428, 429, 434, 435, 443, 445, 453, 454, 455, 463, 465, 466, 469, 477, 479 - 428 used by some large businesses: CIBC, General Hospital, etc. 1990 - Might's directory - exchanges are now: 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 434, 435, 443, 445, 453, 454, 455, 457, 462, 463, 464, 465, 466, 468, 469, 477, 479, 494 1995 - Polk's directory - exchanges are now: 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 442, 443, 445, 450, 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 461, 462, 463, 464, 465, 466, 468, 469, 473, 475, 477, 479, 481, 492, 494, 496, 497, 499 - Bedford: 832, 835 - Sackville: 865 -- the end -- David Leibold aa070@freenet.toronto.on.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 22:16:22 -0400 From: Fred R. Goldstein Subject: Revenge Spam Pretends to be From a Lawyer This is a cute spam. It pretends to be a threatening letter from a California law firm (a real one), but it's worded such that if it were for real, the lawyers would be in deep doodoo for making such asinine threats. But at first it looks quite real, so you're strung along getting REALLY MAD at the lawyers, unless/until you catch on. The law firm's phones were really bombarded yesterday from the many recipients calling them to complain! The letter purports to represent Samsung, a major Korean firm, but was routed through the mailserver of a different Korean firm, Kia, and like most spams, has a uu.net dial-up in its headers too (real or forged). >Received: from www.kia.co.kr by BBN.COM id aa06366; 9 Aug 97 16:01 EDT >Received: from www.kia.co.kr (1Cust19.max42.los-angeles.ca.ms.uu.net [153.34.91.19]) by www.kia.co.kr (8.6.12h2/8.6.9) with SMTP id FAA21267; Sun, 10 Aug 1997 05:00:39 +0900 From here on the forgery gets obvious: >From: webmaster@compuserve.com >Received: from mips-1.sailahead.com (mips-1.sailahead.com [199.107.95.10]) by sailahead.com (8.8.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id GAA08903 for ; Sat, 09 Aug 1997 10:47:20 -0600 (EST) >Date: Sat, 09 Aug 97 10:47:20 EST >To: suspected_flamer@somewhereincyberspace.com >Subject: Cease And Desist Flaming >Message-ID: <5.0.52.19970526663666.666a6e97@sailahead.com> >Reply-To: khskllp@aol.com >X-PMFLAGS: 34666848 0 >X-UIDL: 3273376668a65eb1890m0762123a >Comments: Authenticated sender is >Status: > On behalf of our client, Samsung America Inc., ("Samsung") > we hereby request that you cease and desist all > inflammatory internet hacking, telephone hacking, flaming, > jamming, and other illegal activities. > If you have responded aversely to a recent bulk email > message from our client, Samsung America, Inc., or from any > of its subsidiary companies, then you may be one of the > people who has performed fraudulent and actionable > transgressions, thereby causing severe harm to our client. I'm not aware of Samsung being involved in spam; they're a big company and probably wouldn't be so foolish. > Your email name was provided as being suspected of > connection to various acts of internet terrorism. Your acts > are illegal. A real lawyer wouldn't use the word "terrorism" loosely or say "illegal" to a bulk-mail address, especially who is merely "suspected". > Several messages have suggested that Samsung and/or its > subsidiaries, including but not limited to Sailahead Global > Emporium, www.sailahead.com, and Samsung Electronics, > www.sosimple.com, violated US Federal Laws through > activities commonly called "spamming." This allegation is > unfounded in the law, as spamming is a protected activity > under the laws of free speech. That's hard-core flame bait! > Our client has asked us to inform you that all of your > future correspondences should be directed to their counsel: Now the revenge target shows up (I edited out a little): > Russell L. Allyn, Attorney at Law > California Sate Bar Number (SBN) xxxxx > Katz, Hoyt, Seigel & Kapor LLP > Los Angeles, CA > khskllp@aol.com > 310-473-xxxx > 310-473-xxxx (fax) > All incidents of internet terrorism will be prosecuted > where possible, and reported to appropriate law enforcement > authorities as warranted. > Please consider this as your notice to cease all attempts > to harm multi-national corporations who conduct legitimate > commerce on the internet. > Russell L. Allyn, Attorney at Law Obviously somebody wants Allyn to look worse than Canter & Siegel. If Allyn catches the spammer, I suspect this _real_ act of "internet terrorism" will be dealt with harshly. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein@bbn.com +1 617 873 3850 Opinions are mine alone. Sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: wdg@hal-pc.org (Bill Garfield) Subject: SWBell Fiber Cut Clogs Houston's Interoffice Tandems Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 02:21:46 GMT Details as of this moment are still sketchy. What we know is that at approximately 1:10 PM CST Friday afternoon (8 Aug 97) a construction crew operating a large backhoe near the intersection of Richmond Ave and Dunlavy St on the near SW side of Houston, TX severed a major fiber optic cable route (Multiple cables x multiple fibers) interconnecting two of Houston's busiest switching offices, National and Jackson. The Jackson office (DMS-100 + a large 5E) serves as a tandem for many of the surrounding exchanges and provides switched services for Houston's most affluent River Oaks area. It was also one of the first offices in town to provide ISDN PRI services and so many area ISPs are served from Jackson. The National office (a large 5E and a large 1A) provides switched services for Houston's trendy and upscale Galleria and Greenway Plaza areas which are also home to several major energy companies. From almost the very beginning SWBell appears to have been trying to downplay the seriousness of this outage, initially stating that only 4800 customers were out of service and as many as another 15,000 indirectly affected. However, Warner Cable's emergency alert system was called into play to scroll advisory messages of the outage across subscriber's television screens and late word now is the President of SWBell has been flown in to oversee repair operations. Difficult to imagine this much hullabaloo over a mere 15,000 subscriber problem. From local news media coverage it was obvious to the trained eye that the damage was far more serious than press releases might indicate. SWBell has remained adamant in their assertion that only 15,000 subscribers are affected. However, interoffice tandems providing alternate routing around the cut were hopelessly clogged most of the weekend and many cellular customers were without service. Customers of SWBell's "Major Account Center" were being told as late as Sunday morning that repairs could take until Tuesday or possibly Wednesday. In the immediate vicinity of the cut SWBell has erected several emergency pay phones. More details to follow as they become available. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 21:45:36 EDT From: David Leibold Reply-To: David Leibold Subject: What Happens When You Forget the 1-800/888- in Front {The Toronto Star} had a Saturday business section article (9 August 1997) about the woes of a few people whose conventional numbers matched those of some popular toll-free numbers in the last seven digits. Unfortunately, many callers seem to think that the leading 1-800 or 1-888 is optional with a toll-free number and thus reach wrong numbers. The article should be on line for about a month at: www.thestar.com/thestar/back_issues/ED19970809/money/970809BUS03_FI-PHONE9.html David Leibold aa070@freenet.toronto.on.ca [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It was a good article, David. Thanks for giving us the pointer. Yes, some people think 1-800 is 'optional' but then, for them I suspect having a brain is optional as well. The flip side of the coin are the people who are admittedly victimized regularly the 'optional dialing' folks who themselves have crazy ideas on how to solve the problem. For instance, the late Mike Royko beleived that since his 312-seven digit number was the same as a very well-known and commonly used AT&T 800 number it was up to AT&T to change *their number* so that *he* would not get calls from other idiots like himself. A far better solution would be to take those folks who steadfastly refuse to learn how to correctly dial a phone and subject them to torture and/or other bodily harm. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 15:59:52 -0400 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Connecticut's New Area Codes: 475 and 959 Through a roundabout route, I received a short clipping from the _Boston Globe_ about the fight over Connecticut's next two area codes. Connecticut will need to go from its current two area codes (203 and 860) to four codes next year. As expected, SNET, the incumbent LEC for most of the state, favors an overlay to each of the existing codes. Competitive carriers want a split and have published a survey in which they claim that four of every five businesses and residents favor a split. SNET says the study is inaccurate. The two new codes will be 475 and 959. Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com www.mindspring.com/~gmonti/home.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 22:43:56 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Telephone Pioneers Web Site The Telephone Pioneers service organisation have their website ... http://www.telephone-pioneers.org/ David Leibold aa070@freenet.toronto.on.ca ------------------------------ From: Jude Crouch Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: 10 Aug 1997 15:12:12 GMT Organization: Crouch Enterprises, Oak Park, IL In comp.dcom.telecom Nicholas Marino wrote: > But that's not the end of it. Even when a person gets his 900 bill > reversed, the local and long distance telcos do not lose any > money. They collect the 'transport and billing' charge for the call > regardless of whether they collect any money. It's the 900 information > provider that gets screwed. If I set up a $10 donation line, I pay the > telcos about 50 cents per call. If 1000 people call the line, and they > all refuse to pay when they get the bill, I still have to shell out > $500 for billing and transport. The telcos can't lose. > The upshot of all this? The telcos have no incentive to encourage > people to pay for 900 calls. They get their share of the call > regardless of whether the customer pays. It's not unusual for 900 IPs > to have a 40% uncollectable rate. Provided the nonprofit understands the terms, there is no problem. If they get 1000 calls, but only 600 are valid they get $6,000, minus the $500 for transport, or $5,500. It's hardly likely to have 100% refusal-to-pay. AND the 40% uncollectable is likely not a true figure for nonprofits, rather for sex lines, fortune tellers and the like. > The reason that Bell South allows for-profit 900 numbers and disallows > charity 900 numbers is that they are perfectly willing to screw a > for-profit 900 IP out of the money, but they are ethically unwilling > to screw a charity. How charitable of them! Do they also make up the $5,500+ that the charity no longer can collect? > Did I read that right, BellSouth? > So you can thank your elected representatives for enacting knee-jerk > legislation to combat "phone sex", thereby killing a perfectly good > application for 900 services. Nope. It's not the legislation. It's BellSouth. Jude Crouch (jcrouch@pobox.com) - Computing since 1967! Crouch Enterprises - Telecom, Internet & Unix Consulting Oak Park, IL 708-848-0145 URL: http://www.pobox.com/~jcrouch ------------------------------ From: Frank Weatherford Subject: Re: Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 22:44:02 +0600 Organization: CyberNews Network Reply-To: fweather@pobox.com Paula Pettis wrote: > I've had conversations with several of my local BellSouth reps regarding > running full duplex data over T-1's. > According to them the total COMBINED 2-way throughput on a T-1 is 1.544 > Mbps. > They say that if you are transmitting at a rate of say 1 Mbps, you can > only receive data at a rate of 0.544 Mbps because the bandwidth is > shared between the transmit and receive channels. So in the true > sense of "full duplex", a T-1 is NOT full duplex. > This seems to meet the definition of half duplex. I was under the > impression that since this was a 4 wire circuit (1 transmit pair and 1 > receive pair) you could transmit at 1.544 Mbps and receive at 1.544 > Mbps simultaneously without one path interrupting the other. Thus a > combined aggregate throughput of 3.088 Mbps. Paula, I don't know who the "Bell reps" you talked with but they certainly don't know anything about a T1 line! They must have been in marketing. YOU are correct in that a T1 is a four-wire circuit and transmits 1.544MB in both directions. I don't agree with your logic that because you can send 1.544MB in each direction that this amounts to a throughput of 3.088MB. I think throughput only refers to how much data one can send. Frank ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #205 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Aug 11 09:31:26 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA21683; Mon, 11 Aug 1997 09:31:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 09:31:26 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708111331.JAA21683@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #206 TELECOM Digest Mon, 11 Aug 97 09:30:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 206 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Rise of the Stupid Network (Ken Levitt) Spanish Telco and Railroad Phone Booths (John Hewitt) Telecom Managers Association Being Started (John Felts) Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling (Gary Breuckman) Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider (Chris Farrar) Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider (pevans@globalnet.co.uk) Call Forwarding by Verbal Number Request (Doug Terman) Life With Luigi (Adam H. Kerman) Another Year of it (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: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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, 10 Aug 1997 10:26:08 From: Ken Levitt Subject: The Rise of the Stupid Network I just found a great article written by David S. Isenberg, a 12 year vetern of AT&T Labs. The article is called "The Rise of the Stupid Network" which explains why the current way phone companies network information is all wrong. The article can be found at: http://www.computertelephony.com/ct/att.html Ken Levitt stop.abuse@usa.nospam (.nospam is really .net) ------------------------------ From: jhewitt@ctv.es (John Hewitt) Subject: Spanish Telco and Railroad Phone Booths Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 09:54:32 GMT Organization: Unisource Espana NEWS SERVER The following is an excerpt of a news item from an English Langauge Radio Staion broadcasting on the Costa del Sol, Spain. A Spanish Consumers Associatiom has denounced the Spanish Telephone Company (Telefonica) for a recent deal it made with the Spanish National Railway Company (RENFE) to "operate" it's pay telephones at Railroad Stations. The pay telephones are owned by the Railroad, but the dial tone service to them must be supplied by a Telco. The RR awarded a contract to Telefonica to operate and service the booths. Nothing unusual about that - at this time there's only one telco (Though within two months there will be a competitor - so perhaps there was an indecent haste). However the calling rates Telefonica will charge to Joe Public will be 30% higher than similar pay fones just outside in the street!! Looks like a monopoly begats a monopoly. Now I wonder what the rates are to use a payfone in other 'non-public areas' , ie. Spanish Airports, Ferry Terminals, etc. John Hewitt Malaga Spain jhewitt@ctv.es [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What about here in the United States where the rotten, corrupted 'justice' department runs the pay phones in all the prisons? Can't get a much more captive consumer base than that. Or the county jails of the United States, where people who have been found guilty of nothing (as of yet) awaiting trial get to make three dollar per minute collect phone calls to their family to notify them that they have been arrested, etc? Spain's government has nothing on us! PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Felts Subject: Telecom Managers Association Being Started Date: 11 Aug 1997 02:56:19 GMT Organization: Silicon Beach - Business Internet Services I am interested in creating an association of Telecommunications managers. I would like to gather a list of managers and other interested parties across the nation and across the world to share information and ideas. If you are interested at all please email me with any ideas or suggestions. Thank you, John Felts Felts@silcom.com ------------------------------ From: puma@execpc.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Pay Per Use: Three Way Calling Date: 9 Aug 1997 18:50:48 GMT Organization: Puma's Lair In article , Lee Winson wrote: > More troublesome, someone could set up a 3-way and not be aware of it, > and discuss something with person "B" unaware that person "A" is still > on the line and listening. This could be quite embarrassing in social > calls, and downright unacceptable in business calls (for example, when > price negotiations are going on, or in discussions by a lawyer with > different sides.) That shouldn't happen. The first hook flash gets you a new (stutter) dialtone, and you dial the new (2nd) number. This I agree is easy to do by accident. At this time only you and the 2nd call are in the conversation. In order to add the 1st call back in and make it a three-way call you need to flash again. You aren't likely to ever do that by accident. Also, you really intended to end that 1st call, right? That caller probably hung up by now anyway. puma@execpc.com ------------------------------ From: Chris Farrar Subject: Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 17:30:16 -0400 Organization: Sympatico Reply-To: cfarrar@sympatico.ca P. Thomson wrote: > The real problem is when calling from non-Equal Access areas, such as > from rural parts of the US or Canada - unless you know how to use > Sprint/MCI (but from Canada?) with a card (using 800-COLLECT for MCI or > 800-210-CARD for Sprint). From such non-Equal-Access areas, calls > 'default' to AT&T, which means ExcelAgency for 555-1212. Well, 1-800-CALL-ATT (1-800-225-5288) does work from Canada and can be used to get you an AT&T operator, or to make a LD call (Calling Card or Collect) into the US. However trying 1-800-CALL-ATT to make a call from Canada to a Canadian destination doesn't work. Chris Farrar | cfarrar@sympatico.ca | Amateur Radio, a VE3CFX | fax +1-905-457-8236 | national resource PGPkey Fingerprint = 3B 64 28 7A 8C F8 4E 71 AE E8 85 31 35 B9 44 B2 ------------------------------ From: pevans@globalnet.co.uk.removethispart Subject: Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 18:14:18 GMT P. Thomson wrote: > I wonder what happens when calling US directory from overseas, whether > +1-NPA-555-1212 is allowed for customer access directly from foreign > (non-NANP) countries or if not, via the operator in the calling non-NANP > country? Pat, this won't work from England - 011-604-555-1212 is blocked. BT charges me for international directory assistance, and I don't even get to talk to the foreign operator. When I called UK directory from New Brunswick I at least got hear a funny accent (but it was still routed through a local operator). ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 15:36:08 -0400 From: Doug Terman Subject: Call Forwarding by Verbal Number Request Dear Telecom Folks, We have the need to hook up with something like an answering service which would be called by our clients who would then verbally give a US toll or 800 number to be dialed. The Operator would then manually dial the call, observe that it connected, then drop out of the loop. (In the event that you're wondering, it's quite legit. Just that our clients *can't* dial touchtones.) Our firm would pay for the calls (single point of billing and collection). Quality of the connection is an issue. Normally, an analog POTS line into and out of the "answering service" is not adequate due to the db drob. Should be digital service, T-1, etc. If you know of someone who offers this service reasonably, please contact me directly at my email address. Number of minutes a month would be in excess of 5,000. Many thanks, Doug Terman Operations Manager Antilles Engineering, Ltd. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 15:45:32 CDT From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: Life With Luigi Operator What number, please? Luigi Evanston 481 Operator Oh, that's suburban. I'll connect you with the toll operator. Luigi (thinks to himself) Hm. Here in America, they've got tall operators and short operators. Tall operators must be for long distance. Closing his letter to his mother, after a date with the operator: Mama, I am very greatful to Alexander Graham Bell for inventing the telephone operator. From the radio program "Life With Luigi", January 4, 1949. Starring J. Carrol Naish and Alan Reed (as Pasquale) The program was set in Chicago, but the operator had a Brooklyn accent! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 09:13:34 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Another Year of it This issue of the Digest begins the sixteenth year of this e-journal. Jon Solomon started the Digest in August, 1981. The net has changed quite a lot over the years. Today alone, I had more spam in the telecom mail queue than there were total messages in a week's time when the Digest first started. In fact, there were about 200 spams today. In the past week also, I've been attacked twice by out of control autoresponders, this latest one (the one I found today) being the second such attack by Citicorp, a good net neighbor if there ever was one (said with a straight face). Here's to another sixteen years or so ... thanks for being part of it. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #206 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Aug 12 09:03:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA09163; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 09:03:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 09:03:25 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708121303.JAA09163@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #207 TELECOM Digest Tue, 12 Aug 97 09:02:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 207 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Terminal Games" by Perriman (Rob Slade) AT&T Wireless Digital (Steve Kass) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Ed Ellers) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Nicholas Marino) Re: Revenge Spam Pretends to be From a Lawyer (Brian Leyton) Re: Revenge Spam Pretends to be From a Lawyer (James Bellaire) Re: Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? (Robert MacNab) Re: Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? (William Bigelis) Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider (Jeremy Rogers) So I Was Off by a Year (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: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 11:00:21 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Terminal Games" by Perriman BKTERGAM.RVW 970327 "Terminal Games", Cole Perriman, 1994, 0-553-57243-1, U$5.99/C$7.99 %A Cole Perriman %C 666 Fifth Ave., New York, NY 10103 %D 1994 %G 0-553-57243-1 %I Bantam Books %O U$5.99/C$7.99 212-765-6500 http://www.bdd.com %P 546 %T "Terminal Games" First off, Cole Perriman is said to be the pseudonym of another writer. I rather suspect that it is the pseudonym of at least two other writers, since that is the easiest explanation of the rather dichotomous writing involved here. In some places there is a very nice feel for technology, some other passages demonstrate the usual flights of, well, fantasy. The terminal games of the title revolve around an online service called Insomnimania. The description of the technology fits an expansion of MUD (multi-user domain) gaming: basically conversation between online users. The addition of cartoon "virtual reality" is well within acceptable limits, and the "bots" (automated response programs) are credible as well. The online conversations are reasonably characteristic of what goes on in MUDs and IRC (Internet Relay Chat), although all the users seem to be B1FF clones. Everything is upper case, most of the conversation is trivial, and it is hard to accept construction like "REEEEEEEL WURLD" as the kind of timesaving abbreviation convention that professional businesspeople would use. I'm pleased to see that at least one writer realizes that computer crackers and phone phreaks do not come in the same package. The business model for Insomnimania doesn't quite work. There is no mention of networks: everybody is direct dial, even those (many) from across the country. The two asocial nerds who run the place are unlikely to be the types to provide a level of service necessary to keep such a tony (and well heeled) clientele online. There also doesn't appear to be any reason for the business hours shutdown of the service: this harks back to the early days of CompuServe and the Source (remember them?) when hobbyist systems ran on the unused time of business systems. The psychology of the plot is a bit better. Real time chat, in whatever guise, is extremely popular as a recreation. The denizens of Insomnimania seem to be remarkably polite; there doesn't appear to be any flaming, spamming, or loud activity by determinedly obnoxious newbies; but I've seen similar levels of interaction on many different systems and technologies. The plot makes much of an affect "pulling" users increasingly "into" the virtual world. I'm not quite as comfortable with that. The book speaks of users "hearing" conversations typed online: I have, myself, auditory memories of dialogues that were only typed, but I suspect that the phenomenon has more to do with memory encoding than personality disorder. The big surprise twist ending is a) not to hard to figure in advance and b) a little too far out. There is also a laughable description of a virus "zoo" in the book. Whether the writer(s) know it or not, zoo is actually the term used to describe a collection of sample computer viruses. A real zoo, though, is simply a pile of disks, or a directory full of files. There is absolutely no need whatsoever to keep viruses "alive" on running computers. In fact, a collection of obsolete computers *couldn't* keep viruses alive, since very few of those old machines had any viruses written for them. (Oh, and one more thing. If you do keep a virus zoo, it isn't necessary to keep feeding the little beasts accounting programs to keep them alive. They don't "consume" code.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKTERGAM.RVW 970327 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke http://www2.gdi.net/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ Subject: AT&T Wireless Digital From: Steve Kass Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 11:01:51 -0400 Reply-To: skass@icosa.drew.edu Organization: Drew University After several months of unacceptable quality cell service, I am switching from AT&T Wireless Digital PCS service back to analog service. While AT&T advertises its digital service as superior to analog, this was not the case for me. Because of constant dropouts and breaking up of transmission, it was nearly impossible for me to successfully check voicemail, and in conversations, I had to constantly ask those I spoke with to repeat themselves. Despite quoting a new policy (as of August 1) prohibiting customer service representatives from offering compensation for poor service, a supervisor was able to offer me a 300-minute "time bank" to be applied to my service, which will be converted back to analog once I resurrect my analog phone. Interestingly enough, my conversation with customer service took twice as long as necessary, since I had to ask the representative to repeat much of what he said three or four times before I could understand him. I'm not happy to have spent $199 for a digital phone that I cannot return, nor did I appreciate hearing that no compensation was available according to company policy, when this was not the case in the end. Are others out there dissatisfied with AT&T's digital service? And has anyone been able to return their expensive telephones for a full refund? I find it remarkable that AT&T can advertise a service that manifestly cannot deliver what it promises. I would be happy to participate in a class action suit against AT&T for false advertising and failure to provide acceptable service, if I am not alone. Steve Kass, All Trades Computing steve@all-trades.com, skass@icosa.drew.edu (973) 514 1187 ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 22:36:02 -0400 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Nicholas Marino wrote: > Anyone who calls a 900 number can call their local telephone company > and have the charge taken off. You don't even have to deny making the > call, although many people do and the telco doesn't question it. You > can also say that you didn't think you got your money's worth from the > call. You can say just about anything. > "But that's not the end of it. Even when a person gets his 900 bill > reversed, the local and long distance telcos do not lose any money. They > collect the 'transport and billing' charge for the call regardless of > whether they collect any money. It's the 900 information provider that gets > screwed. If I set up a $10 donation line, I pay the telcos about 50 cents > per call. If 1000 people call the line, and they all refuse to pay when they > get the bill, I still have to shell out $500 for billing and transport. The > telcos can't lose." And they shouldn't, because as common carriers they have no power to weed out the crooks and make 900 service available to only reputable information providers. You forgot to mention that when a customer refuses to pay a 900 bill, the information provider has the same legal recourse against the customer that it would if it had billed the customer directly. What it does not have is the ability to hang that duty around the neck of the telco. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Additionally, the information provider has the right to obtain the necessary billing data from telco for the purpose of billing direct *whether your number is published or non-published*. The IP is treated the same as any 'carrier' in that your local telco is required to make your name and address available *for billing purposes only* -- no marketing allowed! -- in the event direct billing is needed. Some IPs won't hesitate for a minute to place you with a collection agency when your bill with them is high enough or outrageous enough. One IP here in the Chicago area for many years -- maybe they are still around -- was the Nine Hundred Service Corporation. They always used that same bunch of sleazeballs that AT&T is so fond of, GC Services out of Houston, Texas, formerly known as Gulf Coast Services and before that Gulf Coast Collection Agency. There is a limited return on collection agency placements of only a couple dollars but some IPs will bill you two or three hundred dollars and then immediatly place you with an agency as soon as local telco recourses them or gives them a chargeback on it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nicholas Marino Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 09:50:31 -0400 Jude Crouch wrote: > Nope. It's not the legislation. It's BellSouth. My point is that the legislation forces BellSouth (or any other local telco) into a position where they can't force customers to pay their bills, and even if they could, they wouldn't make any more money to offset the added collection expense. BTW, the actual cost of the 900 numbers is about 50 cents per minute, plus 10% of the billed amount, so a $10 900 number call which lasts one minute puts $1.50 into the pockets of the local and LD companies. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 18:01:53 -0400 From: bleyton@aol.com (Brian Leyton) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Revenge Spam Pretends to be From a Lawyer In article , Fred R. Goldstein writes: > This is a cute spam. It pretends to be a threatening letter from a > California law firm (a real one), but it's worded such that if it were > for real, the lawyers would be in deep doodoo for making such asinine > threats. But at first it looks quite real, so you're strung along > getting REALLY MAD at the lawyers, unless/until you catch on. The law > firm's phones were really bombarded yesterday from the many recipients > calling them to complain! > The letter purports to represent Samsung, a major Korean firm, but was > routed through the mailserver of a different Korean firm, Kia, and > like most spams, has a uu.net dial-up in its headers too (real or > forged). > I'm not aware of Samsung being involved in spam; they're a big > company and probably wouldn't be so foolish. SAILahead is a subsidiary of Samsung that is in the business of designing and hosting web commerce applications. The original problem started when they became the target of a revenge spam, I believe by one of their former customers. The sysadmin from SAILahead has been participating in the news.admin.net-abuse.email newsgroup, where he has explained some of the details of the original revenge attack. He indicated that he knew who was responsible, and the FBI was involved. It appears that the revenge spammer has now targeted their law firm as well. Brian Leyton MIS Manager, Commercial Petroleum Equipment ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 17:18:49 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Re: Revenge Spam Pretends to be From a Lawyer Fred R. Goldstein wrote: > This is a cute spam. It pretends to be a threatening letter from a > California law firm (a real one), but it's worded such that if it were > for real, the lawyers would be in deep doodoo for making such asinine > threats. But at first it looks quite real, so you're strung along > getting REALLY MAD at the lawyers, unless/until you catch on. The law > firm's phones were really bombarded yesterday from the many recipients > calling them to complain! [SNIP] >> If you have responded aversely to a recent bulk email >> message from our client, Samsung America, Inc., or from any >> of its subsidiary companies, then you may be one of the >> people who has performed fraudulent and actionable >> transgressions, thereby causing severe harm to our client. > I'm not aware of Samsung being involved in spam; they're a big > company and probably wouldn't be so foolish. I received a sailahead.com spam on behalf of 'Samsung America'. I responded adversely to it (and the reply did not bounce). But I haven't received the threat from the lawyers, yet. Could Samsung really be stupid enough to spam? The original 'Samsung' spam read (in part): > Received: from irvine.ast.com (1Cust86.max44.los-angeles.ca.ms.uu.net [153.34.92.86]) by ast.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA24829; Thu, 7 Aug 1997 02:59:16 -0700 (PDT) > From: webmaster@sailahead.com > Received: from mail.sosimple.com (alt1.sosimple.com(206.1.562.666)) by sales@sosimple.com (8.8.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id GAA02392 for ; Thu, 07 Aug 1997 00:33:07 -0600 (EST) > Date: Thu, 07 Aug 97 00:33:07 EST > To: sosimple@Globalemporiumshopper.com > Subject: A Warm Welcome The Samsung Family Of Companies > Message-ID: <288523806666342786@sosimple.com> > Reply-To: ywkoo@la.sai.samsung.com > X-PMFLAGS: 34666848 0 > Comments: Authenticated sender is > X-UIDL: 3273376668a65eb1890m0762123a > Status: RO > On behalf all of Samsung Electronics America, please come and visit > us at > http://www.sosimple.com > which is hosted by our comrades and coworkers at > http://www.sailahead.com > We are sure you'll not only find our site informative but entertaining > and easy to navigate. [SNIP] > How to Contact Us > SAILAhead Internet Services is located in the city of La Mirada, > California, USA, in the Samsung America, Inc., L.A. Office building. > Our office is located just off the Santa Ana freeway (US 5) at the > Valley View exit. You may contact us via any one of traditional means > (mail, telephone fax), via e-mail, or feel free to stop by. > Address: 14251 East Firestone Blvd > La Mirada, CA, 90275 > Telephone: (800) 943-4252 > (562) 802-2211 Fax: (562) 802-3011 > E-mail: info@sailahead.com > sales@sailahead.com It was an odd spam. Ususally I receive two copies of each spam (one for each 'public' address). This time only one address received the spam. Now, I have received further information of interest on this: http://www.sosimple.com/spam.html says: > Samsung Electronics America's website has recently fallen prey to a > ruthless hacker. This person, or persons, took information from our > www.sosimple.com website and distributed it at random via electronic mail > (spamming). > We would like to make it clear that Samsung has no association with this > fraud and is not party to this activity. If you've received such electronic > junk mail please accept our apologies, and ignore it. > We are working with local and federal authorities to help catch and stop > whoever is responsbile for this. > Please help us remove spamming from the Internet. We know you might be > upset, but please do not spam us also. > Thank you for your cooperation on this matter > Sincerely, > Samsung Electronics America, Inc. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Telecom Indiana Webpage http://members.iquest.net/~bellaire/telecom/ * Note new server - old URL should still work * ------------------------------ From: w4xg@nova.org (Robert MacNab) Subject: Re: Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 17:10:05 GMT Organization: This Space for Rent Reply-To: w4xg@nova.org On Wed, 6 Aug 1997 22:28:36 -0400, Paula Pettis wrote: > I've had conversations with several of my local BellSouth reps regarding > running full duplex data over T-1's. > According to them the total COMBINED 2-way throughput on a T-1 is 1.544 > Mbps. It carries 1.544 in both directions at the same time. Full duplex. ------------------------------ From: pal@eskimo.com (William Bigelis) Subject: Re: Is a T-1 Full or Half Duplex? Date: 11 Aug 1997 17:01:27 GMT Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever Paula Pettis (stuff@gdi.net) wrote: > I've had conversations with several of my local BellSouth reps regarding > running full duplex data over T-1's. > According to them the total COMBINED 2-way throughput on a T-1 is 1.544 > Mbps. What you write is kind of scary - SEVERAL Bellsouth reps not even knowing what they sell. If you're buying a dedicated, private line T1, you get 1.544 Mb/s in each direction. Guess I'm lucky I'm not in Bellsouth territory. Bill B ------------------------------ From: Jeremy Rogers Subject: Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 19:19:07 +0100 pevans@globalnet.co.uk.removethispart writes: > P. Thomson wrote: >> I wonder what happens when calling US directory from overseas, whether >> +1-NPA-555-1212 is allowed for customer access directly from foreign >> (non-NANP) countries or if not, via the operator in the calling non-NANP >> country? > Pat, this won't work from England - 011-604-555-1212 is blocked. I think you mean 00 1 604 555 1212. I get NU trying this via BT and AT&T, but get connected ("Welcome to BC Tel Directory Assistance") using ACC. Jez ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: So, I Was Off by a Year Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 08:30:00 EDT Clive and a couple other readers pointed out that actually now this Digest is starting its SEVENTEENTH year rather than its sixteenth year as I noted yesterday. I guess I subtracted 81 from 97 and came up with 16, which is correct, but it is 16 completed years. I dunno, the past couple of years have spun by so rapidly for me that there are times things are just a blur for me. Someone also asked me (in person) the other day how old I was and I actually had to stop and think for a minute. :( Seriously ... Do you old-time readers remember back in the early nineties when I sent out as many as a thousand issues of this Digest per year for a couple years straight? For about the past year, I've been working elsewhere full time ten to twelve hours per day and doing this Digest as a 'part time' thing, which is why this year you will only get somewhere around 300-350 issues, more or less one per day on average. I know you did not really believe me when I said the post office delivers my mail from readers twice a day in number one bags sent in a semi-trailer truck and dropped on my loading dock ... :) Actually, there are days when the tiny little box I rent at the postal sub-station in Orchard Plaza is quite barren. Thus, to live in the style to which I am accustomed -- don't I wish it was still the 1960's with weekend shopping trips to New York City -- and to keep up with my neighbors the Joneses and not have to rely on the food pantry and the social worker the Joneses and their neighbors provide for interlopers like me in the north suburbs of Chicago -- I took a full time job around a year ago where I am subject to the public's abuse day after day in a rather hectic environment. I am still working on getting telecom-digest.org restarted. Someone took complete charge of the matter a month ago and nothing further has happened. I guess I will call and bug them today. Please send me some mail today. Your mail to me at PO Box 4621, Skokie, IL 60077 is more important than you realize. Now onward for another year of this Digest. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #207 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sat Aug 16 09:20:40 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA06813; Sat, 16 Aug 1997 09:20:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 09:20:40 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708161320.JAA06813@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #208 TELECOM Digest Sat, 16 Aug 97 09:20:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 208 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Remote Access Essentials" by Robbins (Rob Slade) AT&T Revises Intralata Calling Card Rates (Babu Mengelepouti) Awwww ... What a Shame... (Babu Mengelepouti) Samsung's Position on Spamming (Andrew Kritzer) 602 Split/Overlay (Dave Stott) Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? (Andrew Gerald) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Nicholas Marino) Callback Banned in South Africa (Rob Hall) AOL May Track User Clicks (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: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:59:27 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Remote Access Essentials" by Robbins BKRMACES.RVW 970120 "Remote Access Essentials", Margaret Robbins, 1996, 0-12-691410-9 %A Margaret Robbins %C 525 B Street, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101-4495 %D 1996 %G 0-12-691410-9 %I Academic Press Professional %O 619-231-0926 800-321-5068 fax: 619-699-6380 app@acad.com %P 237 %T "Remote Access Essentials" Remote access covers a lot of territory, and the book does fall under that category. But essentials? In practical terms, almost everything is missing. There are tidbits here and there, but if you need any help to get a modem installed, a call set up, or an application working, you are not going to find much assistance, here. In technical terms, a lot is missing as well. Technical depth is an arguable point, perhaps, but the material here is just once-over-lightly, with almost none of the references that even an intermediate telecommunications user would need. Illustrations are unhelpful or flatly wrong. In conceptual terms, the book does touch on a number of the important topics. The operative words are "touch on". copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997 BKRMACES.RVW 970120 ====================== roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke http://www2.gdi.net/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:00:19 -0400 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: AT&T Revises Intralata Calling Card Rates An ad appeared in today's {Seattle Times} which reads as follows: NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMERS WITHIN WASHINGTON STATE Effective August 30, 1997 AT&T's usage rates and service charges for intrastate calls billed at AT&T and Local Exchange Company Calling Cards will be changed as follows: o usage rates for both customer dialed and operator dialed card calls are changed to $.26 for both the initial and each additional minute for all rate periods and mileage bands o the service charge for customer dialed calls which access the AT&T network via 1 800 CALLATT and are billed to an AT&T Calling Card is reduced from $.60 to $.35 o the service charge for customer dialed calls which access the AT&T network via 1 800 CALLATT and are billed to a Local Exchange Company Calling Card is reduced from $.95 to $.60 per call. The above changes may result in increases or decreases in Customer charges depending on the distance, the duration, the time of day, and the method used to access AT&T's network as well as the type of calling card used. Residential customers with questions should call AT&T at 1 800 222-0300; business customers should direct their questions to their AT&T Account Executive, or 1 800 222-0400. ------------- It seems that at a time where other carriers are substantially increasing their calling card surcharges, AT&T is decreasing them in favor of a very high per-minute rate. . /|\ //|\\ Welcome to the rainforest... ///|\\\ dialtone@vcn.bc.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 23:09:20 -0700 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: Awwww ... What a Shame... Spammer servers under siege By Courtney Macavinta August 12, 1997, 11:00 a.m. PT The most well-known spammer on the Net, Cyber Promotions, is under siege. The bulk email company's servers were hacked Sunday, leaving its Web site inaccessible, and many internal files and email were erased as of today. The hack is not an isolated incident, according to Cyber Promotions president Sanford "Spamford" Wallace, who said he has pointed the FBI to at least one suspect: a person who posted an online offer of $1,000 to anyone who could shut down Cyber Promotions for at least a week. "Somebody posted one of our password files to the newsgroup 'news.admin.net-abuse.email' last week," Wallace said today. "They were calling up our customers in the middle of the night and terrorizing them. The same hacker went back into our system this weekend and erased many of our files." The bulk emailer's site was back up at 11 a.m. PT; most of its internal system will be back up by the end of the day, Wallace noted. The erased files included customer orders and email accounts, he added, but didn't stop spam from going out. "One thing they did not interfere with is our actual ability to send email. Our Cyber Bomber is operational," Wallace said. An status update on Cyber Promotions' Web site stated the following: "Autoresponders will be restored within a few hours. Cyber Bomber will be completely functional within a few hours. Web page accounts and virtual pop box accounts will have to be set up again. We will open up the phone lines tomorrow." As the company uploads its backup files, some spam haters were rejoicing about the hack on the "net-abuse.email" newsgroup. Others charged that Cyber Promotions staged both hacks. "If the hack was real, then I can sum up my sympathies for this company and the others that refuse to leave people alone, even after they repeatedly ask to be left alone. In two words: 'Oh well,'" stated a post. But some spam foes were against illegal acts to stop unsolicited email. "The point is this: It does not matter who posts what in the way of hacked passwords -- those machines are not ours, they are his. We do not have the right, legally or morally, to behave as they do." Cyber Promotions left a recorded message for customers today informing them of the "hack" and contends that both attacks are not media stunts. "We didn't stage this whole thing. If we did, we would have put up a press release," Wallace said. "It is not in our best interest to upset 11,000 customers." ------------------------------ From: Andrew Kritzer Subject: Samsung's Position on Spamming Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 17:15:11 -0700 Organization: Samsung Electronics America, Inc. Since July 19, an unknown party has mass distributed a number of fraudulent e-mail messages under the name of Samsung Electronics America. As most of you know at this time, Samsung neither authored nor condoned these e-mails. As policy, Samsung is strongly against spamming. We respect the integrity of the Internet and the rights of Internet users. We are working with Federal authorities to identify the individual(s) responsible for this hoax and intend to take legal action against the perpetrator(s). Of course, we will keep you informed as we resolve the situation. In the meantime, we appreciate your understanding and support. This situation has confirmed that the Internet community must work together to exterminate spamming and other forms of fraud that jeopardize the future of the Internet. If you have questions, comments or suggestions regarding this situation, please contact me, at akritzer@sea.samsung.com. Thank you for your understanding. Sincerely, Andrew Kritzer Senior Manager of Marketing Communications Samsung Electronics America, Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 09:14:22 -0500 From: Dave Stott Subject: 602 Split/Overlay In today's (8-14-97) {Tempe, AZ, Tribune} the results of the AZ Corporation Commission's initial NPA meeting are discussed. As expected, both the overlay and split were discussed. The story reports that "most of the East Valley, including Apache Jct, Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Scottsdale, and Tempe would switch to the new area code, while most of Phoenix would remain 602." I'm surprised that Scottsdale was included in the new NPA for the reasons discussed in my last post. Also, there was no mention of the West Valley, so I'm not sure what the intention is for that part of 602. Curiously, Jack Ott, the U S WEST "executive" (who is making quite a name for himself in the Western states lately, it seems) suggests that "Because an overlay has never been fully done anywhere in the United States, no one really knows if it will work well." C'mon Jack, what about New York? PAGENET supports the overlay, but MCI said it's anti-competitive and would "prevent it and other outside carriers from getting their fair share of the local market." (Which raises the question, what is their 'fair share'; is it some pre-determined percentage of the total line count, or is it the number of sub- scribers a carriers can win over by marketing effort and pricing?) Finally, the story says "a recommendation will made (sic) to the commission by U S WEST in mid-September." Like they don't already have one in mind. Let's go with the overlay and get this whole thing done with! Dave Stott ------------------------------ From: ccsystems$@worldnet.att.net (Andrew Gerald) Subject: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 01:21:36 GMT Organization: CCSystems Reply-To: ccsystems$@worldnet.att.net I'm interested in hearing from ISDN customers specifically in the New York City area but welcome complaints of the same nature as mine from any NYNEX-serviced area. Also, if any telephone professionals can disprove NYNEX's claims about the NorTel DMS-100 switch I would appreciate hearing about it. Today I had a very encouraging discussion with a well known reporter for a well known NYC AM radio news station. The subject was specifically related to my dispute with NYNEX but I believe that many other NYNEX ISDN customers may be having similar difficulty. It would help all of us if I had some supporting complaints to forward to the reporter. I will forward ALL responses I receive to the reporter. It is NOT necessary to provide private contact information. If the reporter wishes to speak to any respondents either he or I will e-mail the respondent with his name and telephone number. Additionally, I am working with my NY State Senator's office on the NYNEX issue and will forward all responses there as well. It's time that NYNEX be put in the public spotlight and shown for what it really is -- a PROUD OF ITSELF, IGNORANT, ARROGANT BULLY -- among many other things which I'll leave unsaid. This could turn out to be a great opportunity for us to hit them hard. I wouldn't be spending my time (or yours) if I didn't think so. My dispute: (Very abbreviated, believe it or not.) In December, 1995, I ordered my two POTS lines converted to ISDN. At this time I asked whether or not the "PhoneSmart" features I already had would work with ISDN. I was told that they would, especially since I already had them, so I could be sure of it. After significant troubles and a PSC complaint the installation was attempted on March 13, 1996. After many days and much difficulty NYNEX got the lines working. At this point I discovered that the "PhoneSmart" features did NOT work. I did not have the use of *57, *66, *69, *82, Anonymous Call Reject, or Caller-ID (the incoming number was always "out of area".) Amazingly I now had CALL-WAITING which I didn't have before nor did I order! After about a week of complaining I was able to get NYNEX to remove the Call-Waiting feature. The problem was that they insisted Call-Waiting and ISDN were not compatible. It wasn't until I proved to them that I actually had Call-Waiting that it was removed. I was told by NYNEX that the reason why the PhoneSmart features weren't working must be a configuration error, on my part, with my TA. "Your TA is not interpreting the (*) correctly" was their response. First I told them this was BS then I got Motorola to tell them it was BS too. They were now clueless. After a few weeks and more complaints to the PSC they managed to get *82 working. Keep in mind that during this time I couldn't call anyone who had ACR enabled because I couldn't un-block my number. About two months of complaints later they got *57 and Caller-ID working. They were now insisting that PhoneSmart and ISDN were not compatible and so I could not have those features. I then explained how a friend of mine in Brooklyn had ISDN and PhoneSmart. After a few weeks of complaints their new answer was that the NorTel DMS-100 in my C.O. (central office) could not offer PhoneSmart to ISDN lines. I then called NorTel tech support and was told that the DMS-100 can and does offer the features NYNEX calls PhoneSmart but possibly the switch is running older software which would need to be upgraded. I reported this to NYNEX and after several weeks of harassing them for an answer they reported that the switch was indeed in need of an upgrade. The good news was that they located an internal bulletin stating that the switch would be upgraded some time in the fourth quarter of 1996. Sometime in June, 1996, after more complaints to NYNEX and the PSC they sent a "DMS specialist" to fix the Caller-ID. He called me to check that the Caller-ID was indeed working and informed me that it had been a C.O.-wide configuration error. It seems that no one with ISDN had Caller-ID. In January, 1997, after many complaints to NYNEX and the PSC the story was changed. They now had no idea when, or if ever, the switch would be upgraded to offer PhoneSmart to ISDN. All they could do to solve the problem is convert me back to POTS. I was told that "it was not economically feasible to upgrade the switch just to satisfy one customer." Never mind that every ISDN subscriber in Staten Island was without PhoneSmart features. Off and on I've been fighting with various "business" units of NYNEX mainly because I've refused to pay the bill since September of 1996. I have advised them in writing and over the phone that I will pay the bill in full when the promised service is delivered. Usually they have backed down but now the account collections unit says that they don't give a damn about the open PSC complaint, my problems, my threats to file a complaint with the NYS Attorney General, my threats to go to the press, or the lousy service and the poor way I've been treated. They are going to disconnect my phones on Tuesday come hell or high water unless I pay in full. NYNEX collections: "None of what you've just told me justifies your withholding payment. You are not being billed for any of the services you mentioned. Therefore the order to disconnect your service on Tuesday still stands." Later on: "Sir, whether or not you've filed any complaints with the PSC doesn't matter. You are expected to pay your bill." To this I replied "And you're expected to deliver a service, which you have not delivered, therefore I will not be making any payments until the service is delivered." Translation: NYNEX: We screw you, then you pay us. Sounds to me like a whore with a gun. I should add that during my last conversation with the PSC, about two weeks ago, they informed me that my case was indeed still open and since it was open for over a year they were sending a directive to NYNEX to (as best I can recollect) "make whatever software and/or hardware changes and/or updates necessary to deliver the promised services as stated in the complaint." Apparently this is all just a big joke to NYNEX. Shutting off my phones is probably retaliation for the PSC directive. So are we going to be wimps or are we fighting back? Andrew Gerald Custom Communications Systems Staten Island, NY *** NOTE: TO REPLY REMOVE THE "$" FROM THE E-MAIL ADDRESS. This e-mail address is a 'facsimile receiver' as defined by Title 47 USC. Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this address is a violation of US Federal Law. ------------------------------ From: Nicholas Marino Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:02:07 -0400 Ed Ellers wrote: > And they shouldn't, because as common carriers they have no power to > weed out the crooks and make 900 service available to only reputable > information providers. As a (reputable) IP, I am paying the telco for BILLING and COLLECTION. What am I getting in return? If you are looking for crooks, try the people who call 900 numbers with no intention of paying their bills. > You forgot to mention that when a customer refuses to pay a 900 bill, > the information provider has the same legal recourse against the > customer that it would if it had billed the customer directly. What > it does not have is the ability to hang that duty around the neck of > the telco. Well that's my point, isn't it? I do not have the ABILITY to force my telco to collect my money, but I certainly have the RIGHT! That is what I am paying them to do. I could set up a normal phone number, and tell you when answer the phone that if you want to talk to me it will cost $N per minute. But it would be inconvenient for both of us to arrange a payment method, especially if the amount is less than $10, as many 900 calls are. The 900 pay-per-call business is supposed to help me forget about complicated billing and collection procedures. I'm supposed to leave that up to the telco. That is what I am paying them to do. When I pay someone to clean my bathroom, I'm not "hanging that duty around the neck" of my cleaning lady - she's holding up her end of the agreement. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Additionally, the information provider > has the right to obtain the necessary billing data from telco for > the purpose of billing direct *whether your number is published or > non-published*. The IP is treated the same as any 'carrier' in that > your local telco is required to make your name and address available > *for billing purposes only* -- no marketing allowed! -- in the event > direct billing is needed. Some IPs won't hesitate for a minute to > place you with a collection agency when your bill with them is high > enough or outrageous enough. One IP here in the Chicago area for > many years -- maybe they are still around -- was the Nine Hundred > Service Corporation. They always used that same bunch of sleazeballs > that AT&T is so fond of, GC Services out of Houston, Texas, formerly > known as Gulf Coast Services and before that Gulf Coast Collection > Agency. There is a limited return on collection agency placements of > only a couple dollars but some IPs will bill you two or three hundred > dollars and then immediatly place you with an agency as soon as local > telco recourses them or gives them a chargeback on it. PAT] Ah, so you admit that it is impractical for the IP to bill and collect small amounts of money! I don't want to seem as down on the telcos as you guys are apparently down on IPs. The telcos have been forced into this position by the FCC. I am convinced that if they had the ability to turn off phone service for failure to pay a 900 bill, everyone would benefit. ------------------------------ From: Rob Hall Subject: Callback Banned in South Africa Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:22:31 +0800 Business Day (South Africa) August 13, 1997 Callback operators to be banned Robin Chalmers CALLBACK operators will be banned in SA from September 1 in terms of a surprise first ruling by the newly formed SA (South Africa) Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (Satra). The move has outraged callback operators, who provide cheaper international calls than Telkom by basing the call in countries like the US. The operators effectively have two weeks to close down their local businesses, which generate an estimated R18m a month. They have vowed to fight the ruling, which also appears to have caught Telkom executives by surprise. However, Post, Telecommunications and Broadcasting Minister Jay Naidoo strongly supported Satra's decision. There had been complaints that callback operations were undermining Telkom's ability to generate the revenue necessary to meet the telecommunications needs of underserviced (sic) communities, he said yesterday. Other concerns included that callback operations were degrading Telkom's network, that government could not levy value-added tax on their services and that they were not contributing to economic development. "We wish to attract investment to SA, but of the type offered by SBC Communications and Telecom Malaysia, which have invested an enormous amount into telecommunications" he said. Satra chairman Nape Maepa said in terms of the Telecommunications Act telecommunications services could be provided only by licensed entities. Telkom was the only organisation in SA licensed to provide international telecommunications services on an exclusive basis for a five- to six-year period. Contravention of the law could result in a fine of up to R500,000 or two years' imprisonment, or both, he said. Maepa said a major objective of the act was to allow Telkom a period of exclusivity to provide telephones to previously disadvantaged areas as well as give Telkom the opportunity to rebalance its tariffs and to prepare for a competitive environment. Both Maepa and Naidoo said they were confident the ruling could be policed, although details of this would be released later. Initial methods would include preventing the advertising and marketing of overt callback services, and gaining the support of overseas regulatory authorities. Gianfranco Cicogna, chairman of the recently formed SA Callback Association and MD of Ursus, the largest callback operator in SA, labeled the move a "direct attack" on US business interests in SA and a "conspiracy" to prop up Telkom's monopoly. Callback operators would fight the ban. Cicogna said hundreds of people employed in the callback industry would lose their jobs and the businessmen and companies, including government departments and leading SA groups, which had made significant savings using callback, would suffer losses. He estimated that callback services generated R18m in revenue a month or more than 7% of Telkom's revenue from international services, which rose only 4% to R2,79bn in the year ended March this year. Telkom, which said callback services were a factor in the sluggish growth in international revenue, has estimated that callback accounts for 3% of its international revenue. Telkom spokesman Amanda Singleton said banning callback operators would improve Telkom's service to international destinations. "Telkom is committed to continuing with its programme of lowering international call rates as evidenced by recent tariff adjustments". Satra has defied callback as "a call originating in SA on any SA telecommunications access service provider network, intended for outside SA, that through various means results in the majority of the call being financially allocatable (sic) to other than an SA telecommunications access service provider". ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 05:21:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL May Track User Clicks Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Inter@ctive WeekAugust 8, 1997 AOL May Track User Clicks By Will Rodger America Online Inc. is under pressure again, this time from privacy advocates who said the company still hasn't fulfilled its pledge to respect subscribers' privacy. Observers said the new Terms of Service agreement AOL plans to issue next week reveals the company's intention to track members' mouse clicks in order to compile mailing lists for third parties. "This is potentially a far more serious privacy violation than the sale of phone numbers," said David Sobel, counsel to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), a privacy rights group. "This is a detailed profile which divulges salient details about people's lifestyle and habits." Even if not disclosed to third parties, he said, the very existence of such profiles could cause problems. "The problem isn't that it's being shared. The problem is it's being collected and maintained," he said. But officials at AOL said there's little to worry about, suggesting that critics should read the forthcoming policy before passing judgment. "We are not using that information to target our members," AOL spokeswoman Tricia Primrose said. "To the extent we use it, we'll use it in the aggregate." AOL officials last month backed away from a plan to share customers' phone numbers with its marketing partners after a barrage of criticism. Part of the consumer outrage stemmed from the way AOL introduced its plan. Instead of directly informing subscribers that their account information would be given to telemarketers, the company planned to state its intentions in the new Terms of Service agreement - a multipaged, densely worded legal document posted on AOL that informs members about the company's operations. A July 25 letter from EPIC asking for clarification of the policy went unanswered through today. AOL can be reached at www.aol.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #208 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Sun Aug 17 14:03:22 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA21478; Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:03:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 14:03:22 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708171803.OAA21478@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #209 TELECOM Digest Sun, 17 Aug 97 14:03:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 209 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Gregory Johnson) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (James Bellaire) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (AES) UCLA Short Course: Communication Systems Using Digital Signal (B. Goodin) A Strategy Contra Spammers? (Eric Ewanco) Year 2000 Problems (Y2K) (John Shaver) Last Laugh! Just Kidding of Course ... (Babu Mengelepouti) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: gkj@panix.com (Gregory Johnson) Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: 16 Aug 1997 09:35:29 -0400 Organization: Panix Public Access Internet & Unix, NYC In article Nicholas Marino writes: > Ed Ellers wrote: >> And they shouldn't, because as common carriers they have no power to >> weed out the crooks and make 900 service available to only reputable >> information providers. > As a (reputable) IP, I am paying the telco for BILLING and > COLLECTION. What am I getting in return? If you are looking for > crooks, try the people who call 900 numbers with no intention of > paying their bills. And you are getting what you are paying for. The telco bills and collects remittances for you. [snip] > I don't want to seem as down on the telcos as you guys are apparently > down on IPs. The telcos have been forced into this position by the > FCC. I am convinced that if they had the ability to turn off phone > service for failure to pay a 900 bill, everyone would benefit. This would be bad public policy. Telephone service is an essential utility. Information services are not. Your local phone company should not be able to discontinue providing service "A" which is essential, because you are unwilling/unable to pay for service "B" which is not, and is provided by a third party. Analogously, do you think if American Express subcontracted its billing to your local electric company, that the electric company should be able to stop supplying you with electric power because you paid your electric bill but not your American Express bill? I don't think that would be good policy either, even though it would substantially decrease the number of people who failed to pay their American Express bills. --Greg ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 10:31:11 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Nicholas Marino wrote: > As a (reputable) IP, I am paying the telco for BILLING and COLLECTION. > What am I getting in return? If you are looking for crooks, try > the people who call 900 numbers with no intention of paying > their bills. [snip] > I don't want to seem as down on the telcos as you guys are apparently > down on IPs. The telcos have been forced into this position by the > FCC. I am convinced that if they had the ability to turn off phone > service for failure to pay a 900 bill, everyone would benefit. How about a compromise? Any user who refuses to pay the 900 portion of their bill has an immediate 900/976 block placed on their line. Then they cannot make any more calls they do not intend to pay for. And the bill must be contested within one billing period. That should at least reduce the risk for the reputable IPs. Another option would be to default users to NO access to 900/976 until they call the phone company to authorize the calls. But that would probably cut down the number of impulse calls to your information. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Telecom Indiana Webpage http://members.iquest.net/~bellaire/telecom/ * Note new server - old URL should still work * [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ameritech here in Illinois does in fact require an immediate block on the line of anyone who claims they did not authorize the 900 call. They do not require a block merely on the basis that the person claims the information recieved was worthless. Also I think someone here in the Digest pointed out some time ago that a couple of the telcos which use 900-999 specifically for very raunchy hardcore sex stuff do in fact block that one exchange (999) unless the subscriber requests it. Imagine how humiliating and morti- fying that would be; having to call the business office asking to be allowed access to those real raunchy services. PAT] ------------------------------ From: siegman@ee.stanford.edu (Anthony E. Seigman) Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 20:57:46 -0700 Organization: Stanford University I'm interested and glad (no sarcasm intended) to have 900-service-operator Nicholas Marino respond to criticisms of those services, especially his statements that: > As a (reputable) IP, I am paying the telco for BILLING and > COLLECTION. What am I getting in return? If you are looking for > crooks, try the people who call 900 numbers with no intention of > paying their bills. > Well that's my point, isn't it? I do not have the ABILITY to force my > telco to collect my money, but I certainly have the RIGHT! That is > what I am paying them to do. > I don't want to seem as down on the telcos as you guys are apparently > down on IPs. The telcos have been forced into this position by the > FCC. I am convinced that if they had the ability to turn off phone > service for failure to pay a 900 bill, everyone would benefit. ... because this really comes to the point. Sure, billing and collection through the telco for NON-telco services is convenient (for the IP, at least, and even, to some extent, for the customer). Sure, people who deliberately stiff IPs are crooks. But when I contract with the telco for phone service, I'm contracting with them for TELEPHONE service, period. If I stiff them on any of my TELEPHONE charges, they're certainly entitled to cut me off. But once I've paid them for the TELEPHONE services that they've provided me, they should be out of my life. I'm certainly not about to give the telco powers of attorney over ANY of my other financial affairs, or powers to hold my phone service hostage for any of my other non-telco financial transactions -- even if done over the phone. If I order a sofa from the local furniture mart over the phone, accept delivery, and then try to stiff the vendor, he'll have to try to collect on my debt through the appropriate, legally provided mechanisms -- which do NOT include telling the local phone company (or the gas company, or the electric company, for that matter) to turn off my service. If I behave similarly with one of Mr. Marino's numbers, he has every right to be mad at me, and to come after me for payment through any of the same legal channels. In doing this he can certainly negotiate whatever business arrangements he can with the telco. BUT HE CAN'T TAKE CONTROL OF MY PHONE SERVICE, SO LONG AS I'M CURRENT WITH THE PHONE COMPANY ITSELF FOR THE SERVICES *THEY* PROVIDED TO ME -- despite the fact that the ability to do this would certainly be convenient for him. He has to solve his problem with me through normal channels, just like the furniture dealer. If I understand Mr. Marino's message correctly, he doesn't understand this last point. That's why the FCC has had to make that point clear, and why they'll have to continue making it clear. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The problem is, there are no *convenient* 'legal channels' for Mr. Marino or other IPs to use. Typically the IP works with customers five and ten dollars at a time. A sofa on the other hand costs a few hundred dollars and makes collection activity somewhat worthwhile. Even suing you for an unpaid sofa would be a marginal thing at best. You talk suit only when the debt is at least several hundred dollars and the debtor is local to you, or maybe a thousand dollars or more if the debtor is in another state and you need to retain counsel in that state or jurisdiction to proceed, etc. Collection agencies only make money on mass processing of thousands of small accounts, and then, many agencies are reluctant to handle claims where there is no signature on file nor any tangible item to be repossesed or accounted for, etc. That is why if Mr. Marino and other IPs do not have telco's assistance, they may as well close up shop. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 17:53:04 -0700 On November 10-14, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Processing", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bernard Sklar, PhD, Communications Engineering Services, and frederick harris, MS, Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State University. As part of the course materials, each participant receives a copy of the text, "Digital Communications: Fundamentals and Applications", by Bernard Sklar. This course provides comprehensive coverage of advanced digital communications. It differs from other communications courses in its emphasis on applying modern digital signal processing techniques to the implementation of communication systems. This makes the course essential for practitioners in the rapidly changing field. Error-correction coding, spread spectrum techniques, and bandwidth-efficient signaling are all discussed in detail. Basic digital signaling methods and the newest modulation-with-memory techniques are presented, along with trellis-coded modulation. Many traditional communication applications such as modulation/demodulation, channelization, channel equalization, synchronization, and frequency synthesis are being implemented with new digital signal processing techniques to achieve high performance. The course analyzes these techniques, including multirate filters, I-Q sampling, and conversion between I-Q and real signals. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1990. The course fee is $1595, which includes the text and extensive course notes. These course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/ This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: Eric Ewanco Subject: A Strategy Contra Spammers? Date: 16 Aug 1997 22:11:21 -0400 An idea occurred to me about how to approach the problem of spammers. One consequence of forging return addresses is that it is not possible for spammers to determine which addresses are good and which are bogus. Consequently they are unable to guarantee the quality of their lists. At some point, bulk mailing lists will become sufficiently unreliable and untrustworthy -- especially if the automated mechanisms they use to collect them (such as phony "remove me" mailboxes) pick up a substantial portion of bogus addresses. (It's also possible that con artists will open (or are already opening) fraudulent spam mills using entirely bogus address lists. Think of it: the fewer real addresses you use, the more you can guarantee your client minimal backlash. :-)) The expectation is that at some point would-be customers will develop enough suspicion about the quality of the mailing lists used that they will avoid spamming mills or even reconsider their spamming strategy. If spam mills acquire a shady reputation even among their clients, the business will not thrive; and if it does not thrive, it will likely not survive, at least not in a form perilous to the infrastructure of the 'net. Part of our strategy has to involve a degree of countermarketing: spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the industry so as to deter would-be spam clients. The media would prove indispensible to carrying out this strategy: a few articles stressing the specter of impotent or even wholly fraudulent mailing lists in the light of the unverifiability of true audience penetration may instill sufficient concern among would-be clients to prove a worthy deterrent for the majority. On a related topic, rumor has it that a magazine printed an email address of the Federal Trade Commission for consumer inquiries and fraud reports; the address is consumerline@ftc.gov and seems an appropriate destination for forwarding all those spams you get for illegal or even just dubious products or business opportunities. Already I have forwarded several to the address; I've received nothing back, but that includes bounce notifications. # __ __ Eric Ewanco # IC | XC eje@world.std.com # ---+--- http://www.wp.com/Eric_Ewanco # NI | KA Framingham, MA; USA ------------------------------ From: John Shaver Subject: Year 2000 Problems (Y2K) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 15:07:34 -0700 Pat, A friend of mine is the former chief of Information management for a large local organization. Now retired, she is developing a data base of local large organizations such as banks, utilities, stock brokers, car manufacturers, etc. She is interested in hearing from large organizations to include telephone and long distance suppliers as to their plans and why their plans will successfully solve the problem. She has started locally at the phone-in customer service phone numbers and has in some cases gotten to officers of corporations who could not understand her questions and had not heard of the problem. She would be interested in hearing from technical persons who could assist her in evaluating plans that are in place and how they might solve the problem. She can be reached at slorenz@juno.com. Juno does not allow large file transferred, please contact her with summaries of the information which you feel may be of value to her and make arrangements to ship large volumes after the initial contact. Thanks, John ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:37:16 -0700 From: Babu Mengelepouti Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca Organization: US Secret Service Subject: Last Laugh! Just Kidding of Course ... from the dcstuff mailing list ... From: atuttle@interplay.com (Tuttle Alton) Subject: figured you would dig this Spammer servers under siege By Courtney Macavinta August 12, 1997, 11:00 a.m. PT The most well-known spammer on the Net, Cyber Promotions, is under siege. [snip, sad ending of Cyberpromo remaining in existence deleted] I know how to make the story better, to wit: *************************************************************** Sanford Wallace found dead in home By Szechuan Death August 12, 1997, 11:00 PM AT The most well-known spammer on the Net, Sanford Wallace, AKA "Spamford", was found dead in his house today. He was apparently electrocuted during a hanging, cut down, shot several times, staked through the heart, decapitated and dismembered, then set on fire. Police are questioning the approximately one million cheering computer users surrounding the morgue where his charred remains are held. Sources say approximately one hundred thousand people have come forward claiming to have committed the murder, if it in fact was a murder. Some of the deceased's neighbors have told police they didn't see anything, and heard mad gibbering by Sanford wanting to "End it all" the night before he was found. Some people do feel sorry for him, however. America Online's president was heard to say this at a conference following the announcement: "The Internet mourns the loss of a true pioneer today, and try as we might, we may not be able to carry on in his footsteps." He attempted to give a further eulogy, but was booed and pelted with both opened and unopened Mountain Dew cans and AOL subscription CDs, and had to be led offstage in tears. ************************************************************** Ahh. That sounds a lot better. finger sdeath@ackphft.matsu.alaska.edu for PGP key PGP fingerprint: 448A2FA09E2BB00DC621D9E24D319C28 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for that very inspirational and thoughtful message to close this issue of the Digest. Yes, I agree that Steve Case and Spamford Wallace are like two peas in a pot, as Stan Laurel once said until his straight man Oliver Hardy tried to correct him: "Stanley, that's two peas in a pod ... P-O-D --- paw-duh, not 'pot' ..." but it is true, they both seem to come from the same mold. Talking about spam, what a laugh I had today! In addition to the usual couple dozen spam letters I get each day, today there was a letter from postmaster@znet.com advising me that this Digest was 'spam' and to cease and desist sending it. In fact, he returned several copies each of several issues recently telling me to cut it out. I wrote him back and told him sweetheart, you just bought yourself a ticket to my bit bucket; henceforth all mail from znet.com will go straight to /dev/null and flushed away with the rest of the raw sewage I get each day. If Spamford ever does show up dismembered, burned alive or whatever, someone please let me know so I can run a special edition here. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #209 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Aug 18 00:04:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA23751; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 00:04:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 00:04:04 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708180404.AAA23751@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #210 TELECOM Digest Mon, 18 Aug 97 00:04:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 210 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: A Strategy Contra Spammers? (Eric Bohlman) Re: A Strategy Contra Spammers? (Rick DeMattia) Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? (Bill Levant) Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? (kilgor@wt.net) ATM Mailing List Being Started (Babul Miah) Re: AT&T Wireless Digital (Richard Neveau) Re: AT&T Wireless Digital (Corky Sarvis) Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider (Peter Corlett) Is a "Local Loop" a Loop? (Stephen B. Kutzer) Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? (circuit@worldnet) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: ebohlman@netcom.com (Eric Bohlman) Subject: Re: A Strategy Contra Spammers? Organization: OMS Development Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 21:00:44 GMT Eric Ewanco (eje@world.std.com) wrote: > An idea occurred to me about how to approach the problem of spammers. > One consequence of forging return addresses is that it is not possible > for spammers to determine which addresses are good and which are > bogus. Consequently they are unable to guarantee the quality of their > lists. If they were legitimate businesses, this would be a concern for them. But they're not. There are really two types of major spammers: the "spam for hire" companies and the "information providers" (usually operators of 900 numbers or pay websites). The spammers-for-hire generally market their services to small businesses (in many cases small-time scammers themselves) that don't know anything more about the Internet than what they read in the mainstream press. They usually make extravagant promises to them. Most of those clients wouldn't know the difference between a deliverable and non-deliverable address. The quality of the list makes no difference in how much money the spammer-for-hire makes by selling the list. Most of their clients are one-timers and don't communicate with each other. Those who have legitimate products and services to sell usually realize, after the fact, that they've been ripped off. The "information providers" who spam on behalf of themselves also don't care about the quality of their lists. Spamming 200,000 people costs them negligibly more than spamming 100,000 people. As long as there are *any* non-bogus addresses in the lists they compile for themselves, they're not hurt by the presence of bogus addresses. The *entire* reason that spam is such a problem is that it's the *only* form of direct marketing where there's no cost to the marketer in contacting someone who isn't interested in what you're marketing. If you're snail-mailing brochures to people on a list, you lose the cost of postage and printing for every non-deliverable or uninterested person on the list. If you're telemarketing and you have a low-quality list, you have to pay your telemarketers to sit there and listen to intercepts and refusals. Thus snail-mailers and telemarketers have a strong economic incentive to limit their lists to "qualified prospects." But spammers have no such financial incentives. Spamming to a list of 100 qualifieds and 500,000 duds costs no more than spamming to just the 100 qualifieds. The effort and expense in trimming out the duds carries *no* payoff to them; there's no economic reason for them to do it, and every reason for them not to. Of course, when I say "costs no more" I mean "costs no more *to the spammer*." In reality, the spammers are simply offloading their costs to Net users in general, just as a polluter offloads the costs of cleaning up his mess to his neighbors. Both of them aren't so much *making* money as *taking* money; they're profitable only because they're receiving involuntary subsidies. ------------------------------ From: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Subject: Re: A Strategy Contra Spammers? Reply-To: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Organization: Railnet BBS +1 216 786 0476 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:27:02 GMT As quoted from by Eric Ewanco : > An idea occurred to me about how to approach the problem of spammers. > One consequence of forging return addresses is that it is not possible > for spammers to determine which addresses are good and which are > bogus. Consequently they are unable to guarantee the quality of their > lists. I should think that the quality of the lists is irrelevant. As a system administrator I see regular bounces (from spam) for addresses that have not been valid for YEARS. Literally. So I think that it's probably only the gullible who pay money for these distribution lists. Of course, if P.T. Barnum was correct, we're not likely to run out of the gullible in our lifetimes! Rick DeMattia ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? Date: 16 Aug 1997 19:25:44 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 01:21:36 GMT, Andrew Gerald wrote: > Off and on I've been fighting with various "business" units of NYNEX > mainly because I've refused to pay the bill since September of 1996. > I have advised them in writing and over the phone that I will pay the > bill in full when the promised service is delivered. Usually they > have backed down but now the account collections unit says that they > don't give a damn about the open PSC complaint, my problems, my > threats to file a complaint with the NYS Attorney General, my threats > to go to the press, or the lousy service and the poor way I've been > treated. They are going to disconnect my phones on Tuesday come hell > or high water unless I pay in full. > NYNEX collections: "None of what you've just told me justifies your > withholding payment. You are not being billed for any of the services > you mentioned. Therefore the order to disconnect your service on > Tuesday still stands." Later on: "Sir, whether or not you've filed > any complaints with the PSC doesn't matter. You are expected to pay > your bill." To this I replied "And you're expected to deliver a > service, which you have not delivered, therefore I will not be making > any payments until the service is delivered." Translation: NYNEX: We > screw you, then you pay us. Sounds to me like a whore with a gun. DISCLAIMER: I Am Not A Lawyer Inform the person you're talking with that unless they abey the disconnect order on your service until the dispute is settled, you will file a civil action for treble damages against the President of NYNEX under the terms of 42 USC 1983, the 1871 Civil Rights Act, for violation of your right to due process, since, as a government sanctioned monopoly, they are "acting under color of law". I'd suggest you read the section, and try to find a copy of a book called "Super Threats: How to Sound Like a Lawyer and Get Your Own Way". Excellent book, comes with citations. Hit www.law.cornell.edu to see the statute. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth High Technology Systems Consulting Ashworth Designer Linux: Where Do You Want To Fly Today? & Associates ka1fjx/4 Crack. It does a body good. +1 813 790 7592 jra@baylink.com http://rc5.distributed.net NIC: jra3 ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 08:46:24 EDT Subject: Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? In Digest issue 208, Andrew Gerald said a bunch of things, ending with ... > So are we going to be wimps or are we fighting back? As of 8/15/97, NYNEX is no more. Now you have a whole different phone company to fight with. I don't think Bell Atlantic is materially brighter than NYNEX; it took them the best part of two weeks (and four visits, two from the "toaster repairman" subcontractors, and two from genuine thirty-year Bell guys) to fix a noise-and-disconnect problem on our main fax line (which the "real" Bell guys claim was caused by a misconfigured channel card), but you can always hope. Bill ------------------------------ From: kilgor@wt.net Subject: Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? Date: Sun, 17 Aug 97 00:37:36 GMT Organization: MDC Inc. Uh... I am a little confused. You refuse to pay for any services rendered because you don't have all of the services you were told you were going to have? You have ISDN ... are you paying for that, and not paying for the Phonesmart features? Or are you refusing to pay for the whole thing? Did you ever pay for one month? If you did, you will be screwed because a cancelled check is often considered acceptance of a contract. I am not a lawyer. Don't get me wrong, I hope you get your problems fixed. My experiences with ISDN have been similar, I found that the Pac-Tel tech guys were more than happy to figure out solutions and have me test them for them. It's new for them and full of problems that they have to overcome. NYNEX blew it by promising something it couldn't deliver. They should have just said sorry, but we can't do it, we made a mistake and worked out a deal with you. ------------------------------ From: Babul Miah Subject: ATM Mailing List Being Started Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 18:48:56 +0100 Organization: Telecom Lab, Engineering Dept, QMW, UoL Reply-To: b.miah@qmw.ac.uk Hello, A new mailing list has been created for ATM at the Mailbase site. I invite you all to join this group and make full use of it. Below is a brief description of what this is all about. To join the list send email to "mailbase@mailbase.ac.uk" with the message "join atm " as the sole body of the mail (subject text does not matter); see "http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/atm" for more detail. Thank you. Babul Miah ============================================= The purpose of the atm mailing list is to create a bulletin/discussion board for people interested in telecommunications in general and in ATM in particular; it is open to managers, researchers and developers a like. I hope that the list will enable exchange and sharing of information, ideas and views related to the topic. As far as I am aware of, this is the first mailing list of its kind and provides us with an opportunity to supplement the many conferences and seminars in this topic. ATM certainly is a hot topic in telecommunications at the moment and there is no shortage of issues to discuss so I invite everyone to share their thoughts with the others by mailing to the list; if you are talking to friends or colleagues about anything related to ATM send copies to the list as well. And finally, since I have only just set this up we need more participants to make this a lively and fruitful discussion list. So please do encourage others to join as well. Note that Mailbase archives all emails sent to the list for a period of time and provides various other facilities. Contact mailbase for further information ("mailbase-helpline@mailbase.ac.uk" or "http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/atm"). ------------------------------ From: Richard Neveau Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Digital Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 02:38:37 -0500 Organization: bitsmiths Reply-To: rsn@airmail.net Steve Kass wrote: > After several months of unacceptable quality cell service, I am > switching from AT&T Wireless Digital PCS service back to analog > service. While AT&T advertises its digital service as superior to > analog, this was not the case for me. When my wife first got her AT&T Digital "PCS" phone the rep spent a while explaining how to lock the Nokia Phone to only use the "Analog" service 100% of the time. When I commented that kind of defeated the reason AT&T was rolling out the digital service (better bandwidth utilization) he of course was unable to understand. I know that option is still in the phone. The only hassle is you need to turn it on every time you turn on the phone. With the digital phones using less power I leave them on 24 hours a day but with analog I guess I would need to shut the phone off or carry a few spare batteries (Hey - that's one reason digital IS superior to analog !!) > I'm not happy to have spent $199 for a digital phone that I cannot > return, nor did I appreciate hearing that no compensation was > available according to company policy, when this was not the case in > the end. Why don't you: 1) Lock your phone to analog only. Only you will know. -OR - 2) Use it anyway as an analog only phone for your new service. Just lock out the digital mode. You didn't get a FREE phone since you had no contract. A fair exchange for most of us. > Are others out there dissatisfied with AT&T's digital service? And > has anyone been able to return their expensive telephones for a full > refund? I returned my Dual Mode phone on 29th day. Their policy is 30 days and less than 1 hour talk time and returns are no problem. I knew the rules and followed them. I didn't have any problems with the phone (an Ericsson DF388) I just wanted to pick up a Dual Mode / Dual Band phone instead so I can get TDMA "PCS" service @ 1900 MHz also once it rolls out. > I find it remarkable that AT&T can advertise a service that > manifestly cannot deliver what it promises. I pretty much got what I expected from both my wife's service and mine. We both are on the 1500 minute free w/ "everything" else service. I wanted the "E-mail" short message service that I am still waiting for on my Sprint CDMA PCS service (talk about vapor-ware - I want my alpha paging on a Q Phone NOW !!!!). If Sprint / Qualcomm can't get these loose ends finished I will probably stick with AT&T. For now I am using both services to compare. I will admit the Sprint PCS (Qualcomm CDMA Digital) does sound a LOT better but I can still - use - the AT&T TDMA Digital. Check out the 900 MHz phone threads in news:comp.dcom.telecom.tech and see how even this technology most of us find 'better' drives some people up the wall. All cellular service schemes have good and bad points. I'm just glad there are so many choices! The AT&T service is best for my wife as she is not a techno-geek and just wants to pick up the phone ANYWHERE and use it. AT&T gives her that AND cost less than analog AND lets me send her alpha messages. I don't travel much so the limited coverage of CDMA isn't a problem for me but I do want the alpha paging soon or I'll be giving up my Sprint PCS service. I am thinking of going 100% wireless as I very seldom use our POTS line anymore. > I would be happy to > participate in a class action suit against AT&T for false advertising > and failure to provide acceptable service, if I am not alone. You are not alone but ... didn't you kind of get a hint in the first 30 days you didn't like the service quality? The original reason I got the AT&T service for my wife was lower price with NO CONTRACT. That is worth a lot in turbulent times like these! You still got out with no cancellation penalty and have a pretty good phone most likely to use for your next service. I fail to see why you should be so upset. ------------------------------ From: Corky Sarvis Organization: Our Lady of the Lake University Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:42:39 CDT Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Digital Pat, I read in this morning's issue about the challenges and problems that one of your readers is having with AT & T Wireless Digital Service. About 90-days ago, I made the switch from Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems analog cellular service to Sprint PCS here in San Antonio, Texas. The "gimmick" for switching was a very great amount of airtime for a flat monthly fee. I believe I have 2100-minutes of airtime per month for about $100 including taxes and fees. My occupation takes me all over the San Antonio, metropolitan area. I have been keeping careful notes of coverage as well as system downtime / outages. Since I have been on Sprint PCS, here is what has happened. Twice they have had major system failures that lasted several hours in the middle of the business day. They did finally get voice-mail activated. It seems to work as advertised. Just lately, within the last week, I cannot get a call to connect on the first try. It usually takes two or three attempts! I have noticed some severe coverage problems within the major areas of the San Antonio city limits. To wit, Loop 410 near the Medical Center area, between Babcock and Fredericksburg Road. Pity the poor physician speaking to a colleague and happens to hit this hole! It is an absolute drop-out, with no coverage. On the outskirts of the city, approximately the "outer loop" or Loop 1604, the 'phone does not usually work inside buildings, only out-of-doors. The downtown area usually has fairly good coverage, except in some of the larger office buildings. I liken this coverage problem that Sprint PCS is having with what we used to go through with many of the VHF repeater stations of 20-25 years ago. The rule back then was, "Know your coverage limitations and don't travel in that particular area without backup or a buddy in a vehicle to act as relay on a simplex channel". I have decided to be patient with Sprint PCS, even though the Customer Service Number is usually not answered or busy. In all fairness, the salesman that prospected me and sold me the 'phone and service has been most responsive, to the extent that he knows what's going on. Sprint PCS came to San Antonio amid great fanfare and slick marketing. I believe that they are simply waiting for the technology and the number of towers they have to catch-up with the advertising. I'll give them until the end of this year and make a decision at that time. Corky Sarvis, Director Weekend College and Special Programs Our Lady of the Lake University San Antonio, Texas [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A few months ago I had a similar problem with a certain tower which I nearly always seem to use for my cell phone rejecting most of my calls ... just taking the information, pausing a couple seconds then disconnecting. It took me two or three persistent calls to get it straightened out, but it turns out Ameritech was able to solve it by 'fingerprinting' my phone. A lady called me on the cell phone, said who she was, and that she wanted me to press 'Function' plus certain other keys on my phone. I did so and she worked on something at her end and presently said to me I was 'all set', and that I should have no further problems making calls ... and I haven't. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Peter Corlett Subject: Re: Bogus Directory Assistance Provider Date: 17 Aug 1997 23:25:44 +0100 Organization: The Haunted Fishtank In article , wrote: > Pat, this won't work from England - 011-604-555-1212 is blocked. BT > charges me for international directory assistance, and I don't even > get to talk to the foreign operator. When I called UK directory from > New Brunswick I at least got hear a funny accent (but it was still > routed through a local operator). I'm not sure if that is a typo, or whether there is a genuine problem with the networks. If you did dial 01160 from the UK, your call would be rejected, as 0116 is the code for Leicester, and the 0 being an invalid first digit for a local number. Oftel's numbering database lists 01160 as "Unusable". I made a test call to 001-604-555-1212 using First Telecom as the carrier, and got through fine. AT&T UK are no worse than usual calling this number, and I have reports that Energis works too (and is much cheaper than using BT's International DQ service.) I can't speak for calling over BT, since their international rates are in fantasy land, and I won't use them. It is possible that BT has "decided" that +1 xxx 555 xxxx is an invalid number, and won't waste network bandwidth attempting the call. There's probably not a lot you can do about this, bar raise the issue with either BT themselves or Oftel. \/ http://www.verrine.demon.co.uk/ * "peter" is a news-only account and bounces Tel.: +44 7020 954422 ("d" rate) * mail. To contact me, substitute "tomcat". echo Today is $((($(date +%s)-$(date -d 31-aug-93 +%s))/86400)) September 1993. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 16:19:39 -0400 From: Stephen B. Kutzer Subject: Is a "Local Loop" a Loop? A silly question, no doubt. What's really meant by the term "local loop"? As a related question, of the four wires in my phone, I know that two are used per number. Is one for "send" and another for "receive", and do they form the "loop"? Feeling loopy, Steve [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, they form the loop, but 'send' and 'receive' are not the correct terms. One of the two wires comes out to your phone from the central office. Your switchhook, mouth and earpiece are connected in series through that wire which then loops back to the central office. Electrical current coming down the wire to your phone cannot complete the circuit and go back to the central office while your phone is on hook. When your phone goes off-hook, a contact in the phone connects the incoming and outgoing wires, (known usually as 'tip' and 'ring') so that the current can flow back to the telephone exchange. When the current gets back to the other end, it trips other relays which tells the phone exchange that you have lifted the receiver and wish to make a call. The two wires used for the first line are usually green and red, while the two wires used for the second line are usually yellow and black. I do not know the difference between 'loop' and 'local loop'. I think they are used interchangeably. PAT] ------------------------------ From: CIRCUIT@worldnet.att.net Subject: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 11:35:08 -0400 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Reply-To: CIRCUIT@worldnet.att.net Hi, I have two separate cordless phones in my residence, both AT&T cordless phones, of different models. I have recently been experiencing something strange. When I pick up one or the other phone, I get a low tone "beepbeep", as if it can't find an open channel. One of the phones is a 10 channel, the other a 25 channel. Then as mysteriously as it appeared, it disappears and both phones are fine. Could this be some sort of FCC regulated interference by someone with possibly a ham radio? If so, what can I do about this and/or verify the problem? Any help greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Circuit@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #210 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Aug 19 01:00:43 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA15289; Tue, 19 Aug 1997 01:00:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 01:00:43 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708190500.BAA15289@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #211 TELECOM Digest Tue, 19 Aug 97 01:00:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 211 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Is a "Local Loop" a Loop? (Michael Bryant) Re: Is a "Local Loop" a Loop? (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: AT&T Wireless Digital (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: AT&T Wireless Digital (Tim Russell) Re: AT&T Wireless Digital (J.F. Mezei) Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? (Michael Sullivan) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Joseph Singer) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Bill Levant) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Eli Mantel) Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities (Nicholas Marino) Re: Last Laugh! Just Kidding of Course ... (Art Walker) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Bryant Subject: Is a "Local Loop" a Loop? Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:22:37 -0400 The local loop can also be referred to as the "loop" or "subscriber loop". They all refer to the same thing which is the circuit between a subscriber's premises and the serving central office. In other words, the loop can be considered the exchange access portion of an overall telecommunications circuit. The local loop has traditionally been metallic copper pairs but it can also be optical fiber, radio links or hybrid-fiber coax(HFC) and in these cases is usually in use with a digital loop carrier(DLC). It sounds as if you have two lines and a two line telephone instrument. Yes, two wires are necessary for one telephone line(circuit). As the editor notes, the terminology "send" and "receive" are not appropriate. Telephone instruments and switches are four-wires. Many years ago it was decided cost prohibitive to run four-wires to each phone. Therefore every phone has a hybrid transformer to convert the four wires to two wires and vice-versa. Should you take apart your phone you will find that the transmitter has two wires and the receiver has two wires. Hence, your four wire telephone set. Your voice is changed to electrical current and over the local loop. The editor also noted that the first line in a home is normally red/green and the second yellow/black. This is the old quad wiring. It is unacceptable in this day and age and the FCC is about to make it mandatory for all new wiring to be at least a category 3 type. Newer wiring contains twisted pairs versus the old quad wiring. Complaints of crosstalk are an every day complaint to phone companies and the FCC for folks still using quad wiring and that have two lines in the same cable jacket. Just a small tidbit for the day. Michael Bryant ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Is a "Local Loop" a Loop? Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 03:22:17 -0400 Organization: DIGEX, Inc. Reply-To: Michael D. Sullivan On Sun, 17 Aug 1997 16:19:39 -0400, Stephen B. Kutzer wrote: > A silly question, no doubt. What's really meant by the term "local > loop"? As a related question, of the four wires in my phone, I know > that two are used per number. Is one for "send" and another for > "receive", and do they form the "loop"? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, they form the loop, but 'send' > and 'receive' are not the correct terms. One of the two wires comes > out to your phone from the central office. Your switchhook, mouth > and earpiece are connected in series through that wire which then loops > back to the central office. Electrical current coming down the wire > to your phone cannot complete the circuit and go back to the central > office while your phone is on hook. When your phone goes off-hook, > a contact in the phone connects the incoming and outgoing wires, > (known usually as 'tip' and 'ring') so that the current can flow > back to the telephone exchange. When the current gets back to the > other end, it trips other relays which tells the phone exchange > that you have lifted the receiver and wish to make a call. The > two wires used for the first line are usually green and red, while > the two wires used for the second line are usually yellow and black. > I do not know the difference between 'loop' and 'local loop'. I > think they are used interchangeably. PAT] In other words, when you pick up your phone, you complete a loop: the green wire from the telco is connected through your phone to the red wire to the telco. Any electric circuit involving a power source (e.g., the battery in the central office) and resistance between the battery terminals (e.g., the telco's copper wires and your phone) is known as a loop. Michael D. Sullivan, Bethesda, Maryland, USA mds@access.digex.net, avogadro@well.com ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Digital Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 03:18:16 -0400 Organization: DIGEX, Inc. Reply-To: Michael D. Sullivan On Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:42:39 CDT, Corky Sarvis wrote: > About 90-days ago, I made the switch from Southwestern Bell Mobile > Systems analog cellular service to Sprint PCS here in San Antonio, > Texas. > The "gimmick" for switching was a very great amount of airtime for a > flat monthly fee. I believe I have 2100-minutes of airtime per month > for about $100 including taxes and fees. > I have noticed some severe coverage problems within the major areas of > the San Antonio city limits. To wit, Loop 410 near the Medical Center > area, between Babcock and Fredericksburg Road. Pity the poor > physician speaking to a colleague and happens to hit this hole! It is > an absolute drop-out, with no coverage. On the outskirts of the city, > approximately the "outer loop" or Loop 1604, the 'phone does not > usually work inside buildings, only out-of-doors. The downtown area > usually has fairly good coverage, except in some of the larger office > buildings. You may want to try going to the local cellular carrier. Some carriers have a promotional trade-in policy. I recently saw Bell Atlantic NYNEX Mobile folks taking Sprint Spectrum PCS phones in trade for cellular phones and service. I suspect they have a deal that is very good. Michael D. Sullivan, Bethesda, Maryland, USA mds@access.digex.net, avogadro@well.com ------------------------------ From: russell@probe.net (Tim Russell) Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Digital Date: 18 Aug 1997 17:16:03 GMT Organization: Probe Technology Internet Services Corky Sarvis writes: > Since I have been on Sprint PCS, here is what has happened. Twice > they have had major system failures that lasted several hours in the > middle of the business day. They did finally get voice-mail > activated. It seems to work as advertised. Here in Omaha, the system seems to work well, within the limitations I would expect from a new service offering. Coverage is a problem in outlying areas, however, I've also been surprised at having coverage in several areas I didn't expect, such as a state park some fifteen miles south of the metro area. I have reported one glaring dropout zone in town (84th & Center) and received a call that a new site would be put in during July. It's August and the problem remains, but I'm willing to wait some. I know the difficulties of getting new sites installed, especially since I believe Omaha has placed a moratorium on new cell sites. Overall, I'm more than happy to put up with small problems, because I absolutely /love/ the battery life on this phone. My AMPS phone was constantly low on power even though I used the largest NiMH battery I could find. My Qualcomm phone, on the other hand, has been on standby for over 24 hours and still had plenty of capacity for several 5-minute calls. The additional privacy is an added bonus. This morning, my voicemail box had a message from Sprint PCS stating that they will be installing an entirely new voicemail system on August 24th. I'll certainly be interested to see how it performs - the current system, which was finally rolled out to all customers, has performed passably except for a long delay between when the message is placed and when I get notified of it. The only BIG complaint I have had thus far in four months of service has been the long hold times for customer support. Recently I was a little late sending in payment and consequently had my phone shut off. Fine, I deserved that. However, it took me SIX HOURS on hold (I exaggerate not) to get through to a rep to make payment. The explanation was a big marketing push, however I find this entirely unacceptable, especially since the phone system has prompts to inform it that one is a current customer. I spent twenty minutes talking to a supervisor, explaining to him that it would behoove Sprint to concentrate a little more on keeping current customers happy than on getting new ones. He comiserated, but didn't seem to be able to grasp the concept of keeping a group of operators dedicated to current customer use on the support lines. When my one year of double minutes is up, I'll look at them MUCH more critically. Right now, I'm happy overall. Tim Russell System Admin, Probe Technology email: russell@probe.net PGP RSA: C992 109C 6D7F 8D91 062E 817E 00D3 287A "The worst censorship is self-censorship, because fear has no limits." -- Grady Ward ------------------------------ From: jf mezei <[non-spam]jfmezei@videotron.ca> Subject: Re: AT&T Wireless Digital Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 18:46:35 -0500 Organization: VTL Reply-To: [non-spam]jfmezei@videotron.ca Corky Sarvis wrote: > My occupation takes me all over the San Antonio, metropolitan area. > I have been keeping careful notes of coverage as well as system > downtime / outages. I have been with FIDO/Microcell (GSM) in Montreal Canada for about two months now. Coverage is definitely not up to snuff yet. And I "hear" outages that last a few seconds to a couple of minutes at night near midnight (phone beeps when it looses touch with the network). Inside a certain downtown buildings (with copper tinted glass), the phone won't work unless it is right at the window. In that same building analog phones from AT&T (Cantel) also have great difficulty. As a cyclist, I am often outside the city and I have monitored the coverage area. I reported a problem with no coverage on a side road that was parallel to a highway about 300m away, and that highway was on the coverage map. Lo and behold they called me vback about two weeks later to tell me that they had sent a technician who confirmed that the antennas were very focused to the highway only. I was impressed that they would even bother to call me back! I must say that I have been pretty impressed by their customer support. Rarely wait long, and the folks are pretty knowledgeable. ------------------------------ From: Michael D. Sullivan Subject: Re: Any NYNEX ISDN Customers Having Trouble With NYNEX? Date: Mon, 18 Aug 97 03:11:30 -0400 Organization: DIGEX, Inc. Reply-To: Michael D. Sullivan On 16 Aug 1997 19:25:44 GMT, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > DISCLAIMER: I Am Not A Lawyer > Inform the person you're talking with that unless they abey the > disconnect order on your service until the dispute is settled, you will > file a civil action for treble damages against the President of NYNEX > under the terms of 42 USC 1983, the 1871 Civil Rights Act, for > violation of your right to due process, since, as a government > sanctioned monopoly, they are "acting under color of law". You certainly are not a lawyer. The 1871 Civil Rights Act, or Anti-Klu-Klux-Klan Act, 42 U.S.C. 1983, is applicable only to denial of civil rights by *government* workers acting under color of law. Having a local telephone exchange franchise has never been held to subject a company to Section 1983 liability. Michael D. Sullivan, Bethesda, Maryland, USA mds@access.digex.net, avogadro@well.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:38:44 -0700 From: Joseph Singer Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Pat wrote recently in TELECOM Digest: > Also I think someone here in the Digest pointed out some time ago > that a couple of the telcos which use 900-999 specifically for very > raunchy hardcore sex stuff do in fact block that one exchange (999) > unless the subscriber requests it. Imagine how humiliating and morti- > fying that would be; having to call the business office asking to > be allowed access to those real raunchy services. PAT] A few years ago when I was living in Texas telco initiated a '976' type service that would only be for "adult" type entertainment and assigned it the 766 prefix. To be able to call this prefix however required that you had to call Southwestern Bell and request the ability to call this special prefix. I imagine it did not work partially for the reason you state at the end of your comment above, but imagine also that 976 type services for the 'adult' entertainment industry was on the way out and they'd more likely use 900 services, services in Caribbean 809 area or one of the international 'adult' services in Guyana (011-592-XXX.) Joseph Singer Seattle, Washington USA [ICQ pgr] PO Box 23135, Seattle WA 98102 FAX +1 206 325 5862 ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 07:51:19 EDT Subject: Humiliating and Mortifying? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: [prelude snipped] > Imagine how humiliating and mortifying that would be; having to call > the business office asking to be allowed access to those real raunchy > services. PAT] Some years ago, Bell of Pennsylvania (Lord only knows what they're called *this* week) moved all the raunch-o-phone services from 215-976-XXXX to 215-556-xxxx (a non-standard NXX for the purpose, as far as I know) with a default setting of "no access". If you wanted that sort of thing, you had to call the business office and sign up. I did; I was neither humiliated nor mortified, though the Bell rep did say I was the first one she'd processed. It's been about eight years now; I've **never** had occasion to call **any** of the 556-XXXX's, and most likely, never will. To me, it's a matter of principle; First Amendment and all that. I don't need the telephone company to *protect* me from anything, thanks very much. Bill ------------------------------ From: Eli Mantel Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 21:03:01 PDT Nicholas Marino (nmarino@comcastpc.com) wrote: > I am convinced that if [the telcos] had the ability to turn > off phone service for failure to pay a 900 bill, everyone > would benefit. And I am convinced that "everyone would benefit" if we would just get rid of telco-billed pay-per-call services altogether. Who would benefit by allowing termination of phone service for failure to pay a 900 bill, besides the information providers? Would the charges for these services actually decline if collection costs went down? If that were the case, then there should be different charges for these calls depending on how they were paid for. On the other hand, there has been a plethora of problems created by telco billing of such services. How many customer disputes have resulted from this? How many warnings from the FCC, the FTC, the BBB, and local consumer reporters have been issued? How many PBX's and how many customer-owned pay phones had to be reprogrammed to prevent unauthorized use of 900 services? How many different rules did the FCC create to provide consumer protection? And last AND least, how many calls have the IPs had to eat the charges for? TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu) wrote: > ...there are no *convenient* 'legal channels' for Mr. Marino > or other IPs to use. Typically the IP works with customers > five and ten dollars at a time... This issue is really a straw man. There are plenty of other businesses that have small dollar sales to people on credit. Music clubs, book clubs, and magazines are a few examples. IPs always have the choice to require credit cards to provide service. They can also protect themselves by exchanging credit information with other IPs, as well as requiring prepayment or written pre-authorization for use of their services. In any case, the fact that IPs may have difficulty in billing and collection of their services is no excuse to impact the users of other telephone services in any way. If we had 900/976 blocking by default, I expect that the percentage of customers who opt to remove such blocking would be exceedingly small. Fine with me! Eli Mantel, mantel@hotmail.com Cagey Consumer site: http://www.geocities.com/wallstreet/5395 Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I left the mention of hotmail.com in Eli's .signature above because I want to mention a problem today I had with a spammer at that site who sent me *forty* copies of the very same spam over a one hour period. Now it seems we not only have to endure spammers and their nonsense, we also have to endure spammers whose mailing programs do not work correctly. I simply batched the whole thing up -- all forty or so copies consisting of several thousand lines and sent it all back to postmaster@hotmail.com asking if he would try to get his user under control. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nicholas Marino Subject: Re: BellSouth Refuses 900 Service to Charities Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 14:56:49 -0400 Gregory Johnson wrote: > And you are getting what you are paying for. The telco bills and > collects remittances for you. Pre-1992, the telcos were agressive about forcing customers to pay their 900 bills. They could turn your phone service off. Today they can't, and you are right -- all they do is include my charges on a piece of paper along with the rest of your bill. Did they reduce the amount of money that they charge for billing? Not on your life. >> I don't want to seem as down on the telcos as you guys are apparently >> down on IPs. The telcos have been forced into this position by the >> FCC. I am convinced that if they had the ability to turn off phone >> service for failure to pay a 900 bill, everyone would benefit. > This would be bad public policy. Telephone service is an essential > utility. Information services are not. Your local phone company > should not be able to discontinue providing service "A" which is > essential, because you are unwilling/unable to pay for service "B" > which is not, and is provided by a third party. The 'bad policy' came from the FCC in 1992. Not only did it emasculate the telcos, it also forced them to put that little disclaimer on your phone bill reminding you that you won't be disconnected for failure to pay your bill. What is the purpose of that disclaimer? Wouldn't a mandated policy be enough? It was a purely political move on the day it was required, to appease the vocal minority. Today it is simply ridiculous. It is in the best interest of the telcos to discourage deadbeats, whether they are my customers, or Nynex's or AT&Ts. Nine times out of ten when someone stiffs an IP out of hundres of dollars in 900 charges, he is also stiffing the local and long distance companies out of thousands of dollars in toll charges. ------------------------------ From: walker@phantom.onesourcetech.com (Art Walker) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Just Kidding of Course ... Date: 17 Aug 1997 19:58:54 GMT Organization: OneSource Technologies - Omaha, NE Reply-To: Art.Walker@onesourcetech.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for that very inspirational > and thoughtful message to close this issue of the Digest. Yes, I agree > that Steve Case and Spamford Wallace are like two peas in a pot, as > Stan Laurel once said until his straight man Oliver Hardy tried to > correct him: "Stanley, that's two peas in a pod ... P-O-D --- > paw-duh, not 'pot' ..." but it is true, they both seem to come from > the same mold. An apt choice of words. They both remind me a lot of things I occasionally find growing under my 'fridge. - Art [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A different kind of mold I guess. I see it growing around the drain in my bathtub now and then and I always scrub it away as soon as it appears. Speaking of molds, I saw some cheese at a store today and thinking I might purchase it I examined it a bit more closely ... it almost made me pass out, that's how horrible the odor was. I have never seen or smelled a cheese like that before, and hope to never again. Limburger is mild by compar- ison. I wonder if Spamford and Steve Case ever thought of merging their shops? It seems it would be an ideal arrangement for both of them. Then the rest of us could just disconnect the new conglomerate and hopefully forget about it, and hope to never smell anything like it again. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #211 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Aug 20 00:48:01 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA07774; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:48:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:48:01 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708200448.AAA07774@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #212 TELECOM Digest Wed, 20 Aug 97 00:48:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 212 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson UCLA Short Course: "Mobile IP and Mobile Networking" (Bill Goodin) CPSR Urges DNS Reform (Monty Solomon) Annoying Calls? Pac Bell Center Has the Answer (Tad Cook) The Telecom Side of 56K (Clifton T. Sharp, Jr.) Two Dialups Supported Under 95? (Eric Florack) Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID (Charles Cremer) ACD Help Needed (Ramona Chavez) SITA / Sprint X.25 Gateway (Paul J. Smith) Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? (John Stafford) Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? (Brian Leyton) Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? (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: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: "Mobile IP and Mobile Networking" Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:21:19 -0700 On November 17-19, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Mobile IP and Mobile Networking", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructor is Charles Perkins, MA, Senior Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems. As part of the course materials, each participant receives a copy of the text, "Mobile IP: Design Principles and Practice", by Charles Perkins. As the Internet continues its phenomenal growth, mobile computers are likewise gaining unprecedented popularity. When mobile computers move and attach themselves to new networks within the Internet, they can use mobile IP as a means to achieve seamless and transparent roaming to application software. In this context, 'transparent' means that the applications don't need to be recompiled or reconfigured, while 'seamless' means that roaming from one place to another occurs without inconvenience to the user. As long as a physical path exists for communication, the user might not even be aware when a cell boundary has been crossed. This course lays out the necessary protocol technology to allow mobile computers to use mobile IP, and describes the relevant operation of other protocols which can be used to aid mobility (such as DHCP and Service Location Protocol). The course explores in detail all aspects of mobile IP and other standard protocols that further simplify the operation of mobile computers on the Internet, including: o Mobile agent advertisements o Registration procedures o Tunneling mechanisms o The role of security o Home agents o Foreign agents o How to set up a home network o Getting care-of addresses via DHCP o Route optimization o Smooth handoffs o Mobility vs. portability o IPv6 mobility support o Service Location Protocol o Finding printers, faxes, filesystems Participants also look at an architectural model for supporting nomadic users currently under development within the Cross-Industry Working Team (XIWT) in the 'Nomadicity' group. The course is intended for anyone seeking to understand how to use mobile IP; how to create a home network for mobile users within their organization; or how to explore new Internet protocols and mobile computing. This interest group includes programmers, administrators, network managers, and mobile computer users who are already familiar with using the Internet. The course fee is $1195, which includes the text and extensive course notes. These course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/ This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 22:04:15 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CPSR Urges DNS Reform Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 23:16:53 -0700 From: Susan Evoy Subject: CPSR Urges DNS Reform August 18, 1997 For More Information: Glenn B. Manishin 202.955.6300 Aki Namioka 206.587.6825 Computer Professionals Urge "Open, Consensus-Based" Approach for Internet Naming System "The Internet system of domain names (DNS) is too important to the structure of the Internet for `reform' to proceed in a hasty or ill-conceived manner," Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) said in a filing today before the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). "Whatever its merits, the IAHC process was closed, rushed and unbalanced, leading to a proposal that should not be endorsed by the US government," said CPSR President Aki Namioka. She called for more input from "consumers and other users of the Internet." "There is no present `crisis' in DNS administration that require expedited implementation of any system for DNS reform, including those proposed by the Internet Ad Hoc Committee (IAHC), Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI) and others," Namioka stated. CPSR said in its filing that "the DNS reform process should be slowed in order to permit the achievement of a consensus approach ... No `rush to reform' is necessary." "The US government should not endorse, and should actively oppose, intervention by ITU and WIPO in the DNS administration process," CPSR stated. CPSR asked the US and other national governments to "encourage open, consensus-based Internet self-governance, intervening only to assure public debate and to prevent any single segment of the Internet community from asserting its special interests above those of all Internet users." It suggested that "the U.S. government can act as a catalyst in assisting the creation of the new self-governance organizations (open and balanced consortia of Internet professionals, providers and users) that will be necessary to complete the transition to a fully non-governmentally administered Internet." DNS is a combination of software, protocols, and computers that translate Internet computer names like "www.cpsr.org" to Internet numbers like 198.207.136.10. These numbers are then used by email clients, web browsers, and server software to deliver data to its intended destination. Since 1993, domain names in the most popular "top-level" domains ".com", ".org", and ".net" have been issued by Network Solutions, Inc.(NSI) , under the terms of a contract with the National Science Foundation. NSI has recently come under attack for failing to protect the rights of trademark holders while exercising monopolistic control over the top-level domains. In February of 1997, the Internet Ad-Hoc Committee (IAHC) issued a plan for reform of DNS management, including creation of new top-level domains, which would be shared by multiple entities, known as registrars, who would be able to assign names in these domains. This plan, known as the "Generic Top-Level Domain Memorandum of Understanding" (gTLD-MoU) calls for a bureaucratic structure for DNS management and a set of procedures for resolving disputes over domain names, along with the participation of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The CPSR submission to NTIA said that "international quasi-governmental organizations (ITU, WIPO, OECD, etc.) should have no formal role in Internet governance or domain name registration," and that "the extensive new bureaucracy for domain name management and oversight proposed by IAHC, including a Swiss-based Council of Registrars (CORE) and a higher level interim Policy Oversight Committee (iPOC), are unnecessary and counterproductive." "CPSR believes that the recent fascination of many parties with trademark rights to Internet domains is a short-run issue only in the Internet community," the organization said in its filing. It warned against holding "the important and competitively crucial matter of introducing competition to DNS administration hostage to a quixotic desire to create a new, international law of Internet trademark rights or to perfect an "efficient" trademark dispute mechanism that displaces national courts." "DNS has a profound effect upon the way that end users access the Internet," said Harry Hochheiser, a member of CPSR's board of directors. "Changes to DNS should be made on the basis of what's best for all constituencies involved, instead of simply focusing on the narrowly-defined needs of trademark owners or those who hope to build domain-registration businesses". # # # Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (www.cpsr.org) CPSR is a public-interest alliance of computer scientists and others interested in the impact of computer technology on society. CPSR's goal is to direct public attention to difficult choices concerning the applications of computing and how those choices affect society. > Duff Axsom * Executive Director > http://www.cpsr.org/home.html > Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility > P.O. Box 717 * Palo Alto * CA * 94302 > Phone: (650) 322-3778 * Fax: (650) 322-4748 * Email: duff@cpsr.org ------------------------------ Subject: Annoying Calls? Pac Bell Center Has the Answer Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 23:31:19 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) by DENNIS ROCKSTROH San Jose Mercury News Annoying calls? Pac Bell center has the answer. ELECTRONIC terrorism by telephone is on the rise. I know a man in San Jose who was just victimized by this insidious invasion of our homes. "One night our telephones started ringing at 11 p.m.," he said. When he put the receiver to his ear, he heard the telltale sound of a fax machine calling out to another fax machine. He hung up. Seven minutes later, the telephone rang again. And for the next four hours, every seven minutes, the phone rang. He slept little that night as the telephones played their maddening computer-ordered chorus. This was a case for Pacific Bell's Annoyance Call Bureau. "It's a growing problem," said David K. Miller, manager of the 39-person bureau. It is against the law to make an annoying telephone call. The San Ramon-based bureau has picked up state-wide responsibility for tracking down annoying machine-made calls. Before that, the office handled only human annoyance calls. The bureau's been around since 1993 when it covered just the Bay Area. Over the years, responsibility for annoyance calls throughout the state moved from the local business and repair offices to the central site in San Ramon. The system works like this: Victims should first call their local Pac Bell business offices to report obscene, threatening, maddening and otherwise annoying calls, human or machine. On the spot, Pac Bell can change your number. But if the problem can't be solved in the first go-around, it is handed over to the bureau. Forty-five percent of Pac Bell's annoyance calls are machine-generated: faxes, modems, computers, abandoned telemarketing operations, faulty burglar alarms, medical alerts and incorrect telephone numbers on credit cards swiped through a reader. Most of the annoying calls are simply wrong numbers. "A human programmed in the wrong number," Miller said. Earlier this year, the bureau handled 800 calls a day. Today it's handling more than 1,400, with the increase coming from culprit machines. "We started getting 1,100 calls a day, then 1,300, then 1,400. One day we got more than 1,500. It's a great problem," said Miller. MOST machine complaints are resolved in a matter of days. Pac Bell puts a trap on the victim's line and registers information on incoming calls. The victim keeps a log and calls the bureau to report what time the annoying calls came in. Pac Bell checks the number and calls the offending company or fires off a letter asking it to take the victim's number out of its machine. "They usually comply," said Miller. "If not, we send a more strongly worded letter. That usually does it." A similar system handles annoying calls from humans. "Most of these are a relationship gone bad," Miller said. Obscene and threatening calls also should be reported to the police. In his four years with the bureau, Miller said, he knows of two telephone terrorists who went to jail. Pac Bell sets about 350 new traps a day. Miller said his staff gets no special training to handle the complaints. He just has good listeners like Lilia Pasual, 24. "I get a lot of irate people," Pasual said. "I try to do all I can." It is not uncommon for someone to spend 30 minutes with a victim, Miller said. "It gives you a really good feeling when you solve it," said Pasual. Other times, it's just a stressful job. "Sometimes you have to get up from your desk, go outside and take a deep breath," she said. -------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of the incident several years ago involving a fax machine at the First National Bank of Chicago. A fax machine was programmed to 'poll' several other fax machines in branches of the bank between about six and seven p.m. each night. Some fool had programmed the machine with a wrong telephone number -- in Germany! So every night for a couple weeks, this poor distraught family in Germany was being awakened from their sleep at about two in the morning their time by a ringing phone every few minutes and dead silence or an occassional chirp on the other end. They reported it to B'post and asked for assistance. B'post soon enough had it tracked down to coming from the United States and asked AT&T to look into the matter on this side. When AT&T found it coming from Chicago they had Ameritech take over the case. An Ameritech rep who was the primary contact between the bank and telco called a few different people at the bank asking for assistance and getting nowhere. She might as well have stood in front of the bank and talked to the brick wall. Finally someone in the bank's telecom department said they would take care of it. Imagine her surprise then when several days later from B'post via AT&T via her supervisor comes word that nothing had been done at all; that the family in Germany was still being harassed night after night after night, a couple dozen times per night. At that point a sharply worded letter went to First National Bank saying that the offending line had been disconnected and would not be restored unless/until bank filed a formal appeal to the Illinois Commerce Commission and the Commission ordered Ameritech to restore the service. Then she sent a disconnect order on it to plant for handing. Several days later a phone call from some clerk in the bank's telecom department: "one of our lines is out of order, it appears to be dead. We called repair and they said they could do nothing and for us to call our account representative." That was, you might say, the frosting on the cake. Her supervisor's supervisor got in contact with the bank's Vice-President, Telecom and read him the riot act. I guess he in turn went to the department where the offending fax machine was located and literally unplugged it and carried it away. After reprogramming the entire thing and a long discussion with the Ameritech rep, the line was reconnected. Ah, but the best part was yet to come. No one bothered to tell any of this to the clerks who spend their days reconciling the huge phone bill each month from Ameritech and when the next bill came, there were, naturally, hundreds of one minute calls to Germany from that line. Bank pays all the phone bill except for those calls and has someone call rep asking for credit on 'what obviously has to be some really big screw up on our bill by the phone company.' The Ameritech rep -- I am sure she wished *she* could have been the one to deliver the message -- goes back up the line to the supervisor's supervisor who calls back to the bank's VP-Telecom with a short, very precise and succinct message: pay the bill, pay it today, have a check on my desk this afternoon for those calls, or tomorrow it will go to Legal and that line will be disconnected again. First National sent a check over a couple hours later. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 15:55:57 -0500 From: Clifton T. Sharp, Jr. Reply-To: clifto@megsinet.net Organization: as little as possible Subject: The Telecom Side of 56K I've been doing a bit of perusing the web after getting a new K56Flex modem. The following tidbit from Ascend (http://www.ascend.com/737.html) left me scratching my head: ------------------ If you've got noise and a low line level, you need to contact your Telco provider. Explain to them that you are using a modem on your line, you are getting poor cct quality figures from your modem, and that the line level is low. You are entitled to have this problem corrected. Make sure that you say there is nothing wrong with your normal voice communications (if that is the case...) otherwise they will just do a normal line check. If you are on a digital exchange, ask them if you can have the AGC (automatic gain control) turned OFF and your line setting at the exchange, set to position "5". In most cases this should give you a good cct and level and cure your connect problems at a stroke. ------------------ 1. What the heck is 'cct'? 2. What happens when telco "sets my line setting to 5"? And some related questions: 3. If and when I manage to persuade someone at Ameritech to do all this stuff, how do I get them to reduce or remove digital padding? The modem is telling me it detects 6 dB of padding, and though I can't find a straight answer on that subject, I suspect less or no padding would be better. Modem reports -13 to -14 dBm levels; unrelated, my loop current is high (I took out the two 390 ohm resistors I put in to drop it to 25 mA, this raised the level from -19 dBm). 4. The old firmware I had consistently reported a robbed-bit signaling pattern of "7A". The new stuff *usually* reports 11. I thought I read in this newsgroup some time ago that there should be no robbed-bit signaling where SS7 is implemented, and that one could be reasonably sure SS7 was in anyplace where ADSI level 3 was supported. (The experts now know I'm out of my element. :-) I believe I've also been told that Ameritech has SS7 implemented throughout most all of the Chicago MSA. What's at work here, and which (if either) of the firmware versions is likely to be correct? (And which parts did I remember wrong? :-) 5. The bottom line: given good help at telco (I'm usually pretty lucky), what do I ask them to do so that I get optimum modem performance out of the 56K with my dedicated modem line? If it matters, I understand 847-928 is #5ESS. Cliff Sharp | president@the-dma.org is not my address, it's WA9PDM | just one I noticed today... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 06:35:58 PDT From: Eric Florack Subject: Two Dialups Supported Under 95? I'm starting to hear some low-level static about the ISDN accelerator package that MS is allowing us to download. What I'm hearing is rather striking. It will allow two dialups lines of whatever speed on the same computer, to be dialed into the same source, thereby allowing you to double your throughput ... assuming of course you've got a computer with a bus mouse and the ability to put modems on both ports. This would be consistant with what I know of ISDN lines, and the way they work in individual channels. I wasn't aware the package would allow it with modem channels, though. I guess the driver is written on the basis is a connection is a connection ... (parts is parts, etc) Question: Do most ISP's allow this kind of connection via modem? Do ANY? If so, this may be an answer to my customers who don't have ISDN available at reasonable cost in their area. IE; two dialups are cheaper than an ISDN line and assuming two 56k connections, or even two 33.6 connections, the throughput gains would make the moderate added cost of the added line worthwhile. Comments? /E ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:42:27 -0400 From: Charles Cremer Subject: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID SBC Communications announced 14-August-1997 that slightly more than 50 percent of its Texas customers have subscribed for Caller ID service. This makes Texas the state with the greatest acceptance of the Caller ID service. Either our demographics include a lot of techies or perhaps we are the state most afflicted by telemarketers which create a need for the service. Charles Cremer Austin TX ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 13:37:06 -0700 From: Ramona Chavez Subject: ACD Help Needed Currently I am working an ACD (Automatic Call Distribution) system for a customer that currently has four operators (or agents) answering the phone for a whole department. Simple enough - transferring the calls to a queue for equal distribution of incoming calls. However, we're trying to make this transition as transparent as possible. Not so easy. Let me explain the current way they operate and then what we're trying to achieve through ACD. Currently: An incoming call comes in to the operator station and goes to a hunt group. An operator picks up the call and puts it on hold. She pages for "Joe" to "pick up on line '2-3'" Joe goes to any phone in the building and presses "2-3" and receives his call. Duplicating through ACD: At this point we cannot do so without a very cumbersome process. Because it is in the ACD we do not have hunt groups. We would point the incoming calls to go to a queue. The first available operator would pick up the call. She would then have to transfer the call outside the ACD (a secondary line) pick up the transfer and put it on hold. Two extra steps. Other option - Park the call in the switch: Another cumbersome process. To park the call in the switch (we have a 5ESS 10), the operator would have to access call park by dialing a code , e.g. "#8" then dial the DN that the call will be parked at. The person retrieving the call would have to do the same, dial a code to access call park, then the DN the call is parked at. Has anyone worked with ACD in this manner? Any solutions? The ACD system we have is Pinnacle. Thanks for your help. RAMONA CHAVEZ Telecommunications Systems Department Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory ------------------------------ From: Paul J. Smith Subject: SITA / Sprint X.25 Gateway Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 17:03:35 -0500 I have a SITA X.25 connection and want to send packets to / receive packets from a Sprint X.25 network address. Is there any way to do this? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 18:42:30 -0400 From: John Stafford Subject: Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? CIRCUIT@worldnet.att.net wrote: > I have two separate cordless phones in my residence, both AT&T > cordless phones, of different models. I have recently been > experiencing something strange. When I pick up one or the other phone, > I get a low tone "beepbeep", as if it can't find an open channel. Sounds like the security feature on the phones, the purpose and operation of which are somewhat unclear (apparently, it prevents to a certain extent other phones from dialing out of your base by requiring an internally set code). All I know is mine used to get it on occasion (especially when I was in a much higher density area). Solution is to leave the phone in the cradle for five to ten seconds and the code will reset. There's a FAQ that somewhat describes it on Lucent's website (they took over consumer phone equipment from AT&T). John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:03:36 -0400 From: bleyton@aol.com (Brian Leyton) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? In article , CIRCUIT@worldnet.att.net writes: > I have two separate cordless phones in my residence, both AT&T > cordless phones, of different models. I have recently been > experiencing something strange. When I pick up one or the other phone, > I get a low tone "beepbeep", as if it can't find an open channel. > One of the phones is a 10 channel, the other a 25 channel. Then as > mysteriously as it appeared, it disappears and both phones are fine. > Could this be some sort of FCC regulated interference by someone with > possibly a ham radio? If so, what can I do about this and/or verify > the problem? I have an AT&T 49mhz cordless, and I have exactly the same problem. It seems that if you put it back on the base and pick it up again, then it will sometimes work properly, sometimes not. I chalked it up to interference from another phone, baby monitor or the 50KW radio station around the block. Strange, since it worked fine for months, then started acting up. The last week or so it has worked fine, though. Brian Leyton MIS Manager, Commercial Petroleum Equipment ------------------------------ From: tthiel@slonet.org (Tom Thiel) Subject: Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? Date: 20 Aug 1997 01:51:03 GMT Organization: Call America Internet Services +1 (800) 563-3271 If an AT&T Cordless base unit loses power while the handset is out of the cradle, it will scramble the digital coding. Simply put the handset back in the charging cradle, disconnect the AC power transformer, count to 10, and plug it back in. Everthing should sync back up. Soft of like re-booting your computer. Tom Thiel (tthiel@slonet.org) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #212 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Aug 20 09:13:07 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA28607; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:13:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:13:07 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708201313.JAA28607@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #213 TELECOM Digest Wed, 20 Aug 97 09:13:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 213 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson International Telephone Service - 1964 Forecast, and Today (Mark Cuccia) Checking UART-Registers (Andreas Mueller) Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? (Bill Newkirk) Lucent 56k Drivers to NT4 (billa@jetdrivers.com) AT&T Merlin Questions (Steve Bagdon) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:13:45 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: International Telephone Service - 1964 Forecast, and Today The following submission to TELECOM-Digest includes a transcript of "Numbers 'Round the World", an article which appeared in the Sept/Oct. 1964 issue of one of Bell Labs magazines, "The Reporter" (_not_ the "Bell Labs Record", which was the better known Labs magazine). The article is only one page of text, with a facing page of various dialfaces from different parts of the world. There is a picture of a dialface from: - The United Arab Emirates - Iran - Kuwait (these three had the 'original' Arabic numbering, but the Kuwaiti dial also had the contemporary/Western Arabic numbering as well) - Brazil (numbers only - no letters) - Hong Kong (contemporary "Arabic" numbers in addition to Chinese numbers) - The Isle of Guernsey - in the English Channel (This dial had the _full_ names of exchanges spelled out, 'wrapped' around the following digits, similar to the way the word 'Operator' is usually spelled out wrapped around the '0' on North America's dialfaces) 2 = Central 3 = St. Martin 4 = St. Sampson 5 = Catel 6 = St. Peter (The 1, 7, 8, 9, 0 had no names/letters associated with them.) All six dials pictured on the first page were of the "A.E." variety, with the '0' digit down at the 'six-o'clock' position. In the very center of the arrangements of the six dialfaces is a sketch of one side of a 'globe', with only the latitude and longitude lines drawn. A copy of this article was recently sent to me by one of my Bell Labs retiree friends. Any comments of mine will be enclosed in square brackets []. After the transcription of the original 1964 article, I will have some more information regarding international numbering/dialing and automation from the mid/late 1960's through today (1997). -------(From 1964 article)-------- Someday in the near future, nearly every American will be able to pick up his phone and dial any of the 100-million telephones in the world. Such calls will be made possible by world-wide direct customer dialing. The Bell System is already studying international direct dialing. If the tests go well, customer world-wide will be introduced, on a limited scale, by 1968 and expanded steadily until it becomes available for most of the world's phones in the 1970's. Until recently, a person wanting to make a call overseas would have to contact the overseas operator. She, in turn, called an operator in the foreign country who completed the call. This system was speeded up by connecting U.S. overseas operators directly with telephones in England, Belgium, France, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Austria. Later this year, direct operator dialing will be expanded to Italy and Japan. The first major step to eliminate operators altogether on station-to- station calls was taken at a meeting of delegates from 68 member nations of the International Telecommunications Union in Rome, Italy. They gave preliminary approval to a plan which assigns telephone numbers to each country. The plan calls for dividing the globe into eight major dialing-code areas. For example, all areas adjacent to and including Australia will have a two or three digit code beginning with 6. Thus, tiny Niue Island in the South Pacific, with 102 telephones, was given the code number 668. [In 1964, Niue was _actually_ assigned +688, _not_ +668, as Thailand has had +66 ever since 1964. Niue's country code was changed from +688 to +683 sometime after 1976 and before 1980. By 1980, +688 was assigned to Tuvalu, formerly known as the Ellice Islands of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands. Gilbert Islands, now known as Kiribati, became +686.] Calling abroad would then be as simple as calling from New York to Chicago. A New Yorker calling Paris, for example, would first dial a domestic code number to connect him with the overseas system. [From the US and Canada, this has been 011+ for direct dialed 'station' international calls]. Then he'd dial '33', France's [country] code, plus the local [domestic/national] number he's calling. The Rome agreement also provides that a customer will only dial a maximum of 12-digits once he's connected with the international network. [i.e. 12-digits _after_ the international/overseas 'exit' code. The possible maximum number of 'significant' digits, as per ITU standards, has increased to 15-digits beginning 01-January-1997. This date had been set about ten years prior, and hopefully most of the telephone networks in various countries have been preparing their networks and/or local originating switch translations for the increase in significant maximum digits of the worldwide number. Some countries _already_ have worldwide numbers over the 'old' 12-digit maximum of significant digits.] To make this possible, two of the eight areas will have a single initial digit [country-code]: North America (except Panama and Cuba) will have the single digit '1'; the Soviet Union will have the single digit '7'. Thus it will someday be possible to reach the Kremlin by dialing '7' and then the Kremlin's number 444-772. [Moscow's local numbering is now seven-digits, and Moscow's national city/area code is '095'.] [Throughout the later 1960's, the Central American countries were assigned their _own_ country codes of the +50X form, as well, some _other_ Caribbean/Atlantic islands (Haiti, French Islands, Dutch Islands including Aruba) have also been assigned their _own_ country codes +59X or +50X. Mexico is also not really part of the NANP (+1), and was assigned +52 as their country code around 1968. At one time, back in the later 1950's and throughout the 1960's, AT&T/Bell-System _really_ had wanted to incorporate Mexico as part of the NANP/DDD network. However, except for the 'pseudo' NPA access to Mexico City (and environs) as +1-90-5-etc from 1969/70 through 1991, the fifteen or so northwest Mexican border towns _really_ were a part of the AT&T/Bell-System NANP/DDD network as +1-903- from 1962/63 through 1980. In October of 1980, these border towns were 'evolved' to the Mexican (+52) numbering and dialing plan (as +52-6nx-x-etc) and now used 'pseudo' NPA access as +1-70-6-nxx-etc, the 'pseudo' NANP 70-6 access being eliminated in 1991 along with 90-5. When pseudo NANP 70-6 access was in effect from 1980 through 1991, _much_more_ of Mexico's own +52-6nx-x-etc. was pseudo-NANP dialable as 70-6 than was dialable under +1-903-. Also, Mexico's _own_ network and numbering and dialing plans always had developed _separately_ from the NANP / DDD / AT&T (Bell-System) network, although for years, AT&T had really wanted to completely include Mexico into the NANP, +1.] There are some problems, of course. The global dialing agreement assumes that all-number dialing will completely replace central office name designations. Americans use 24 Roman letters on their dial, but the Russians use Cyrillic letters. Translation problems would be innumerable. There are other subtle differences as well. The Danes, for example, have no 'W' on their dial, making it difficult [for them] to dial a WAlnut exchange [in the US/Canada or even UK]. Americans have no 'Q' on their dial, so dialing a ROQuette exchange in Paris could prove troublesome. On the English [UK, and French] dial, the letter 'O' is in the zero [finger]hole, while on the American dial the letter 'O' is in the '6' [finger]hole. Most countries, such as Sweden and New Zealand have no letters at all on their dials. Conversion to all-number calling will eliminate such problems in most countries of the world. About 85-per-cent of the phones outside the United States are already on all-number calling. In the U.S., the switch to all-number calling will be two-thirds completed by the first of 1965. But some Middle Eastern phones will still have troubles. They use Persian and Arabic symbols. Some automatic number translating equipment will also have to be installed. In Sweden, for example, the zero is at the top of the dial, and consequently triggers a single electrical [dial]pulse rather than ten electrical [dial]pulses as in most other countries. New Zealanders will really confuse things. They completely reverse the numbers on their dial. Special equipment will be needed to translate these differences. [Of course, most toll, and virtually _all_ international/overseas inter-office signalling doesn't use dialpulses, but has always used a _variety_ of (tone) signalling, such as MF-KP (for international purposes, the ITU/CCITT System #5 was standardized, and is an 'extension' of the AT&T NANP/DDD MF system), DTMF (touchtone), R-2, etc. In the 1970's, CCITT System #6 was being developed and standardized, which is a 'common-channel' system. Both CCITT System #6 and the more current System #7 (SS7) is 'out-of-band' with all of the signalling trunks between two switching offices or a signalling node or database bundled together in a data connection. Dialpulse signalling between international points has never really been used to any significant extent.] There are other minor details to be worked out. Two reflect the Cold War situations. The ITU wanted separate codes for East and West Germany. The West Germans, however, still hoping for reunification, insist on a single German code. And Red China [sic], although not allowed to send a delegate to the meeting, was assigned a country code, 86. [East Germany was politically reunified with West Germany, circa 1990. Shortly after that, +37 for the East was consolidated into (West) Germany's +49. When mainland (communist) China became 'recognized', Taiwan became 'de-recognized'. Today's country-code list indicates the island of Taiwan as +86-6, as if it were part of mainland China's country-code. In practice, in dialing and routing, most countries of the world indicate Taiwan as its own country-code, +886. The current ITU country-code lists indicate +886 as 'reserved', with _no_ footnotes. +38 Yugoslavia has split up both politically and telephonically. Czechoslovakia (+42) first split politically a few short years ago, and earlier this year, telephonically, as +420 Czech Republic and +421 Slovakia. Starting in the early 1990's, the former Soviet 'republics', one-by-one, have been assigned their own country codes, being activated for inbound access from outside locations at later dates. There are many other examples of how the recent (later 1980's, and 1990's) political situation has affected the telephone country-code situation, but assignment and activation of particular country codes has varied over the decades, in general. Dave Leibold's "History of Country Codes" in the TELECOM-Archives as well as at his own website gives more details.] A.T.&.T. estimates that direct dialing, plus more circuitry, will be major factors boosting U.S. international telephone messages to nearly 100 million calls a year by 1980, or about 20 times the present level. [end of original 1964 article] ----------------------------------------- In June 1966, in Philadelphia PA, at an IEEE meeting, there was a demonstration of customer international dialing. Last Summer, I submitted a post to TELECOM Digest regarding this demonstration, where AT&T Long-Lines and other Bell System personnel _dialed_ calls to Europe on one particular day of this IEEE convention. A #5XB office (LOcust) was converted to handle the international dialing, which remained in effect for one or two days. Everyone served out of the LOcust #5XB office had the capability to dial to the handful of countries in Europe which were dialed in the demonstration. However, 'normal' IDDD dialing procedures weren't used. Switzerland, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and possibly France were all dialed at the IEEE convention in Philadelphia. The only numbering or dialing examples that I found publicized in newspaper articles was for the call to an ITU representative in Geneva, Switzerland, dialed as a 'pseudo' NANP ten-digit call: 200-223-3011, and _not_ as the future (standard) IDDD dialing string: 011 + 41 + 22 + 23-30-11. Even the articles at that time indicated that 'standard' dialing procedures were _not_ being used that day for the international dialing demos. For several months in beginning in March, 1967, several _high_ volume international/overseas customers in midtown Manhattan (New York) such as CBS, NBC, ABC, Mutual Radio, AP, UPI, some travel bureaus and travel related companies (airlines, etc), all served out of the same #5XB office, were able to dial to some international overseas points. The first locations were only London (England) and Paris (France), using _standard_ IDDD dialing procedures (011+ country-code + city- code + local-number, for station. "Special Billing" calls, such as 'person', collect, credit-card, etc. were also possible, using 01+ as the access code rather than 011+). Other (major) cities in the UK and France, as well as other European countries were added to the list of customer dialable locations before the end of the experiment. From what I've been told, the IDDD experiment was only to last three, maybe four months, but it ran a bit longer, probably six to eight months. However, the trial period did come to an end, until 'regular, officially tariffed' IDDD could be officially started, sometime circa 1970. From what I've been told, In the interim these heavy users of international/overseas telephone service were provided with some (toll-free) _non_-published 800- numbers to reach the International/ Overseas centers in New York City and White Plains NY. They would come in on a special trunk to the cordboards, identify themselves, and could be provided with 'special' treatment. Other customers who needed to place overseas calls would have to dial the local/toll '0' operator and ask for 'overseas' to whatever particular country. The '0' local/toll operator would then hand the call over to the overseas cordboard operator in a particular overseas operating center in the US (or Canada). However, beginning in the later 1960's, since there already was some form of automation to certain specific countries, even many (originating) local cordboard operators could 'dial' (key) directly to those specific overseas locations. This would be handled by two- stage dialing/signaling/keying. Beginning in 1970, 'regular tariffed' customer IDDD began in New York City, from several high-volume #5XB offices in Manhattan. Also, the first electronic switching offices were being installed (#1ESS), which had customer IDDD software translations and outward signaling as part of its generics. Slowly, originating customer IDDD was being made available throughout the Bell System. Even Step (SxS) offices would be able to originate 011+ (and 01+) calls, _IF_ their local operator services included a TSPS/TOPS. The ESS-like operator switch acted like a 'buffer' which collected all of the customer dialed digits (dialpulses) in realtime, and did the proper translations and 2-stage signaling through the DDD network, to the gateway switch. However, #5XB offices required much additional hardwired hardware to provide customer IDDD, and it was decided early to abandon IDDD implementation from such switches (even though the _very_first_ switches in the Bell System to provide experimental or actual originating customer IDDD were #5XB!). It was also intended that many #5XB offices would soon be replaced by ESS/Digital offices, anyhow. (Similarly, it was _rare_ to find fg.D 10-xxx+ originating Equal Access from #5XB offices in the later 1980's). The number of countries or country codes which could be reached by originating customer IDDD from the US (and Canada) has steadily increased over the decades. There have been some instances where a country (code) was made customer dialable from the US, but later was _removed_ from customer IDDD, probably due to governmental politics. +7 USSR, for the capital of Moscow (only), city-code '095' was customer IDDD-able for about a year, in the early 1980's, but then was removed from customer IDDD. Similarly, there was a brief period where +964 Iraq was customer IDDD-able in the early 1980's, but then it wasn't. And even though Canada and the US are both part of the NANP, there have been countries customer dialable from Canada, but not as such from the US (Cuba, for instance). Also, there had been situations where another country could dial _to_ the US/Canada, but not be customer dialable _from_ the US/Canada. These days, 1997, _virtually_every_ country or country code is customer IDDD-able _from_ the US, at least via AT&T. This includes +7 Russia, +964 Iraq, as well as some countries which were dialable from Canada but not the US (+53 Cuba, +850 North Korea), and certain (Communist) countries which, at one time or another, 'officially' did _NOT_ even have telephone service at all with the US (such as +355 Albania, +84 Vietnam, +855 Cambodia, +856 Laos, +86 mainland China, etc). Also, Burma +95 was not customer IDDD-able from the US until just a few years ago. Every 'assigned' ITU country-code in Africa, in the +2NX range is now customer-dialable from the US, including +290 (St. Helena, which didn't have a country code of its own until the early 1990's), +249 Sudan and +252 Somalia (both of which became customer IDDD-able about a year or two ago). The only countries/regions which from the US (and Canada) remain 'operator-handled' (via AT&T from the US, and the Stentor local telco operator in association with Teleglobe and/or AT&T from Canada) that I am aware of are: Afghanistan (ITU country-code +93) Easter Island Pitcairn Island Western/Spanish Sahara Tokelau (ITU country-code +690) Midway/Wake Afghanistan has had +93 as its assigned country-code +93 since the original ITU/CCITT worldwide assignments in 1964, but still remains non-dialable operator-handled (from the US), although I think that it can be dialed from some European countries. Easter Island, located in the eastern South Pacific, is politically part of Chile. I don't know if when it becomes automated/dialable, it will have its 'own' country code, or if it will be part of Chile's +56 country code. Pitcairn Island, also located in the eastern South Pacific - see my recent article in TELECOM Digest for its telephone status. Western/Spanish Sahara, located on the northwest coast of Africa, is occupied by +212 Morocco (also presently unused +210 and +211), but also claimed by bordering +222 Mauritania. I don't know if this region is going to eventually get its own ITU country code in the +29X range, or if it will become dialable under (one of) Morocco's country-codes - or maybe +222 for Mauritania. Tokelau is a small island group located in the western/central South Pacific, administered by New Zealand. It has had +690 assigned since sometime after 1980 and before 1984. I don't know what its telephone status is - does it even have some form of small manual/magneto local telephone system with HF-Radio connection to the rest of the world? I _have_ been told that they are supposed to be getting a satellite connection. I don't know if this is going to be a +872 Inmarsat dialed code (similar to what Pitcairn also has), or a dialable connection under its own +690 country-code. Midway/Wake - I understand that _some_ of the telephones on these two islands are 'FX-loop-connected' with the PBX/Centrex of Pearl Harbor in Honolulu (Hawaii), and you can dial to these lines, _IF_ you happen to know to thousands/hundreds digits or -xxxx line number ranges within the Pearl Harbor PBX/Centrex. But AT&T still maintains an operator handled connection to Midway/Wake as the 'publicized' way to reach theses two islands, by telephone. For at least twenty years, there were two 'mark-sense' billing identification codes listed in routing/rating documents of AT&T (and later Bellcore): 808-998 Wake and 808-999 Midway. These are _not_ dialing codes for customers nor even operators, but rather billing identification codes. The Bell-System (AT&T) operator would reach these calls via the (GTE-Hawaii) Honolulu inward operator, 808+121. AT&T's International Operator Center, located in Pittsburgh (PA), is used for placing calls to these non-dialable international/overseas locations. It is most likely still a manual cordboard with HF-Radio trunks, 'delayed-call' trunks, and ringdown trunks. Even if this center still uses a cordboard, there are also (computerized) OSPS-like terminals at each operator's position. And while International Maritime Satellite service is automated with the country codes +871 through +874 (for various ocean regions), AT&T (Pittsburgh) can still provide manual operator-handled connections to "high-seas" ships as well as to aircraft. There are also some various miscellaneous islands in the South Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. I don't know if these islands have any human population, and even if they do, I don't know if there is any actual local (magneto/manual) telephone service. From 'west-to-east', these islands are: South Orkney Island, South Georgia Island, South Sandwich Island (all east of the Falkland Islands (+500) in the central South Atlantic, and all associated with the UK). Tristin de Cunha (in the eastern South Atlantic, associated with +291 St. Helena, which is in turn associated with the UK). Bouvert Island (in the eastern South Atlantic, politically associated with Norway). Prince Edward Island (in the western southern Indian Ocean and politically associated with South Africa - not to be confused with Canada's Prince Edward Island province). Crozet Island (in the southern Indian Ocean, politically associated with France; there are also about three other "French" islands nearby). South McDonald Island, Heard Island (in the southern Indian Ocean, politically associated with Australia; Australia does have country-code +672 for the Australian External Territories, but I don't know if these two islands are part of +672). And in the eastern South Pacific, just east of Easter Island, also associated with Chile, is "Sala y Gomez Island". Finally, while a country-code might be dialable doesn't necessarily mean that every location _within_ that code or country is dialable. Such calls (from the US) must be placed through the AT&T '00' domestic toll operator. In most cases, where the country-code 'itself' is customer-dialable, the originating '00' operator can reach the 'inward' operator in that desired country, who will then 'ringdown' an operator in (or near) the called location/village, or _even_ directly ringdown the desired customer. But sometimes, it might be necessary to hand the call over to the AT&T international operator in Pittsburgh. Even within the NANP (and also +52 Mexico) there still remain a large number of remote NON-customer-dialable (nor operator 'dialable' locations, mostly in Nevada, California, Alaska, and remote parts of Canada. Many of these isolated outposts are forest / ranger / fire / etc. stations, with connections with the outside world via HF-Radio. Some of them might still be ring-down party-lines. Calls with these locations must still be placed via the AT&T (or when calling from Canada, the local/toll Stentor operator), who reaches an 'inward' operator near the desired location, who will then 'ringdown' the called line or party. So, while most every (though still not yet all) country/territory in the world is now customer dialable, it seems that there will always be a number of miscellaneous isolated remote outposts here and there, which if there even exists some form of local telephone (or electronic communications), calls to such points must still be placed through an operator, for a still undeterminable period of time. ---- NWORLASKCG0 (BellSouth #1AESS Class-5 Local "Seabrook" 504-24x-) NWORLAIYCM1 (BellSouth-Mobility Hughes-GMH-2000 Cellular-MTSO NOL) NWORLAMA0GT (BellSouth DMS-100/200 fg-B/C/D Accss-Tandem "Main" 504+) NWORLAMA20T (BellSouth DMS-200 TOPS:Opr-Srvcs-Tandem "Main" 504+053+) NWORLAMA04T (AT&T #4ESS Class-2 Toll 060-T / 504-2T "Main" 504+) JCSNMSPS06T (AT&T #5ESS OSPS:Operator-Services-Tandem 601-0T 601+121) MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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: Andreas Mueller Subject: Checking UART-Registers Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 22:58:44 -0400 Organization: GSO-FH Nuernberg Hi!! I've got the following UART-Problem: I want to find out whether there is an established connection via a modem or not (only outgoing calls should be registered). This checking should run permanently as long as the program is running. In that case, is it sufficient to check the UART-modem status register for the following bit settings???: DCD = 1 DSR = 1 CTS = 1 all others = 0 Hope there's anyone out there knowing an answer :) Please answer by EMail! Thanks, Andreas Mueller E-Mail: unix135@ai.fh-nuernberg.de Homepage: http://www1.ai.fh-nuernberg.de/~unix135 ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: Cordless Phones Interference, FCC Guidelines/Followup? Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 18:15:42 -0400 Organization: Rockwell Collins, Inc. Reply-To: wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com CIRCUIT@worldnet.att.net wrote: > I have two separate cordless phones in my residence, both AT&T > cordless phones, of different models. I have recently been > experiencing something strange. When I pick up one or the other phone, > I get a low tone "beepbeep", as if it can't find an open channel. Does the problem continue if one of the phones is turned off (and I mean off, not just hung up)? (Do this while the problem is present.) I am thinking that the phones are hearing each other and both trying the same method to find a spot. > One of the phones is a 10 channel, the other a 25 channel. Then as > mysteriously as it appeared, it disappears and both phones are fine. Does this have a schedule? (Like only during the week and not on the weekends?) > Could this be some sort of FCC regulated interference by someone with > possibly a ham radio? It's probably not amateur radio. Bill Newkirk Collins General Aviation Division Publications Department Rockwell Collins, Inc., Melbourne Florida wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com ------------------------------ From: billa@jetdrivers.com Subject: Lucent 56k Drivers to NT4 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 22:55:10 GMT Organization: Internet Partners, Inc. I just bought an HP PAvillion. Anyone know where to go to get drivers for NT for the built-in Lucent k56flex winmodem? Thanks. ------------------------------ From: bagdon@rust.net (Steve Bagdon) Subject: AT&T Merlin questions Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 21:04:37 GMT Organization: Ford Motor Company Reply-To: bagdon@rust.net After three month of learning all about 'northern' homes and how they are constructed, I have finally made headway in wiring up my home. Took me that long (off and on) to find the proper place to run the cable from the basement to the attic (interior walls are a maze!). When I'm finished, I figure I'll have almost 3000feet of Cat III/V and RJ-6 cable, so I wanted to make sure it was run correctly. Questions: Can anyone see any reason to wire up my networking cable with Cat V vs. Cat III? The local Greybar wants $77/1000ft of Cat III, but $280/1000ft for Cat V. I know it's good to plan for the future, but this project is getting out of hand! The phone cable will be Cat III (regular POTS lines, possible ISDN or other digital service in the future, probably other key sets as my interests change). I don't plan on running 100BaseT in my house in the next couple of decades, and all the techs I spoke with say Cat III is fine for 10BaseT. Any opinions? Should I just bit the bullet and pay the extra money, for the 1% off chance I'll need Cat V? Or is the general consensus that I can live with Cat III? Anybody have a cheap source for more stations for my Merlin system? I have (2) SP-34s I'd like to trade for (1) BIS-34, or maybe (2) BIS-34s plus cash. Also in search of a bunch of BIS-10s or BIS-20s. I'd like a 90day warranty on the BIS-34(s), but the BIS-10/20s only have to work when they get here (no DOAs!). Thanks, to anyone else who has suvived a major wiring job like this, and lived to tell about it, and has some suggestions for me! Steve B. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #213 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Aug 21 09:22:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA26834; Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:22:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:22:03 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708211322.JAA26834@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #214 TELECOM Digest Thu, 21 Aug 97 09:22:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 214 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Easter Isl. / Chile: Telephone Numbering/Dialling Update (Mark Cuccia) Ameritech's Annoyance Call Bureau (Adam H. Kerman) Coax Cable - How Does it Work? (Lisa Hancock) "Ground Start" Lines (Ted Klugman) Bellcore-NANPA Webpage Update: Changed CA NPA Test Numbers (Mark Cuccia) Looking for Wiltel Service Techs (Cliff Scheller) DNS NOI Notable Filing List on Web (Craig A. Johnson) Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID (phelper) Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID (Will Nott) Re: International Telephone Service - 1964 Forecast, and Today (Ed Ellers) Re: Callback Banned in South Africa (A.J. Levy) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 13:39:46 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Easter Isl. / Chile: Telephone Numbering/Dialling Update Easter Island (known in the native Polynesian tongue as "Rapanui"), that mysterious island of huge stone face-statues, located in the South Pacific Ocean, several thousand miles due-south of El Paso TX, several hundred miles east of Pitcairn, and several thousand miles west of Chile, is politically associated with Chile. Associated with Easter Island is "Sala y Gomez" island, a few hundred miles to the east, but these are uninhabited. In Spanish, Easter Island is known as "Isla de Pascua", and in other Latin/Roman languages (when translated into English) would be known as 'Paschal Island', the official name of "Easter" in Catholic areas is known (in English) as Paschal-tide. In French, the island is still known as "Ile de Paques", with a 'circumflex' (or 'up-carrot') symbol above the /a/ in Paques. The island is called "Easter Island" since the first recorded European landing was on Easter Sunday of 1722 by Dutchman Jacob Roggeveen. Easter Island became a part of Chile on 9-Sept-1888. Telephonically, Easter Island has been indicated as _non_ dialable (from the US), with all calls having to be routed via the AT&T domestic/toll '00' Operator, who can either call the Santiago (Chile) inward operator (ENTEL), who then rings forward to Easter Island, _or_ the (originating) AT&T operator can hand the call over to the AT&T IOC (Overseas) operator in Pittsburgh PA. I did some websearches, and found a few websites with information on Easter Island. One of the better ones was "Rapanui (Easter Island)", authored by Dr. Grant McCall, Center for South Pacific Studies, University of New South Wales, Sydney, AUSTRALIA. http://www2.hawaii.edu/~ogden/piir/pacific/Rapanui.html Under the section on "Communications" on that website, it mentions that ENTEL (Chile's national telco/carrier) has provided fully automated service of about 400 main stations, and that since June 1992, Easter Island has automated service _to_ most parts of the world, but calls _from_ other parts of the world (and I assume even from within mainland Chile), the call must be handled by a Santiago ENTEL operator. There are telephone numbers on Easter Island which are indicated on that webpage, all of the form 223XXX. The remaining XXX portion of the Easter Island numbers of the form 1XX, 2XX, 3XX (and I would assume 4XX and maybe 5XX). The AT&T operator still maintains that from the US, calls to Easter Island must be operator-handled, but Dave Leibold informed me of some Bell-Canada / Stentor / Teleglobe tariff (re-)filings with the CRTC, dated in Spring, 1997, that _from_Canada_, Easter Island is now customer-dialable, using Chile's +56 country-code. I checked with the (Bell-Canada/Stentor/Teleglobe) Canada-Direct operator (from the US, reached as 1-800-555-1111), who told me that _from_ Canada_, one dials 01(1)+56+32+local-number to reach Easter Island. She also told me that a national number in Chile could be 'no longer than eight digits total', but didn't have the 'exact' possible length of digits used on Easter Island. I also checked the Telecom Archives for WZ-5's country and city code listings, and found that within Chile (+56), there were many cities/towns/villages under +56-32-, and other city-codes in Chile also had several locations under each code. And, I checked with several other "home-country-direct" operators to see if they had any customer or operator numbering/dialing info for Easter Island (the 1-800- numbers listed are available from the US, and _maybe_ from Canada): 1-800-682-2878, Telstra's Australia-Direct 1-800-248-0064, N.Zed Telecom's New Zealand-Direct 1-800-445-5667, BT's UK-Direct (note that: -2878 for Telstra/Australia spells out 'AUST'; -0064 for NZ-Telecom ends '64', New Zealand's country-code; -445- for BT's UK-Direct begins with '44', UK's country-code) Each of these operators told me that Easter Island _is_indeed_ customer-dialable from their respective countries, as if one were dialing to Chile, as: +56 + 32 + 100-xxx. I haven't yet tried to dial anything in this format via AT&T, MCI, or Sprint, so I don't know if such a dial-string is considered 'valid' by the US-based carriers. And I did call ENTEL's Chile-Direct (from the US, 1-800-552-0056, note that Chile's country-code '56' is part of the last four digits), and first heard some prompts "en-Espanol". One of them was to press 'cero', which I did, and cut-through to a live ENTEL operator, who I assume was in Santiago. She answered "en-Espanol", but she did speak English as well. I asked her about Easter Island, and she told me that _indeed_ it is customer-dialable from mainland Chile, and is numbered as +56-32-100-xxx. She told me that _maybe_ AT&T isn't allowing or encouraging customer dialing to Easter Island because there are very few (switched) trunk circuits between the island and the mainland. And when I mentioned that I had seen references to numbers on Easter Island as 223-xxx, she told me that early this year they were _changed_ to 100-xxx. She also told me that all national numbering in Chile is 'fixed' at eight digits total. Santiago (and vicinity) has city/area-code '2', followed by a fixed seven-digit number. All other locations in Chile have two-digit city/area-codes, followed by fixed six-digit numbers. Of course, for Easter Island, since there are less than 1000 lines, it _might_ be possible that calls are locally dialed on a three-digit basis. And since most of the 2-digit city/area-codes have several cities/towns/villages as indicated in Chile's numbering file in the Telecom Archives, I guess that there are several individual local charge areas, each indicated by the first two or three digits (i.e., central-office / exchange /switch code) of the six-digit 'local' number. Also, the file in the Archives indicates city-code '9' for cellular/mobile, but I forgot to ask the ENTEL/Chile operator about the current numbering/dialing of wireless phones. Chile's ENTEL website, http://www.entelchile.net/ has a "Telecom" section, http://www.entelchile.net/entelprod1607/homeproducto.html which is mostly in Spanish, but there are some sections available also available in English. From their telecom pages, it seems that their local service-codes and toll access-prefixes are of the "1XX" format. Domestic toll-free numbers seem to be a total of nine-digits of the form 800-xxx-xxx. From the Easter Island webpage (mentioned earlier) with telephone numbers of the 223XXX form, the telco department numbers on Easter Island were: 223103 (now 100-103 ?) Directory Enquiries 223182 (now 100-102 ?) Booking an Overseas call 223183 (now 100-183 ?) Booking a Chile domestic call 223202 (now 100-202 ?) Telephone Business Office and +56-2-690-2674, a service to send a FAX to anyone on Easter (Rapanui) Island. Since this appears to be a Santiago-based number, I assume there is some form of electronic-relay or postal-courier (or maybe telex/email?) to get the fax/message transmission to the person/company actually on Easter Island. ------------------- NWORLASKCG0 (BellSouth #1AESS Class-5 Local "Seabrook" 504-24x-) NWORLAIYCM1 (BellSouth-Mobility Hughes-GMH-2000 Cellular-MTSO NOL) NWORLAMA0GT (BellSouth DMS-100/200 fg-B/C/D Accss-Tandem "Main" 504+) NWORLAMA20T (BellSouth DMS-200 TOPS:Opr-Srvcs-Tandem "Main" 504+053+) NWORLAMA04T (AT&T #4ESS Class-2 Toll 060-T / 504-2T "Main" 504+) JCSNMSPS06T (AT&T #5ESS OSPS:Operator-Services-Tandem 601-0T 601+121) MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:49:44 CDT From: Adam H. Kerman Subject: Ameritech's Annoyance Call Bureau It seems that Pac Bell goes out of its way to help, but Ameritech no longer does. Three or four years ago, a residential customer could simply call "611" (aargh, a number regulated out of existance) and report a problem with a fax machine attempting to send to a voice line. They were most cooperative. If the newly-introduced "*57" feature could be used to capture the fax machine's number, a maintenance technician would immediately take care of the problem and give the offending office a call. He would waive the fee. I think Ameritech was motivated by 2 factors: They were trying to be good corporate citizens and they were attempting to encourage more widespread acceptance of fax machines, especially in homes. The Annoyance Call Bureau always insisted on a police report filed before they would take action, which apparently wouldn't be anything more than forwarding the information to the police investigator. Clearly, it would be unethical of a telephone consumer to file a police report when malice isn't suspected. Then, Ameritech changed policy a couple of years ago. The maintenance techicians refused to pull the *57 record, and would only offer maintenance traps on the line. At the time, I was having a problem with fax calls coming in around 10 am every few days, making several tries, and then giving up. I guess my line was being polled. By the time the maintenance trap could be set up (oh, no more than three or four hours), there would be nothing to trap. I wasn't about to give Ameritech carte blanche to leave one up for weeks at a time. Lately, I've noticed that Repair won't handle the situation at all, and refers callers to the Annoyance Bureau, which would require a police report. Fax machines eventually became so widely accepted that even I bought one. Since I installed it, I have not been troubled by even a single fax sent in error. Ah, the wonders of technology. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Coax Cable - How Does it Work? Date: 21 Aug 1997 04:09:27 GMT Organization: Net Access BBS I know what coaxial cable is -- we use lots of it at work to connect our terminals. (Coax cable has a center conductor surrounded by an insulator tube, which in turn is surrounded by a braided conductor.) The big advantage of coax is that it can accomodate a much larger "bandwidth" (volume of traffic) than traditional twisted pair wires. For instance, you can multiplex many more telephone conversations or television signals (TV takes up a lot of bandwidth) on coax. Could someone explain how it works, in laymen's terms? How does the physical arrangement enable it to have so much capacity. Also, when was it invented? Was it invented by the Bell System or someone else? Lastly, has fiber-optic cable made coax obsolete? (If I understand fiber-optic correctly, all it is is an extremely single high speed digital pulse transmission, with ultra pure glass fibers and a laser allowing an extremely fine pulse duration and no noise interference. How they can turn a laser on and off so fast that the giga-Hz (billions per second) pulse rates is beyond me! ------------------------------ From: ted_klugman@usa.net.NOSPAM (Ted Klugman) Subject: "Ground Start" Lines Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 15:01:54 GMT Put simply, what is a "ground start" line? We have an 800 number that forwards to a four-line hunt group for our support department. All four of these lines are "ground start" (as opposed to "loop start"?) and the only way I've been able to get a dialtone on these lines is to connect a phone to them and then short one of the wires to another point on the 66-block (shorting the pair does nothing). The only assumption that I can make is that they were installed to be incoming-only lines. Our phone system can't create this "ground start", so they never get a dialtone. Am I on the right track? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If they were intended to be incoming- only lines, then when you went off hook on those lines you would detect 'battery' on the line but never get a dialtone, even after the wire shorting process you describe. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:16:38 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Bellcore-NANPA Webpage Update: Changed CA NPA Test Numbers Bellcore NANPA's website (http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/) is updated as of 18-August-1997. No 'new' announcements of NPA's nor dates, but the test number for Mississippi's 601 split-off of 228 has been 'officially' announced as 228-388-8186. BellSouth has had this test number active for about a month now, which _can_ be reached via NPA 601, since 228-388 is an already existing prefix as 601-228, until mandatory dialing of 228 takes place. However, there are modifications to the _test_ numbers for any already announced new NPAs for California in 1998. Bellcore NANPA's webpage for 1997 PLs (Planning Letters, at US$10.00 each) indicates that PL#80 is now available, which is to indicate the _changed_ test numbers for California's new (1998) NPAs. (Webpage listing the PLs is http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/97ils.html) The main new NPA page (http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/newarea.html) also indicates the updates for these four California 1998 NPA splits, and you can click to the individual split-info pages for the following details. Only the "NXX" portion of the test number is changing. The dates of permissive and mandatory dialing, as well as the last four digits (-xxxx) of the NPA test number remain the same. All of these (as have most of the test numbers for California's new 1997 NPAs) use a 'line' number of: '0' plus the numericals of the new NPA. 510/925: permissive 14-Mar-1998, mandatory 12-Sep-1998 CHANGED TEST NUMBER: 925-341-0925, to be activated 14-Feb-1998 (was to be 925-666-0925) 714/949: permissive 18-Apr-1998, mandatory 17-Oct-1998 CHANGED TEST NUMBER: 949-482-0949, to be activated 16-Mar-1998 (was to be 949-777-0949) 213/323: permissive 13-Jun-1998, mandatory 16-Jan-1999 CHANGED TEST NUMBER: 323-946-0323, to be activated 09-Mar-1998 (was to be 323-999-0323) 408/831: permissive 11-Jul-1998, mandatory 20-Feb-1999 CHANGED TEST NUMBER: 831-669-0831, to be activated 13-June-1999 ------------- NWORLASKCG0 (BellSouth #1AESS Class-5 Local "Seabrook" 504-24x-) NWORLAIYCM1 (BellSouth-Mobility Hughes-GMH-2000 Cellular-MTSO NOL) NWORLAMA0GT (BellSouth DMS-100/200 fg-B/C/D Accss-Tandem "Main" 504+) NWORLAMA20T (BellSouth DMS-200 TOPS:Opr-Srvcs-Tandem "Main" 504+053+) NWORLAMA04T (AT&T #4ESS Class-2 Toll 060-T / 504-2T "Main" 504+) JCSNMSPS06T (AT&T #5ESS OSPS:Operator-Services-Tandem 601-0T 601+121) MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__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: Cliff Scheller Organization: http://www.compuquestinc.com Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 08:43:22 -0600 Subject: Looking for Wiltel Service Techs I'm trying to make contact with PBX Service Technicians from Wiltel, or even Centel, before they "got together". If anyone on the list is or has been involved in the customer-site PBX maintenance activities at Wiltel, please email me privately, as there is no need to bother the list. Thanks, Cliff Scheller http://www.compuquestinc.com ------------------------------ From: Craig A. Johnson Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:18:49 +0000 Subject: DNS NOI Notable Filing List on Web Pat, FYI. You may want to post this; it is a fairly comprehensive catalog of the DNS filings. Best, Craig ------------------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:14:19 -0400 Reply-to: amr@chaos.com From: Tony Rutkowski Subject: DNS NOI notable filing list on web At the site , there is a structured list of most known "notable" filings in the DNS proceeding - all in individual html versions that have either been provided as URLs or files, or converted from the submitted filing. The NTIA server concatenates all the filings of the day into a daily file as well as a larger master concatenation - which makes it difficult to be aware of and access specific filings. Caveats: 1) the large number of filings on the last day, 18 August, are not listed - unless otherwise separately announced on diverse lists or provided. These will be added when they're provided on the NTIA site or otherwise made known. 2) There are many dozens of form letters and what are little more than short EMail messages. These are not individually listed. A number of submissions representative of "the trenches" or otherwise unusual have also been included. 3) Any submission not in this compendium will be listed and linked (or probably even hosted) if the information is provided. Cheers, Tony ------------------------------ From: phelper@onramp.net Subject: Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:04:54 GMT Organization: OnRamp Technologies, Inc.; ISP > SBC Communications announced 14-August-1997 that slightly more than 50 > percent of its Texas customers have subscribed for Caller ID service. > This makes Texas the state with the greatest acceptance of the Caller > ID service. > Either our demographics include a lot of techies or perhaps we are the > state most afflicted by telemarketers which create a need for the > service. Could be. I'm sick as hell of telemarketers. I'm cussin' them out now. I generally don't answer the phone if CID reports BLOCKED, OUT OF AREA, PRIVATE, or whatever. I only answer the phone if I see a name/phone number I recognize. Yet there are a couple of businesses that call me over and over and over, and have been for months. They never leave a message. I'm just so tired of telemarketers. When they do get me, it's just so inconvenient and they are always hasslers. Nope, I don't take it anymore. On one side note, I don't use AT&T since I went to work for their competition. I liked AT&T, but I just wanted to show a little pride in the company I work for. AT&T calls about twice a month wanting me to switch back. They hassle me. They just don't want to accept "no thank you." I always figured I'd switch back to AT&T when I left this job, but now I'll never switch to AT&T. Their telemarketers lost this customer. I don't want any flames regarding telemarketers as people who need work or people who have families to support. Prostitutes and drug dealers fall in to that category too. If I was out of work, I'd never whore myself out to a telemarketing firm. ------------------------------ From: Will Nott Subject: Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID Organization: Compaq Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 20:25:23 GMT Charles Cremer wrote in article : > SBC Communications announced 14-August-1997 that slightly more than 50 > percent of its Texas customers have subscribed for Caller ID service. > This makes Texas the state with the greatest acceptance of the Caller > ID service. > Either our demographics include a lot of techies or perhaps we are the > state most afflicted by telemarketers which create a need for the > service. Being one involved, I'd judge it's largely the latter, but coupled with the fact that SW Bell had an agressive campaign to sell the service, even using tactics which might be described as "preying on fear" (really got my wife concerned). A sideline - they also tried to bundle in "anonymous reject", for only another $0.50 but I read them the riot act over that - we had some calls from COCOT's bolcked when they were, in fact, important. My personal take is that SW Bell spent much more effort on selling than informing; maybe that's a sad commentary on Texas consumers!! Regards, Bill ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: International Telephone Service - 1964 Forecast, and Today Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:22:04 -0400 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Mark J. Cuccia (mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu) wrote: > (quote from 1964 article) > There are other subtle differences as well. The Danes, for example, > have no 'W' on their dial, making it difficult [for them] to dial a > WAlnut exchange [in the US/Canada or even UK]. Americans have no 'Q' > on their dial, so dialing a ROQuette exchange in Paris could prove > troublesome. On the English [UK, and French] dial, the letter 'O' is > in the zero [finger]hole, while on the American dial the letter 'O' is > in the '6' [finger]hole. Most countries, such as Sweden and New > Zealand have no letters at all on their dials. FWIW, the ITU apparently now has a worldwide recommendation for lettering telephone dials, with all the letters of the North American plan in the usual places and the Q and Z on the 7 and 9 keys (finger holes?) respectively. Some AT&T brand business phones, such as the Partner series, have these designations now. > When mainland (communist) China became 'recognized', Taiwan became > 'de-recognized'. Today's country-code list indicates the island of > Taiwan as +86-6, as if it were part of mainland China's > country-code. In practice, in dialing and routing, most countries of > the world indicate Taiwan as its own country-code, +886. The current > ITU country-code lists indicate +886 as 'reserved', with _no_ > footnotes." Last time I heard, that's the one thing both Chinese regimes agree on -- that Taiwan should be part of China, under one government. (The question, of course, is *which* government. :-) > Even Step (SxS) offices would be able to originate 011+ (and 01+) > calls, _IF_ their local operator services included a TSPS/TOPS. The > ESS-like operator switch acted like a 'buffer' which collected all of > the customer dialed digits (dialpulses) in realtime, and did the > proper translations and 2-stage signaling through the DDD network, to > the gateway switch. > However, #5XB offices required much additional hardwired hardware to > provide customer IDDD, and it was decided early to abandon IDDD > implementation from such switches (even though the _very_first_ > switches in the Bell System to provide experimental or actual > originating customer IDDD were #5XB!). It was also intended that many > #5XB offices would soon be replaced by ESS/Digital offices, anyhow. I guess that explains why the JUniper office in downtown Louisville originally supported IDDD only on the SXS switch (installed in 1930) and not on the crossbar switch. They went to a 1A ESS in 1976, which solved that problem as well as the split between prefixes with Touch-Tone capability and prefixes that couldn't handle it. > The number of countries or country codes which could be reached by > originating customer IDDD from the US (and Canada) has steadily > increased over the decades. There have been some instances where a > country (code) was made customer dialable from the US, but later was > _removed_ from customer IDDD, probably due to governmental > politics. +7 USSR, for the capital of Moscow (only), city-code '095' > was customer IDDD-able for about a year, in the early 1980's, but then > was removed from customer IDDD. At the time the Soviets claimed that they had problems with their international toll switches that precluded IDDD. Strangely enough there was a period in the 1980s when the USSR was customer-dialable from Britain but not from the U.S., which would tend to put the lie to that claim. ------------------------------ From: A.J. Levy Subject: Re: Callback Banned in South Africa Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 23:00:20 +0200 Clearly, what the South African government, SATRA and Telkom are doing is unconstitutional and illegal. The entrenchment of Telkom as the exclusive service provider of international calls and the 'banning of callback' directly interfere with The Constitution - Act 108 of 1996. Specifically: Chapter 2: 1) Rights 7.(1)(2) is violated 2) Application 8.(1) is violated 3) Privacy 14.(d) is violated 4) Freedom of association 18. Is violated 5) Freedom of trade, occupation and profession 22. Is violated In plain English, 1) The South African government/SATRA/Telkom [all government bodies] are not respecting, protecting, or promoting the rights mentioned in 3) through 5) of the constitution that they drafted. The enshrined democratic principle of freedom is not worth anything if legislation to protect Telkom violates points 4) and 5). 2) I quote 8.(1) "The Bill of Rights applies to all law, and binds the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and all organs of state." - If this is to be taken seriously, then the Telkom monopoly entrenchment is unconstitutional for the violation of the rights violations cited in 3) through 5). 3) The right to Privacy is being violated. Telkom is a 70% government owned phone company. [Sidebar: A 30% stake was recently sold by the South African government to a Malaysian company - the circumstances of this deal, namely that there was only one bidder and the restrictions on the use of The South African government's use of the proceeds of the sale make this deal stink to high heaven.] Now back to the privacy issue: Because of the major interest that the government has in Telkom, they have very easy access to the call details of any of Telkom's accounts. To aggravate this intolerable situation, if the government wanted to 'legally' obtain a Telkom subscribers telephone account, or any other private information, all they need to do is trump up drug trafficking or money laundering charges to get warrants of search and seizure. What will go a long way to restoring individuals freedom is competition to Telkom in the form of Callback service providers who direct market the Callback service where the service provider, most likely in the US, directly bills the subscriber and the ITC or agent does not see the customer's account. 4) The Freedom of association violation by the proposed banning of Callback comes about because individuals are being forced to make use of Telkom's services. Individuals are not allowed to make their choice of who to associate with as their long distance service provider. 5) Freedom of trade, occupation and profession. This violation affects those ITCs and agents of Callback service providers from operating their businesses. The government is proposing a R 500,000.00 fine to be imposed against agents and ITCs and or their customers for promoting or using Callback. Whatever pressure that can be brought to bear on the South African government by people, organizations and Governments from both locally and abroad at all levels including sport, cultural and economic will assist the democracy in South Africa to defend it's constitutional rights. I urge you to do whatever you can to see to it that these violations of fundamental democratic rights is not allowed to take place. If these violations are allowed free passage, as sure as nuts, countries around the world that have not yet deregulated, and that is most countries today, will start the same crap in their countries and against the spirit of democracy and decency. If the South African government/SATRA/Telkom defends its position in terms of Act 108 of 1996 then this constitution is not worth the paper it's written on. Any law that is not for the benefit of the Democracy is invalid. AJ Levy Country Director, One World Communications (South Africa). ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #214 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Aug 21 22:10:59 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA20137; Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:10:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:10:59 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708220210.WAA20137@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #215 TELECOM Digest Thu, 21 Aug 97 22:10:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 215 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: "Ground Start" Lines (Steve Uhrig) Re: "Ground Start" Lines (rocourtney@worldnet.att.net) Re: "Ground Start" Lines (Brian Cox) Re: "Ground Start" Lines (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: "Ground Start" Lines (Steve Randall) Re: "Ground Start" Lines (Garry Manning) Re: "Ground Start" Lines (Michael Bryant) Re: Coax Cable - How Does it Work? (Henry Baker) Re: Coax Cable - How Does it Work? (Jay R. Ashworth) Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID (Steve Bagdon) Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID (Bill Newkirk) Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID (John Many Jars) Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID (Rick DeMattia) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: suhrig@bright.net (Steve Uhrig) Subject: Re: "Ground Start" Lines Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 18:27:16 GMT Organization: BrightNet Ohio On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 15:01:54 GMT, ted_klugman@usa.net.NOSPAM (Ted Klugman) wrote: > Put simply, what is a "ground start" line? We have an 800 number > that forwards to a four-line hunt group for our support department. > All four of these lines are "ground start" (as opposed to "loop > start"?) and the only way I've been able to get a dialtone on these > lines is to connect a phone to them and then short one of the wires to > another point on the 66-block (shorting the pair does nothing). Ground start lines are just what the name implies. The customer provides the ground to the telco equipment to activate it. On a loop start line the CO provides both the battery and ground on the line. The line is activated by completeing the loop. > The only assumption that I can make is that they were installed to > be incoming-only lines. Our phone system can't create this "ground > start", so they never get a dialtone. Ground start is only needed on two way lines. It's main purpose is to prevent call collisions. On either a one way in or one way out lines there is no danger of a call collision so ground start is not needed. I assume from your message that you can call both ways on the lines in question. You can have the phone company convert the lines to loop start, but don't complain to them if your employees calling out connect to a customer calling in instead of getting dial tone. Steve Uhrig Chillicothe, Ohio USA Send mail to suhrig@bright.net ------------------------------ From: rocourtney@worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: "Ground Start" Circuits Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:53:22 -0500 One reason long distance carriers use ground start on incoming trunks is to force customer equipment to disconnect when caller hangs up (especially if caller was on eternity HOLD). You will notice this if you place a volt meter across holding line. Voltage drops shortly after caller hangs up. You may not have ordered the trunks correctly for your outbound service, check with your account rep if you have outbound WATS service. rocourtney@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ From: Brian Cox Subject: Re: "Ground Start" Lines Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:25:35 -0400 Organization: Fair, but improving Ted Klugman wrote: > Put simply, what is a "ground start" line? We have an 800 number > that forwards to a four-line hunt group for our support department. > All four of these lines are "ground start" (as opposed to "loop > start"?) and the only way I've been able to get a dialtone on these > lines is to connect a phone to them and then short one of the wires to > another point on the 66-block (shorting the pair does nothing). > The only assumption that I can make is that they were installed to > be incoming-only lines. Our phone system can't create this "ground > start", so they never get a dialtone. > Am I on the right track? The more common type of line, such as in your residence, is a loop start line. When you go off hook you are completing the loop back to the central office and starting dial tone. Hence, loop start. All pay phones used to be ground start lines. When you first picked up the receiver there was no dial tone. Dropping in a dime operated a relay which hit the tip side of the line with a momentary ground, thus starting dial tone. This type of line requires a ground to start dial tone, so the term ground start. You will still find wide use of ground start lines for PBX applications. If you touch a ground to the tip side of the line while off hook you will then hear a dial tone on your ground start lines. In phone system applications ground start lines were usually used for outgoing calls, although they can also be used as 2-way lines. Regards, Brian ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: "Ground Start" Lines Date: 21 Aug 1997 18:34:36 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 15:01:54 GMT, Ted Klugman wrote: > Put simply, what is a "ground start" line? We have an 800 number > that forwards to a four-line hunt group for our support department. > All four of these lines are "ground start" (as opposed to "loop > start"?) and the only way I've been able to get a dialtone on these > lines is to connect a phone to them and then short one of the wires to > another point on the 66-block (shorting the pair does nothing). Lines which are "ground-start" usually aren't. Lines, that is. They're usually trunks. Different load engineering you understand. They're ground-start because it reduces the potential for glare -- the possibility that an outbound caller will pick up a line that's gone active, but not actually _rung_ yet. > The only assumption that I can make is that they were installed to > be incoming-only lines. Our phone system can't create this "ground > start", so they never get a dialtone. > Am I on the right track? Nope, they're not incoming only, but they were installed on the assumption that the phone system would be able to cope. If it can't, and you can't (or don't want to) fix that, you'll have to have the telco mutate them back to loop-start, which probably means back to lines. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If they were intended to be incoming- > only lines, then when you went off hook on those lines you would > detect 'battery' on the line but never get a dialtone, even after > the wire shorting process you describe. PAT] This much is tru-u-ue. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "People propose, science studies, technology Tampa Bay, Florida conforms." -- Dr. Don Norman +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:25:57 +0100 From: Steve Randall Subject: Re: "Ground Start" Lines I am sure that many more competant correspondants than me will reply in greater detail but Ground Start trunks are exactly what they say they are. Instead of the CO detecting loop current as an "off-hook" signal, it looks for one of the legs (Tip, I think) to be grounded. At one time, all UK PABX lines were configured this way (it's a simple strap or jumper option in the CO) although I am not sure why. If your system cannot handle ground-start, ask your telco to re-configure them as loop-start; shouldn't be a problem for them. Steve Randall PQM Consultants, Suite C, 17 Moor Street, Chepstow, NP6 5DB, UK tel: +44 1291 626 180 fax: +44 1291 626 190 email: steve@pqm-cons.demon.co.uk url: http://www.pqm-cons.demon.co.uk/ ------------------------------ From: Garry Manning Subject: Re: "Ground Start" Lines Date: 21 Aug 1997 11:13:14 EDT Organization: Mitel Corporation Reply-To: manningg@nospamnetcom.ca Ground start lines require a grounding of the ring side of the line (I believe) to pull up dial tone. Most PBX's use ground start lines and are able to do this when an outgoing line is requested. Some key systems can only use loop start lines and are unable to "ground start" the lines. In a pinch you could buy a loop to ground converter module for your key system. These are used on PBX's for powerfail phones. Powerfail trunks are usually directly connected to certain single line phones. This was fine to all incoming calls during a powerfail, but the single line phones could not generate the "ground" either for the ground start lines. We used to add a button to these powerfail phones and connect ground to the black wire of a quad station cable. The powerfail set would then push the button to ground the attached trunk and an outgoing call could be made. Now modules are made that will sense the powerfail set going off hook (ie loop start) and applies a ground to the trunk to get dial tone. You may be able to use one of the units if you can't get the lines converted to loop start. ------------------------------ From: Michael Bryant Subject:Re: "Ground Start" Lines Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:25:04 -0400 Ground start is a signaling method. It is applicable only to outgoing calls. Incoming calls are not affected by signaling schemes such as loop-start, ground-start or E&M. In order to place a call on a ground start trunk, a momentary ground is applied to the ring side of the circuit. This signals the switch to provide dial tone. You have discovered that by jumpering between the ring side of one of your four lines and the tip (which is ground) of another line that you get dial tone. Thus you have applied the concept of ground-start. If your phone system is incapable of supporting ground start lines, then why did your company order them? Ground-start circuits are normally used with PBX trunks between the CO and the PBX to prevent glare. Glare is the phenomenom when you are using a PBX station and dial "9" for an outside trunk and at the precise moment you are accessing the trunk an incoming caller is dialing in and thus you would be answering his call. Ground-start trunks eliminate this occurance. Michael Bryant ------------------------------ From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) Subject: Re: Coax Cable - How Does it Work? Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:41:48 GMT In article , hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > I know what coaxial cable is -- we use lots of it at work to connect > our terminals. (Coax cable has a center conductor surrounded by an > insulator tube, which in turn is surrounded by a braided conductor.) > The big advantage of coax is that it can accomodate a much larger > "bandwidth" (volume of traffic) than traditional twisted pair wires. > For instance, you can multiplex many more telephone conversations or > television signals (TV takes up a lot of bandwidth) on coax. Technically, this is not quite correct. The main advantage of coax is preserving the waveform shape over a long distance, even as the resistance of the coax attenuates the signal. In the days when 'equalization' was expensive and difficult, this was very important. With today's DSP's, which can measure the 'impulse response' of a system and correct for it, the preservation of the waveform shape is less important than the attenuation itself. For example, high-speed xDSL modems with sophisticated processing can send information at megabits per second over lines only designed for a bandwidth of 4KHz. Of course, sophisticated processing is both expensive and slow, and since coax is relatively cheap, it still makes sense. > Could someone explain how it works, in laymen's terms? How does the > physical arrangement enable it to have so much capacity. Coax properly balances resistance, inductance and capacitance for each small segment of the cable so that the waveform shape is preserved as it propagates down the cable. > Also, when was it invented? Was it invented by the Bell System or > someone else? Coax was invented to allow faster telegraph signalling across the transatlantic cables. Heaviside is usually credited with the basic idea in abou 1887. The fact that the American patent office gave Michael Pupin a patent on Heaviside's invention should be considered a major scandal in the American patent system. ATT licensed Pupin's patent, while Heaviside remained penniless. (Brittain, James E. "The Introduction of the Loading Coil: George A. Campbell and Michael Pupin." Technology and Culture 11 (1970), 36-57.) > Lastly, has fiber-optic cable made coax obsolete? (If I understand > fiber-optic correctly, all it is is an extremely single high speed > digital pulse transmission, with ultra pure glass fibers and a laser > allowing an extremely fine pulse duration and no noise interference. > How they can turn a laser on and off so fast that the giga-Hz > (billions per second) pulse rates is beyond me! No. An excellent little book (119 pages) on coax, waveguides and fibers is: Cronin, Nigel J. "Microwave and Optical Waveguides". Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol and Philadelphia, 1995. ISBN 0-7503-216-X. ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: Coax Cable - How Does it Work? Date: 21 Aug 1997 19:09:15 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates On 21 Aug 1997 04:09:27 GMT, Lisa Hancock wrote: > I know what coaxial cable is -- we use lots of it at work to connect > our terminals. (Coax cable has a center conductor surrounded by an > insulator tube, which in turn is surrounded by a braided conductor.) Roughly. > The big advantage of coax is that it can accomodate a much larger > "bandwidth" (volume of traffic) than traditional twisted pair wires. > For instance, you can multiplex many more telephone conversations or > television signals (TV takes up a lot of bandwidth) on coax. Well, not exactly. > Could someone explain how it works, in laymen's terms? How does the > physical arrangement enable it to have so much capacity. The advantage of coaxial cable over twisted pair is that, being shielded, it doesn't require so much care in the electrical design of the signals you push through it in order to avoid unwanted radiation along the length of the cable. When you attempt to shove high speed signals through a conductor, it will try to act as an antenna. The two primary approaches to avoiding this are shielding, and balance. 10BaseT and its ilk take the second, balancing the electrical current on each side of the wire ti cancel out radiated interference. > Also, when was it invented? Was it invented by the Bell System or > someone else? Damned if I know. I suspect it might have come out of Bell Labs. > Lastly, has fiber-optic cable made coax obsolete? (If I understand > fiber-optic correctly, all it is is an extremely single high speed > digital pulse transmission, with ultra pure glass fibers and a laser > allowing an extremely fine pulse duration and no noise interference. No, because even now, fiber is more expensive to work with than coax. Transceivers, and splicing labor, and such. It's getting cheaper, but it's also worth noting that coax can carry power, and fiber can't. Sometimes this is a feature, sometimes it's a bug. > How they can turn a laser on and off so fast that the giga-Hz > (billions per second) pulse rates is beyond me! They don't. They use electro-optical devices called Q-switches that block the beam intermittantly. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "People propose, science studies, technology Tampa Bay, Florida conforms." -- Dr. Don Norman +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 15:19:26 -0400 From: Steve Bagdon Subject: Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID > Charles Cremer and a lot of other people said: Speaking about telemarkerters, and how irriating they can be. The local radio stations a few weeks ago played blurbs of a new CD titled 'Revenge of the Telemarketers' (or that might be 'on'). One radio station even had an interview with the creator. From what I was able to gather from the interview, a gentleman in Tennessee(?) started working out of his house, and was inundated with unsolicited calls. Frustrated with the entire situation, he started getting back in the best way -- by seeing how long he could keep them on the phone. He would think fast, and every new company would get a new speech. The best from his first album was the call from the carpet cleaning company, as he went into a nervous sounding conversation about 'I've got blood everywhere, and I need it out fast'. He said he's working on his next cd, and his best bit is the direct sales call from the pre-paid funeral home - something about being prepared with a starter's pistol, and him telling the telemarketer it's was 'a sign from God it's time to go'. Absoltuely gut-busting funny. If you can find it, buy it. Steve B. ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:12:16 -0400 Organization: Rockwell Collins, Inc. Reply-To: wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com phelper@onramp.net wrote: > I'm just so tired of telemarketers. When they do get me, it's just so > inconvenient and they are always hasslers. Nope, I don't take it > anymore. I wish i still had that {Mad Magazine} article from the 1960s. It had plans for how to deal with telephone solicitors even then. I think it was one of those things mom and dad tossed when I moved to college. The thing I remember from the article was mainly tying the phone company up in knots since, after all, they're a "co-conspirator" with the telemarketers...8). Like calling repair service while shaving with an electric razor and complaining of buzzing on the line. Or calling a telco number and telling them that they've won a free prize if they would call another telco number in 5 minutes ... that sort of thing. Of course on the other side it was like ordering lots of stuff for non-existant people and addresses when they call. And, there is that guy that's been on the "John Boy and Billy" show who turns the tables on the callers ... "If you have a case of beer delivered to me, I'll buy your product ..." Bill Newkirk Collins General Aviation Division Publications Department Rockwell Collins, Inc., Melbourne Florida wenewkir@collins.rockwell.com ------------------------------ From: hanuman@clark.net (John Many Jars) Subject: Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID Date: 20 Aug 1997 15:43:59 GMT Organization: Hanumanji In article , Charles Cremer wrote: > SBC Communications announced 14-August-1997 that slightly more than 50 > percent of its Texas customers have subscribed for Caller ID service. > This makes Texas the state with the greatest acceptance of the Caller > ID service. Strangely, it's only calls from Texas which consistently *don't* display CID! Most of my family live in east Texas (Centel?), and calls from them always generate an "Anonymous" ID. Other calls from throughout the country display perfectly. jmj ------------------------------ From: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Subject: Re: Texas Leads Nation in Caller ID Reply-To: rad@railnet.nshore.org (Rick DeMattia) Organization: Railnet BBS +1 440 786 0476 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 22:36:18 GMT As quoted from by Charles Cremer : > This makes Texas the state with the greatest acceptance of the Caller > ID service. > Either our demographics include a lot of techies or perhaps we are the > state most afflicted by telemarketers which create a need for the > service. Or maybe SBS is offering a better rate for the service?? Here in northeast Ohio, Ameritech charges $8.50/month for calling name and number. I have the service and like it, but I think it's a mite steep. Lovely though to be able to say that I haven't spoken to a telephone solicitor in months! Rick DeMattia ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #215 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Aug 21 23:55:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA26507; Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:55:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:55:12 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708220355.XAA26507@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #216 TELECOM Digest Thu, 21 Aug 97 23:55:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 216 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson GTE Strikes Out Again! (Curtis Bohl) CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Kathy Kost) Re: Coax Cable - How Does it Work? (Isaac Wingfield) NC Utility Commission Chooses Splits Instead of Overlays (Bob Goudreau) Re: International Telephone Service - 1964 Forecast; Today (Jay Ashworth) Re: Two Dialups Supported Under 95? (Jon Gauthier) Re: The Telecom Side of 56K (Steven V. Christensen) Re: AOL May Track User Clicks (MWeiss7401) Re: 900 MHz Digital Update / U.S. Robotics, etc. (Nick Larsen) Re: "Ground Start" Lines (Tom Watson) Re: ACD Help Needed (Bill Levant) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Curtis Bohl Subject: GTE Strikes Out Again! Date: 21 Aug 1997 13:38:56 GMT Organization: First National Bank Here's another example of how GTE costs customers time and money! Yesterday, one of our staff comes to me with a fax that he needs to get out, but every time he dialed the number (NPA 850) from any of our fax machines, he gets a "unable to reach" intercept message; same thing when using the old 904 area code. But, he says that he can dial the new number OK through our PBX. Well, I know that we send our PBX LD traffic on a T-1 directly to our IXC, so it's time to consider it might be a GTE problem. But first, get the Fax sent out. Find a 25 foot phone cord to tie the fax into a PBX extension. Got it sent OK. Then turn the problem over to our phone manager. Later, he tells me that "GTE hadn't loaded the new NPA into the tables." "Just forgot to load it in our tables" (quote from GTE tech). The total time our staff wasted was probably two hours on this. Given that the permissive period started June 23 (two months ago) I wonder how many others in our area (24 exchanges) had problems that they chalked up to a IXC problem or that someone had given them a wrong number. Gee. No, GTE. Curtis Bohl cbohl@fnb-columbia.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In fairness to GTE, a lot of telcos forget an area code here and a prefix there, etc from time to time. About three years ago, Ameritech somehow forgot about a new exchange which opened in Wisconsin's 414 ... you could reach it by dialing any of the LD carriers direct on their 800 numbers to go through their switches, but one-plussing it always got an intercept from Ameritech saying it was no good. Telling Ameritech about it always produced the expected response: it must be your long distance carrier that is at fault ... telling AT&T of course got the standard line from them that the matter had to be taken up with Ameritech. I did finally get through to an AT&T guy based out of Denver and told him about it. He said it would be corrected 'very shortly'. I told him Ameritech tended to go off on tangents of their own and listen to no one. His response was 'they will listen to me and do as I say ...' And indeed, the next morning the call did go through with one-plus and no more intercept sass-back from Ameritech. It is all in who you talk to I guess, and the Business Office is frequently the last place to go to get things fixed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: kkost@intermec.com (Kathy Kost) Subject: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Date: 21 Aug 1997 19:14:48 GMT Organization: Intermec, Inc. I'm sure this subject has been discussed in length here, but I'm totally confused now that I'm shopping for new cellular service and need some advice. If there are some archives or articles that one can point me to, please do. Currently I'm with AT&T Wireless with an analog service and I want to go digital. I'm not a technical idiot (I'm a Unix sys admin that does both hardware and software support), but doggone it if I can get a straight answer out of any vendor's mouth about the differences between their cellular services. I've narrowed the field to AT&T Digital PCS, Air Touch's Powerband (CDMA), and Sprint PCS. Here are the questions: 1. I'm assuming that AT&T PCS and Sprint PCS is TDMA and *not* CDMA. Is that correct? 2. What are the pros and cons of TDMA versus CDMA? I know that Qualcomm's CDMA is supposedly newer and better but I'm sure the service area is not very extensive for the moment. I would imagine this would change (?) 3. Air Touch is giving me the story that the Sony CM-D500 that they sell is the only CDMA phone in existence right now. Is this bull or reality? AT&T sells Nokia and Ericsson which leads me to believe that they're using TDMA and a different service. From what I can gather, AT&T has the benefit in that they give a nine state (I'm in Seattle) service area without roaming. Air Touch seems to be better in the state of Washington, but I'm not sure about outside of the state. Both appear to have limited Digital areas, regardless of service type. I'm leaning towards the CDMA technology but any advice would be appreciated. Thanks! Kathy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:28:35 -0700 From: Isaac Wingfield Subject: Re: Coax Cable - How Does it Work? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) wrote: > I know what coaxial cable is -- we use lots of it at work to connect > our terminals. (Coax cable has a center conductor surrounded by an > insulator tube, which in turn is surrounded by a braided conductor.) Right so far, although some coaxes have a solid outer conductor. It can get pretty big, too. I've used nine inch diameter coax to carry a third of a million watts of signal up the tower to a TV transmitting antenna. > The big advantage of coax is that it can accomodate a much larger > "bandwidth" (volume of traffic) than traditional twisted pair wires. > For instance, you can multiplex many more telephone conversations or > television signals (TV takes up a lot of bandwidth) on coax. > Could someone explain how it works, in laymen's terms? How does the > physical arrangement enable it to have so much capacity. Actually, it's just another transmission line, having neither better or worse performance than other topologies; in fact, the attenuation is higher than some others (e.g. parallel line, such as the "300 ohm twin lead" used for TV antenna connections). Its bandwidth is not inherently superior either; 100BaseT and Gigabit Ethernet work on twisted pairs. The advantage of coaxial construction is shielding -- both to protect the signal inside from outside interference, and to prevent radiation of the signal to the outside environment. It isn't that you can stuff more data down a coax, it's that if you try it with another topology, there will likely be more inward and outward interference. Symmetry and regularity of construction are very important for wide-bandwidth transmission lines; coax maintains this better when pulled, draped, heated, stretched, placed near metal, etc. The symmetry of twisted pair is easier to disturb under such treatment, leading to a degradation of performance. > Also, when was it invented? Was it invented by the Bell System or > someone else? I believe it was Bell Labs, but am not certain. 1920's? It was surely ubiquitous by WWII. Whenever you don't know where some telecomm technology was invented, Bell Labs is a good guess. > Lastly, has fiber-optic cable made coax obsolete? By no means. The cost of "termination equipment" (whatever it takes to get the signal in or out of the transmission line) is significantly less for coax or other copper-based methods. As the length of the line goes up, of course, this becomes less important. The maximum data carrying capacity of fiber is many orders of magnitude greater than that of copper transmission line, but again, only with much more expensive transmitters and receivers. > (If I understand fiber-optic correctly, all it is is an extremely > single high speed digital pulse transmission, can be analog, too; the > cable TV people do that routinely these days, transmitting all the TV > channels you can receive as one very wide band analog signal (50-800 > MHz, round numbers). .... > with ultra pure glass fibers and a laser allowing an extremely fine > pulse duration and no noise interference. Ultra pure only so it's ultra clear; that allows longer runs between amplifiers, for example. Sometimes it's made like a coax, with different kinds of glass layered concentrically. This tends to "steer" wayward light rays back into line, so that no rays take a longer path than others (which they would do if they were "bouncing off the walls", so to speak). > How they can turn a laser on and off so fast that the giga-Hz > (billions per second) pulse rates is beyond me! At the highest bandwidths, the laser is frequently not turned on and off; there's some kind of a "shutter" or "valve" in front of it to control things. This also allows analog modulation of the intensity. You can always get more data down the pipe if you allow for values between "on" and "off". Isaac Wingfield Staff System Engineer isw@hdvs.com TV/COM International Vox: 408-232-8530 3103 N. First Street Fax: 408-232-8145 San Jose, CA 95134 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 13:50:58 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: NC Utility Commission Chooses Splits Instead of Overlays Today's issue of Raleigh's newspaper _The_News_&_Observer_ reports that the North Carolina Utility Commission decided in a 6-1 vote yesterday that the state's three new area codes will be split from the three existing ones rather than overlaid on top of them. Each of the three existing NPAs will be split into two codes, mostly along or near county boundaries: The western two-thirds of the current 704 NPA (Asheville, Hickory, and most of the mountains) will receive a new code, while Charlotte, Gastonia and environs stay in 704. The northern half of the current 910 NPA (including Greensboro, Winston-Salem and High Point) will receive a new code, while the southern half (including Wilmington and Fayetteville) keeps 910. The eastern three-fourths of the current 919 NPA (including Greenville, New Bern and Rocky Mount) will receive a new code, while the Research Triangle area (Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill and evirons) and Sanford retain 919. Bellcore is supposed to assign the three new numerics in the next four to six weeks, and the telcos will submit an implementation schedule by mid-September. However, the Commission expects all three new codes to take effect some time in the first quarter of 1998, with a permissive period of about four months. Hopefully, this will be soon enough to relieve 910, which currently has only 77 unassigned NXX prefixes left; there was no word on whether 919 or 704 are in jeopardy. Other than the split vs. overlay decision, the main issue the Commission members had to debate was which part of the current 910 zone got to keep that code. The arguments of Sprint Carolina Telephone, which serves most of the eastern part of the state, ultimately prevailed. Since most of Sprint's northern service area will have to change area codes as a result of the 919 split, the Commission thought that it would be unfair to burden the company's southern service area (in 910) with such a change too. Therefore, the northern part of 910, which is mostly served by BellSouth, will have to change, even though it contains what is by far the largest metropolitan area (the Piedmont Triad of Greensboro, Winston-Salem and High Point) in the current 910. Triad residents are none too pleased, since it was only four years ago that 910 was split off from 919. For the complete story, including a color map of the new boundaries, see . Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us (Jay R. Ashworth) Subject: Re: International Telephone Service - 1964 Forecast, and Today Date: 21 Aug 1997 18:49:26 GMT Organization: Ashworth & Associates On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:22:04 -0400, Ed Ellers wrote: > FWIW, the ITU apparently now has a worldwide recommendation for > lettering telephone dials, with all the letters of the North American > plan in the usual places and the Q and Z on the 7 and 9 keys (finger > holes?) respectively. Some AT&T brand business phones, such as the > Partner series, have these designations now. AARRGGHHHH! Is _that_ where this idiocy came from?? What nuclear physicist decided to single-handedly break every dial-the- user's-name phone directory on the planet? There was _already_ a standard for this: "Q", "Z", and " " go on the 1 key. Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "People propose, science studies, technology Tampa Bay, Florida conforms." -- Dr. Don Norman +1 813 790 7592 ------------------------------ From: Jon Gauthier Subject: Re: Two Dialups Supported Under 95? Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 19:56:05 -0400 Organization: Just Me! Reply-To: jgauthier01@nospam.snet.net Eric Florack wrote: snip, snip... > What I'm hearing is rather striking. It will allow two dialups lines > of whatever speed on the same computer, to be dialed into the same > source, thereby allowing you to double your throughput .. > Question: Do most ISP's allow this kind of connection via modem? Do > ANY? > If so, this may be an answer to my customers who don't have ISDN > available at reasonable cost in their area. IE; two dialups are > cheaper than an ISDN line and assuming two 56k connections, or even > two 33.6 connections, the throughput gains would make the moderate > added cost of the added line worthwhile. Comments? One manufacturer has jumped on this and is advertising a "67kbps" modem, which is just a two line V.34+ modem, and uses Windows/NT/95's Multilink PPP (MLPPP) support. It's not new - it's in NT 3.5 under RAS. Multilink PPP has been used by router manufacturers for years to bond multple 56kbps leased lines into a logical 112kbps or better line. I can't remember the modem manufacturer's name, but it was in serveral ot the networking trade rags a couple of months ago. If you buried deep enough into the fine print of the add, you could "deduce" that they were talking two lines, not 67kbps over one! Jon Gauthier Connecticut ------------------------------ From: Steven V. Christensen Subject: Re: The Telecom Side of 56K Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:11:38 -0500 Organization: Caterpillar, Inc. Reply-To: chrissv@pobox.com [ snip, discussions from ASCEND on having MODEM problems ...] > You are entitled to have this problem corrected. Make sure that you > say there is nothing wrong with your normal voice communications (if > that is the case...) otherwise they will just do a normal line check. Whoa! I subscribe to Ameritech (Central Illinois, no choice in the matter), and I doubt they share Ascend's comments on what I am "entitled to." I lived in an apartment a couple of years ago, and couldn't get *squat* with my 14.4 modem - lots of retraining, and eventually it would drop. Voice quality was fine. By elimination, I figured out it wasn't in my MODEM. I called Ameritech, got bounced between the consumer and business service people (??), and basically was told that all they (Ameritech) have to guarantee is voice quality. If I didn't have any problems with the voice quality (and I wasn't), they couldn't/wouldn't do anything about it. However ..., I could opt to have them install a $200 filter (at my cost) on my line at their office, but they specifically didn't guarantee it would help, and if it didn't help, tough! I felt that this was a canned speech I was getting. I had to wait until I _moved_ to a house before I got a decent line. Steven P.S. When she said all they would guarantee is voice quality, I said, "errr... I hear some crackling in the line too..." (which there was none, but I thought they might switch a pair or something). A service person came out, but it didn't help. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:04:35 -0400 From: mweiss7401@aol.com (MWeiss7401) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: AOL May Track User Clicks > Instead of directly informing subscribers that their account information > would be given to telemarketers, the company planned to state its > intentions in the new Terms of Service agreement - a multipaged, densely > worded legal document posted on AOL that informs members about the > company's operations. As an AOL subscriber, I have been growing suspicious of AOL's refusal to respond to good suggestions for eliminating SPAM e-mail from user's mailboxes. I have shown them that a simple cgi script and use of their mail controls address filter could eliminate totally, any SPAM e-mail from entering a person's account. A letter detailing this was sent to Steve Case, AOL's president, as well as e-mail related forums on AOL. To date, no responses have been tendered. Other information indicates that AOL is at break-even on profit margin, so it lends credibility to the notion that AOL is seeking revenue from other avenues, such as selling marketing information and even taking a cut of the profits from SPAMers which are given access to anonymous accounts on AOL, which can blind carbon copy millions of AOL users without using their names at all. If it weren't for the fact that I have a significant web presense that would be severely disrupted by changing ISPs, coupled with the fact that no other local ISP offers five e-mail address, each with two megs of FTP space, I would be out of here immediately. Steve Case does not strike me as an ethical businessman. Mark The "Peg-legged" Bass Pig http://users.aol.com/amn92/amn.htm "I support the micropower broadcasting movement and freedom of the airwaves" ------------------------------ From: Nick Larsen Subject: Re: 900 MHz Digital Update / U.S. Robotics, etc. Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 20:54:01 -0400 Organization: prc Reply-To: larsen_nick_nospam@prc.com I talked with someone at USR about their stillborn 900MHz cordless phones a few months back. He told me they were never released because internal testing showed them to be poor performers, but that USR still planned to introduce new cordless phones later this year (probably not the 310 or 520 models that were advertised for so long, but new designs) unless 3Com nixes them. USR has released a few full-duplex speakerphones (w/o handsets); I bought, and returned, both the CS1000 and CS850. Neither sounded as good at the other end of the line as many regular speakerphones. The 310/520 both were to have integral full duplex speakerphones. I own Uniden's two-line digital 900Mhz cordless/speakerphone, which I find to be quite satisfactory, although I would still like the features that were to be in the USR phones (full duplex, call waiting, speakerphone in handset). There's also new Panasonic SSD cordless out, which isn't as full featured as I would expect for the price. NL ------------------------------ From: tsw@cagent.com (Tom Watson) Subject: Re: "Ground Start" Lines Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:27:43 -0700 Organization: CagEnt, Inc. In article , Michael Bryant wrote: > Ground start is a signaling method. It is applicable only to outgoing > calls. Incoming calls are not affected by signaling schemes such as > loop-start, ground-start or E&M. In order to place a call on a ground > start trunk, a momentary ground is applied to the ring side of the > circuit. This signals the switch to provide dial tone. This is NOT true. Although the lines are started by grounding RING conductor the central office RESPONDS with a ground on the TIP conductor to acknowledge the start (thus completing the loop). When the central office starts the line, they apply ground to the TIP conductor, and the station equipment responds with ground on the RING conductor (usually thru the loop of the station) to answer the phone. What this means is that on a ground start line you can have an instrument across TIP & RING and when the CO siezes the line, you 1) get loop current, and 2) provide an answer entry, and 3) can begin talking. No "ringing" signal need apply (or be heard). Nowdays the option is provided by a programming option in the electronic switch (entry on the console). With SxS exchanges, there was an insulator on the line relay/line finder. tsw@cagent.com (Home: tsw@johana.com) Please forward spam to: annagram@hr.house.gov (my Congressman), I do. ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 02:50:52 EDT Subject: Re: ACD Help Needed [preliminary explanation snipped] > Because it is in the ACD we do not have hunt groups. We would point > the incoming calls to go to a queue. The first available operator > would pick up the call. She would then have to transfer the call > outside the ACD (a secondary line) pick up the transfer and put it on > hold. Two extra steps. > Another cumbersome process. To park the call in the switch (we have a > 5ESS 10), the operator would have to access call park by dialing a > code , e.g. "#8" then dial the DN that the call will be parked at. > The person retrieving the call would have to do the same, dial a code > to access call park, then the DN the call is parked at. Wait a minute. Are you perhaps making this more difficult than necessary? If your operators have phone sets with user-programmable buttons, why not set up a single-button "park" key. That's one key-stroke. Then, you "park" the calls on arbitrary "phantom" extensions (ones that exist logically in the switch, but aren't connected to real telephones; as far as I know, on at least some systems, you can park a call on ANY extension, not necessarily the one the call is presently connected to). Then, you page "Joe, dial 1234 for a call" where "1234" is the phantom number where you parked the call. Taking it one step further, maybe each operator has a pool of four or five "park" extensions that he/she uses exclusively, and which appear on his/her console (with indicator lights) but are otherwise "phantom". Operator #1 parks on 1234, 1235, 1236 and 1237; operator #2 parks on 1238, 1239, 1240 and 1241, for example. Then, he/she can watch the lights to make sure that calls that he/she parked are eventually answered. Only problem is, what if all of the "parking places" are taken, and ANOTHER call comes in? Gotta have enough slots to simultaneously park the largest number of calls that would ever be holding at a given time, bearing in mind that as soon as a parked call is picked up, the "phantom" extension number it was parked on becomes free to be used again. Obviously, if you have ten incoming lines, then ten total "parking places" is probably plenty. If you have 100 incoming lines, then you need to find someone who remembers how to do Poisson distributions, since I forgot shortly after the final exam back in college years ago. I think that some systems can assign the "park" locations automatically, using a pre-determined range of numbers, and displaying the location used on the display (assuming that your operators have phones with display capability). Then, it's a one-button "park", followed by a page to the number that comes up on the display. Bill ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #216 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Aug 22 09:25:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA20364; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:25:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:25:13 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199708221325.JAA20364@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #217 TELECOM Digest Fri, 22 Aug 97 09:25:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 217 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Area Code Dispute in PA Now Stalled! (John Cropper) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Kim Brennan) Re: AT&T Merlin Questions (Dale Laluk) CIR v. Port Speed in Frame Relay (Stephen B. Kutzer) Minnesota PUC Split on Split (Charles Gimon) Your Teletypewriter History and My Museum (Don Robert House) Help Needed With Phones in Offsite Office (phoneguy@hawkeyerec.com) More Thoughts on 900 and IP Billing (R v Head) Ameritech's New Service - Three Way Calling (Michael Stutz) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: John Cropper Subject: Area Code Dispute in PA Now Stalled! Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 05:54:25 -0400 From the Associated Press: DIAL 'D' FOR DEADLOCK ON AREA CODE PLAN WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal advisory panel deadlocked yesterday on Pennsylvania's proposal to avert the need for three new area codes by breaking up partially used blocks of phone numbers. Fourteen members of the North American Numbering Council supported the plan with conditions, while eight opposed. Because the group normally operates by concensus, co-chairman Alan Hasselwander sent the issue to the Federal Communications Commission without a recommendation. Although the FCC wants to quickly rule on the case, it has set no timetable. If the commission decides to launch a round of public commenting given the split among council members, Pennsylvania could miss its September target for implementing the plan. Pennsylvania expects to run out of numbers for area codes 215, 610 and 717 in the eastern half of the state as early as next spring. Last month, the state Public Utility Commission approved carving area code 724 out of Pittsburgh's suburbs, because the region was in crisis. Because of a growing appetite for fax machines, computer modems and other gadgets, phone companies across the country are rapidly running out of numbers. The problem is aggrevated by the introduction of competition to local phone service because of the inefficient way numbers are assigned. The Industry assigns numbers to switching centers in blocks of 10,000, and each emerging phone competitor needs the entire block for each service area, whether it has 10 customers or 10,000. Pennsylvania has approved more than a dozen local competitors. John Hanger, a member of the Pennsylvania PUC, estimates that at least 5 million numbers out of the 7.9 million possible combinations are not being used. To avert the need for new area codes, which forces many consumers to buy new stationary and reprogram their burglar alarms, Pennsylvania wants to reassign some of the unused numbers by creating "transparent" area codes. Under such a mechanism, customers would dial a number in their existing area code, and computers would automatically forward that call to the assigned number with the new code. Callers would not have to change their routines, and in most cases would not even know of the new code. A new area code was created for the Philadelphia area less than three years ago, and already the region is facing a shortage. The 717 area code, which serves south-central and northeastern Pennsylvania, also needs relief. The FCC is considering ways to carve up the 10,000-number blocks but is not expected to implement a plan for a few more years. By then, eastern Pennsylvania would have run out of numbers. The proposal is heavily opposed by wireless service providers. ----------------- LINCS' note: A few friends at Bell Atlantic are thinking that if the transparent issue fails, we could be looking at either across-the-board splits of all 3 codes, splits of 717 & 610 and an overlay of 215, or all overlays (least likely). If the transparent overlay DOES go through, look for a conversion to GENERAL overlay six months AFTER transparent codes are assigned, since portability will not be feasible for a couple years, and the feeble attempt to stave off REAL relief will only give each code about a year's additional life at the very most ... In other BA behind-the-scenes news, BA-NJ is looking at further relief for 201 (still in permissive) sometime in 1999 or 2000. This is due in part to the grandfathering of wireless services into 201 and 908, coupled with continued demand for numbers. As for 609, hearings will be held in early September. A recommendation to split is expected ... John Cropper voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 ICQ: 2670887 Great LD rates: http://www.lincs.net/longdistance/ FREE areacode info: http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ $16.95 internet: http://www.lincs.net/internet/dialupacs.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:21:40 -0400 From: kim@aol.com (Kim Brennan) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Kathy Kost inquires: > I'm sure this subject has been discussed in length here, but I'm > totally confused now that I'm shopping for new cellular service and > need some advice. If there are some archives or articles that one can > point me to, please do. {Byte Magazine} had an article on digital phones in a recent issue, but for the life of me, I can't find it on the Byte web site. Ah, I see now, why ... Oh, well, you'll just have to pick up the August 1997 issue, or wait three months for the web to reveal the full issue. In a nutshell (and pardon any lapses of memory), there are three digital cellular phone technologies. TDMA, CDMA, and GSM. As I recall, TDMA was established first, and has fair amount of coverage. CDMA has been getting a lot of the recent attention from the phone companies and in theory has about as much coverage as TDMA, but it still (apparently) has some problems. Both of these phones types operate in the 900Mhz range. GSM, which is the European standard, is just getting off the ground in the states. Sprint Spectrum (not to be confused with Spring PCS) uses GSM technology. This is in the 1.8 Ghz range (Europe uses 1.9 Ghz). The coverage for GSM is not as broad as either of the other two. The full article goes into a lot more detail. I have a GSM Sprint Spectrum phone personally. Kim Brennan (kim@aol.com) Duo 2300c, Red VW Fox Wagon GL, Black VW Corrado SLC http://members.aol.com/kim Duo Information Page: http://members.aol.com/kim/computer/duo Questions should include "Duo" in the subject, else they'll be deleted unread ------------------------------ From: Dale Laluk Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:31:48 +0000 Subject: Re: AT&T Merlin Questions A response to Steve Bagdon: For a leading edge house like yours I would go ahead with putting in the Cat. 5 wiring, with home runs to each location that you want wired. Some of the benefits, in the long run that I can see for you is running 100 Mbps data (Live video, conferenceing, security monitoring or just mega data) I have clients who have 100 Mbps in their homes and they are maxing out and now we are going to Switched 100 Mbps Hubs. With a small transceiver from ATT&T and other manufacturers you would be able to run Cable TV over your Cat. 5. As far as the price is issue check for the Cat. 5 price is it was for FT-4 (Riser) or FT-6 (Plenum) (Sorry this is the Canadian Term for the fire rating I don't know what the US equv. is). Riser is good enough for most any installation, Plenum has to be used when the air around the cable is being sucked back into an Heating and Vent system for re-use in the house. FT-6 is 3 x more expensive. FT-4 Cat.5 cable from a good manufacturer runs $80US here in Canada per 1000 ft. Hope this helps. Dale Laluk, C.E.T. Lunar Communication Services P.O. Box 569, Hudson's Hope, B.C. V0C 1V0 250-783-5365 or 1-800-227-5912 voice 250-783-5790 fax lunarcom@netbistro.com internet ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:55:06 -0400 From: Stephen B. Kutzer Subject: CIR v. Port Speed in Frame Relay I am trying to understand an issue raised by Sprint's frame relay salesforce in comparison to that of MCI's. According to Sprint, they sell and route virtual circuits based on "port speed"; if you buy a 56K port from them, you'll get 56K from first bit to last. Also according to Sprint, MCI and AT&T's frame connection are routed based on committed information rate. They tell me that this involves starting out at 16kbps and then "throttling up" to the CIR (e.g. 56k). So a couple of questions: is this true? And, does it really matter? I'm planning a network that is going to be pure FTP (file transfers); the files are about 2MByte in size, and will be coming into a central location from 20 satellite locations. The software will send a file as soon as it's ready to go, so I'm going to have an on/off kind of line utilization. I'm worrying that if the "throttling" that Sprint is talking about (with MCI) takes a significant amount of bits per file transfer, that my effective throughput will be diminished. Finally, can anyone give me pointers to materials (books, URL's, magazine articles) that help debunk and demystify frame relay salesspeak? Many thanks, Steve Kutzer ------------------------------ From: Charles Gimon Subject: Minnesota PUC Split on Split Date: 21 Aug 1997 14:30:44 GMT Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. The Minnesota PUC is debating the split/overlay thing for 612 this week. The Commission is supposed to have five members; apparently at the moment there are only four due to a resignation. The current four are split two-to-two on the issue. Local media are covering the story: http://www.startribune.com http://www.wcco.com Wild new Ubik salad dressing, not | gimonca@skypoint.com Italian, not French, but an entirely | Minneapolis MN USA new and different taste treat that's | http://www.skypoint.com/~gimonca waking up the world! | A lean, mean meme machine. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 23:32:08 -0700 From: Don Robert House Reply-To: dhouse@abac.com Subject: Your Teletypewriter History and My Museum I enjoyed reading the teletypewriter history. I was part of it. I started my Bell System career as a Teletype repairman on 9/19/66 in Wheeling, Illinois. I operate a data communications museum with many many examples of Teletype products, datasets, test sets, and associated manuals, literature,etc. I also have a complete DDS mini-hub and end office equipment and a portable D-4 system. Highlights about me and my museum will be on Pacific Bells website (www.pacbell.com) in about three weeks. I am always looking for donations of equipment, literature, photographs, etc. Don Robert House Curator, North American Data Communications Museum 3841 Reche Road Fallbrook, CA 92028-3810 dhouse@abac.com (primary address) dhouse@usa.net (secondary address) http://www.hem.com/nadcomm (museum website) (760) 723-9959 Telephone (760) 781-5161 Facsimile (760) 781-5153 Teletype (8 level,110 baud) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good luck with your museum. I hope readers are invited to contact you and visit when they are in the area. The teletypewriter history you refer to appeared here in the Digest quite a long time ago. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 15:14:32 -0500 From: phoneguy@hawkeyerec.com Reply-To: phoneguy@hawkeyerec.com Subject: Help Needed With Phones in Offsite Office We may be locating an offsite office about a mile from our main office. We currently have: - Norstar modular 8x24 key system - Novell LAN with token ring :-( - a tower right outside the back door with enough heighth for line of sight into the remote location. We would like to be able to: - transfer telephone calls back and forth from main location to remote location and make intercom calls, of course. - connect computers at the remote site into our LAN. Is this a WAN? - would like to try wireless connections for all of this. - wired is not out of the question as remote site is between telco and main office. About three blocks from CO to remote site. About one mile from CO to home office. Any thoughts? Thank you! Jim ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:45:04 -0500 Subject: More Thoughts on 900 and IP Billing From: rvhead@juno.com (R v Head) > IPs always have the choice to require credit cards to provide > service. They can also protect themselves by exchanging credit > information with other IPs, as well as requiring prepayment or > written pre-authorization for use of their services. You'd better be VERY careful before you go "exchanging credit information". The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act as well as the Fair Credit Reporting Act are both quite punitive if you're caught violating them. On a marginally-related note: Those off-shore "FREE" phone sex lines are obviously local to SOMEWHERE - Are the residents of Guyana able to call a local number to avail themselves of such services without incurring LD charges? > In any case, the fact that IPs may have difficulty in billing > and collection of their services is no excuse to impact the > users of other telephone services in any way. If we had 900/976 > blocking by default, I expect that the percentage of customers > who opt to remove such blocking would be exceedingly small. Fine > with me! Why should 900 numbers be blocked at all? Any person calling them is per se aware that he is not making a local call. Don't FCC regs now require the IP to announce that the call is a pay service, how much that service will cost and allow a period of time in which the caller can hang up without incurring any charges? If the regs don't currently so provide, they SHOULD. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:51:25 EDT From: Michael Stutz Subject: Ameritech's New Service - Three Way Calling Not long ago, Ameritech started offering a new "service," Three-way Calling administered on a "pay-per-use" basis. Of course, since it was a feature certainly welcome by all, they implemented it to everyone. Even before the announcements came in the monthly phone bill announcing the service and its price. I found out about it the day it happened because when my modem, after dialing a local number and getting a busy signal, hung up and redialed, this time getting that same busy signal conferenced in with the new call. Sure enough, any form of rapid redialing -- modem or not -- was now off limits. If I'd make a call to, say, the local weather number, and then hang up right away and dial someone else, the weather line would be conferenced in with us. And I'd be getting charged. Calls to Ameritech yielded nothing. I told them that I was given Three-way Calling and that I didn't want it, but customer service operators at Ameritech knew nothing. Two days later my phone bill came. In fine print on one of the printed-out pages was an announcement of the new pay-per-use service, with a date of inception a week into the future. So I called Ameritech again and told them I didn't want it. They told me it was a repair issue, and sent me over to the Repair line. After one of their guys looked over my phone lines, they said nothing was wrong and that I'd have to discuss my feature set with the Business Office, and that if the programming on their switches had changed to include this new "feature" for everyone, there was nothing they could do about it. Calling the Business Office yielded surprise -- "That's not supposed to be active for another week" -- but no solution. I explained that it not only interfered with my normal dialing activities (sorry, but having to wait 2-3 seconds between making calls is not an option) as well as with my modem and other equipment (fax machine redialer too). They said they were sorry, but that it was changed for all POTS lines and I'd have to live with it. So I called the PUCO and explained the situation, and they told me to call the Ameritech Business Office again, giving me a direct number to the people I should speak with, and told me to tell them that I'd spoken with the PUCO about it. Within 24 hours, the pay-per-use Three-Way Calling "feature" was removed from all of my analog lines. Since then, I've spoken with friends and family around here who've experienced "weird dialing problems" that were no doubt this Three-Way Calling in action; I only wonder how many people still have it active and still have to pay for these dialing mistakes because of it. Sometime this summer, a few months after all this happened, Ameritech sent out a glossy flyer with their monthly statement announcing this "service." email stutz@dsl.org Michael Stutz . [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Same thing here! All of a sudden one day some business phones I am responsible for (and frequently use in rapid succession -- click/offhook/new call in two or three seconds -- began presenting me with the triple tone spurt. I *knew* what it was -- perhaps many people would not know -- and called Ameritech immediatly saying get it off the lines. It took two or three calls to the business office before I could get it removed, and then they acted sort of resentful that I was unwilling to have it on the lines. But the rules for those particular phones are that there are to be *NO* additional charges for 'frivilous' features. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #217 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Aug 25 09:18:02 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA18332; Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:18:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 09:18:02 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199708251318.JAA18332@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #218 TELECOM Digest Mon, 25 Aug 97 09:18:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 218 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Frontier Telco Accused of Racketeering (Ray Normandeau) Telephone Psychics (Tad Cook) Area Code Fun and Games in Massachusetts (oldbear@arctos.com) Sprint PCS Overloaded in Florida (Tad Cook) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (George Gilder) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: 24 Aug 97 09:51:14 EDT From: Ray Normandeau <110260.251@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Frontier Telco Accused of Racketeering CONTACT: Ray Normandeau 718-392-1267 Telcom Giant Frontier Accused of Racketeering ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On August 20, Rochester, NY based Frontier Corporation (NYSE: FRO) announced that Ronald L. Bittner had elected to step down as Chief Executive Officer of the company due to continuing "health challenges". Frontier Corporation's media representative, Randal A. Simonetti, 1-716-777-5886, neglected to mention in his press release that in Miami, FL, in July, Blackstone Calling Card Inc., a Miami-based manufacturer and distributor of pre-paid calling cards, filed a lawsuit alleging fraud and racketeering against Frontier. According to Long Distance Digest (http://www.THEDIGEST.COM), Frontier Corp. knowingly arranged for Blackstone to purchase the network services and PIN numbers for pre-paid calling cards through a senior sales representative of a Frontier subsidiary. Blackstone then manufactured and sold its pre-paid calling cards through its existing network of approximately 2,800 distributors and retailers. "... Frontier Corp. knowingly defrauded Blackstone Calling Card Inc by canceling access to pre-paid PINs for long distance calling." The lawsuit, which was filed in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court in Dade County, Fla. by Catlin, Saxon, Tuttle and Evans, P.A., demands $27 million in damages from Frontier Corp. Blackstone Calling Card Inc's media representative is; SAMCOR Communications Co., Cori Rice, Roxanne St. Claire, 1-305-443-5454. For Catlin, Saxon, Tuttle and Evans, P.A.: Jim Catlin, 1-305-371-9575. Late last year, the household of Raymond B. Normandeau in Long Island City Queens was slammed to Frontier/Allnet following a "welcome" letter from another company saying "thanks for switching." An investigation yielded a FORGED "Letter of Agency" with Mrs. Normandeau's name not only forged but misspelled. I am interested in talking about telcom abuses, including not only slamming but the growing scourge of unsolicited commercial E-mail. 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 ------------------------------ Subject: Telephone Psychics Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 23:32:06 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Telephone Psychics are a Gold Mind for Some, Source of Fraud for Others BY JAMES MCNAIR, THE MIAMI HERALD Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Aug. 23--"I can't believe it! She knew all about me -- and all I told her was my name and my birth date! "These psychics are incredible! I never thought that someone I never met could know so much about your life!" -- "Rainelle," in a TV ad for Psychic Solutions USA. Sound familiar? It should if you watch TV talk shows, soaps or late-night cable fare. Ads and infomercials for telephone psychics become epidemic after midnight. Change channels? Sorry, the psychics are there, too. In the mystic realm of dial-a-psychics, millions of Americans look for help, hope and happiness every month from the other end of a telephone line. In their moment of need, the advice of a friend, relative or counselor just won't do. So when Billy Dee Williams or Dionne Warwick says their soothing lines at 2 a.m., calling a psychic for $4 or $5 a minute seems the right route to go. Psychic advice hotlines are to the telephone business what the Klondike was to gold panners. The cash generated by pay-as-you-go 1-900 phone calls for entertainment and information services is estimated to reach $1.4 billion a year by 2000, up from $670 million in 1994, says Telemedia News & Views, and is catching Wall Street's eye. Obviously, the Rainelles of the world can't live without their psychics. But callers may be shocked to find where their money is going. If they came to Fort Lauderdale's posh Harbor Beach section and drove past a three-story $3.5 million house at 14 Isla Bahia Dr., surrounded by lush landscaping, a fleet of exotic cars and a docked 40-foot luxury powerboat, they would have a fair idea. The palace belongs to Steven L. Feder, a 47-year-old New Jersey native who has struck it rich in the psychic hotlines biz. Feder owns Psychic Readers Network, which supervises "several thousand" independent home-based psychics around the country. PRN claims to handle more calls and log more minutes than any of its rivals, including the Warwick-endorsed Psychic Friends. Feder isn't one to boast in public and he declined to be interviewed for this article. In private, though, Feder relishes showing off the spoils of his success. Psychics say he brags about his jewelry and his black 1997 Bentley convertible. At his birthday party in March, where Feder was said to be "dripping in diamonds," singer Gladys Knight treated his guests to a private performance. Feder's anonymity notwithstanding, Psychic Readers Network is known to millions. Who can resist when celebs like Billy Dee Williams, ex-Miami Vice star Philip Michael Thomas, actress-astrologer Joyce Jillson and South Floridaradio personality Bo Griffin are urging people to call? Almost without exception, callers are enticed by offers of 5, 10 or 15 minutes of free readings. But once those free minutes are up, the meter starts ticking away at $4.99 a minute. At that rate, a 30-minute reading will show up on someone's telephone bill as a $124.75 charge. As you might expect, it often has a laxative effect. Deborah Herman of Centerville, Va., said she lost her telephone service -- and her gift-basket business -- because of a disputed charge by a PRN psychic. "They told me I had been given 10 free minutes, but they never specified whether it started at the beginning or the end of the reading. I ended up with a $215 bill from them," she said. Herman successfully contested the charge. But the momentary loss of her telephone number was fatal. "My company has already bitten the dust over this," she said. "I had a $30,000 Yellow Page ad that I was still paying for." Cathryn Radeff of Sheffield Lake, Ohio, responded to a TV spot for three free minutes with a PRN psychic. The mother of seven was billed $78, but didn't pay. Instead, she called regulators. "In the conversation with the gentleman, I asked, `This isn't going to cost me anything?' and three different times he said no," Radeff said. "He lied to me." Complaints pour in from all over the country. The New York attorney general's office has more than 100 on file, Washington, 24. The Florida attorney general's office, with 12 complaints in hand, said it is investigating PRN. "The focus of our investigation is with regard to what's offered -- the free minutes," assistant attorney general Bob Buckner said. "Either they (customers) hadn't gotten it or they were misled about when it started." Unlike other telemarketeers, PRN is quick to make redress. Buckner and other regulators said most complaints lead to refunds. Peter Stolz, a PRN vice president and Feder's cousin, said customer satisfaction is a big concern. "We try to be extra, extra careful, clean and above and beyond reproach," Stolz said. "We give callers complete credits on any complaints. We don't want anybody to be dissatisfied in any way." Yet many of PRN's psychics are in disharmony. According to interviews with eight PRN psychics -- all of whom asked not to be named for fear of losing their jobs -- and documents obtained by The Herald, PRN has cut payouts to its top-earning psychics by 20 percent to 30 percent in the past year. PRN psychics receive flat rates of 20 cents to 25 cents for every minute they are logged on to the company's computerized calling system from their homes. Many work the psychic lines to supplement other sources of income. Last December, PRN raised the call-length averages that triggered per-minute bonus pay. In May, PRN canceled bonuses altogether. When the company raised rates to $4.99 from $3.99 a minute two months ago, psychics didn't receive a penny more. And when free calling time was upped to five minutes, callers took their readings and ran, hanging up at the five-minute beep and killing psychics' chances to make money. Psychics who average less than 12 minutes a call can lose their job, said one veteran of the PRN hotlines. More and more, they liken themselves to telemarketing agents. At the start of every call, psychics must obtain callers' names, addresses and phone numbers, all of which feed into computer databases to become leads for the sale of other products, psychic-related and not. In the current Astrological Society of America sales script obtained by The Herald, PRN psychics offer a $9.95-a-month membership -- good for a cassette player, tarot cards, a magazine, a personalized astrology chart and 15 minutes of psychic readings -- and saythe word "free" 18 times. "It's kind of sad because I feel the intent has been polluted," another PRN psychic in Florida said. "Instead of supplying answers or direction for people in need, they're sold, sold, sold." Another Florida psychic said she enrolled in the Astrological Society of America to see what her callers were getting. She said the cassette player ate the very first tape. The tarot deck was incomplete, and she received neither the magazine nor the personalized astrology chart. Afterward, she said she was inundated by junk mail. "I feel they're hiring people just to get money and the vast majority are not psychic at all and are making things up just to keep people on the line," she said. "It gives us a bad name. It makes me ashamed of what I have to do." According to company policies, PRN will "to the best of its ability hire only qualified psychics who have been tested and interviewed by PRN, not `chat' operators." But a former employee who managed PRN's psychics said that wasn't the case when he was there. "A good 90 percent of these people are horse s--t," the employee said. "They're just trained to pick up on certain things and go from there." That manager and one other said PRN's psychic ranks suffer from high turnover. Those who stay on have a sense of powerlessness. For all their psychic powers, they haven't the power to overcome their treatment as telemarketing pawns, they said. "I'm not going to put hexes on anyone," a Miami psychic said. "If I did, my husband would be writhing in boiling oil." Loretta Nichols, a teacher of psychic power in St. Louis, said she worked for PRN for two weeks in July but quit because she "couldn't stomach it." "Once I realized there was no essence of good to it and that they didn't care about their people or their psychics, I quit," she said. Wall Street connection PRN's money trough extends to Wall Street, which will latch onto most any business concept these days to make money. The link comes in the form of a limited liability company founded by Feder, Thomas Lindsey (his business partner and co-owner of the $3.5 million house) and Peter Stolz, a PRN vice president and Feder's cousin. The three men sold their 50 percent stake in New Lauderdale L.L.C. to the other half-owner, Quintel Entertainment of Pearl River, N.Y., last September. If you cancel AT&T long-distance service and get a call urging you back, odds are it's Quintel calling. New Lauderdale is the company that spreads most of the word about PRN's telepsychics. It owns 1-800 and 1-900 telephone lines. It owns membership clubs, like the Astrological Society of America and its Spanish-language counterpart, La Sociedad Astrologica de America. It hires celebrities and runs the TV spots and infomercials. And when callers' names and addresses roll in from PRN's telepsychics, it churns out junk mail for Quintel's sister products, like cellular phones, music, shampoo and, of course, more psychic readings. Quintel books the revenue. The sale of New Lauderdale turned Feder, Lindsey and Stolz into multimillionaires. According to SEC filings, Feder, Lindsey and Stolz received 3.2 million shares of Quintel's common stock. On the day of the deal, those shares were worth $6.50 apiece, or $21 million. A year later, as investors catch on to Quintel's money machine, the stock trades for $14. The PRN trio has already cashed in $5 million in stock and has a balance of $42.3 million as of Friday's close. The deal was especially lucrative for Feder. Feder's stake in New Lauderdale, exchanged for 1.424 million Quintel shares, is worth $18.3 million. In return for devoting 50 percent of his time managing New Lauderdale -- which is one floor below PRN in the International Building on East Sunrise Boulevard -- he was rewarded with a five-year contract starting at $187,000 a year, 10 percent annual raises, four weeks of paid vacation and the usual perks of a full-time executive job. Meanwhile, Quintel is on a roll. In the three-month period ended May 31, the company posted net income of $5.8 million on sales of $53.3 million -- more than half of which came from the New Lauderdale operation. Its customer database includes 30 million names and addresses culled from psychic readings, voicemail services and other 1-900 telemarketed products. Those names, of course, are rented to other companies with products of their own to sell. "They put me on every junk mail list selling psychic readings, crystals, pyramid cones and pills to increase psychic awareness," said Bonnie Yeager of Bartlett, Ohio. "I was probably getting five pieces of junk mail a week." The busier his psychics, the wealthier Feder becomes. For every $4.99 a minute that the psychics chalk up in sales, PRN keeps 39 1/2 cents, according to a Quintel document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission last Aug. 20. For every dollar Quintel's share price rises, Feder becomes $1.4 million richer on paper. To his psychics, the dollar amounts are beyond belief. That Feder is part owner of one of the nation's largest independent telemarketing companies is not. "He's definitely a telemarketer, the way he talks to people and pumps them up," a PRN psychic in North Carolina said. "He doesn't have a clue as to handling psychics." Herald researcher Michael Clark contributed to this report. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 22:26:21 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Area Code Fun and Games in Massachusetts The following is excerpted from a copyright story which appeared in the {Boston Globe} on Saturday, August 23, 1997: Cellucci to review new area codes By Bruce Mohl and Doris Sue Wong Globe Staff With the state's top phone regulator threatening to scrap two proposed area codes and adopt a whole new approach, Acting Governor Paul Cellucci said yesterday that he now wants to take a closer look at the Legislature's redrawn boundaries for new area codes. "As I said yesterday, I am probably going to sign what the Legislature has put before me," Cellucci said. "I'm not inclined to second-guess them unless there is some serious problem. And that is what we will have to see, if there is some serious problem." John Howe, chairman of the Department of Public Utilities, warned yesterday that the Legislature's area code plan would lead to substantially inferior phone service in Massachusetts, with 19 communities, including most of Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Needham, Newton, and Worcester, unable to get new phone listings for a five-month period starting next May. "Life in Massachusetts would be like life in a Third World country," Howe said. "You would have to wait months for a new phone number." Howe said he would be left with little choice but to scrap the geographical area code framework, as redrafted by the Legislature to include 10 more communities in 617, and replace it with the so-called overlay approach he earlier rejected. The overlay approach would allow existing customers to keep their current numbers while new customers would be assigned the new area codes. The plan would require everyone to dial 10 digits for all local calls and could result in customers on the same street, or even with two lines in the same house, having different area codes. Republican critics privately suggested Cellucci's willingness to overrule his own Department of Public Utilities was motivated by a desire to win votes in 1998 and legislative support for tax cuts. Attorney General Scott Harshbarger, a gubernatorial candidate who opposed the overlay approach in a Public Utilities hearing on area codes last year, urged Cellucci to veto the Legislature's changes. "I hope the acting governor will think long and hard about the statewide confusion and significant costs that could arise from his actions," Harshbarger said. "No one likes change, especially when it comes to their phone numbers, but a short-term gain in convenience for a few communities could produce long-term headaches for millions elsewhere in Massachusetts." Many businesses already have reprinted stationery and repainted signs in anticipation of the Sept. 1 conversion to the new area codes. Bell Atlantic mailed area code maps to customers last week that did not include the Legislature's recent additions. And some of Bell Atlantic's phone books have already gone out with area code maps as previously drawn. According to Howe and officials at Bell Atlantic, the Legislature's decision to add 10 more communities to 617 would mean the area code would exhaust its supply of numbers again in 1999 and another area code would need to be created. Without the 10 communities included, officials estimate another new area code would not be necessary for five to seven years. The Legislature's changes would also require Bell Atlantic to reprogram 200 switches, a process that could take until next November, and boost the $20 million cost of changing area codes to $30 million. The utilities plan to cover the costs by hiking rates. In the meantime, 19 communities would start running out of new numbers next May. Howe said he would be inclined to go with an overlay approach despite its disadvantages because it could be implemented more quickly. "That is a serious issue," Cellucci acknowledged. "I want to get to the bottom of that, whether that is true or whether that's a Washington Monument-type argument." Asked what a Washington Monument-type argument was, Cellucci said, "It's like they're blowing up something to what it isn't. ... When you peel it away, it really isn't as much of an objection as it seems." The state needs two new area codes to accommodate the rapid proliferation of lines for fax machines, modems, pagers, and cellular phones. The Public Utilities decision to carve 781 and 978 out of the existing 617 and 508 area codes caused little controversy until Belmont and Watertown tucked an amendment into the state budget that put them back in 617. Then-Governor William F. Weld approved the amendment with no objection from either Public Utilities or Bell Atlantic. Lawmakers then added an amendment putting Medford, Winchester, Woburn, Revere, Arlington, and Malden back into 617 to a deficiency budget. House and Senate negotiators, who are supposed to only resolve differences between bills passed by the two branches, then decided to toss in Lynn, Waltham, Lexington, and Lincoln. Senator Edward J. Clancy Jr. of Lynn acknowledged that it was highly unusual for a legislative conference committee to add elements to a piece of legislation that had not been included in either the House or Senate versions. Senate Ways and Means Chairman Stanley C. Rosenberg said it was hard to say no after Belmont and Watertown were allowed into 617. "Given that the first two were allowed and made it into law, how do you say no to the others?" he asked. Representative Joseph C. Sullivan, a Democrat from Braintree, filed a bill yesterday to force the 10 communities to pay the added cost of the last-minute changes. ------------------------------ Subject: Sprint PCS Overloaded in Florida Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 19:56:47 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Sprint Wireless Network Overwhelmed after Special Offer BY DAVID POPPE, THE MIAMI HERALD Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Aug. 23--An aggressive promotional deal by Sprint PCS has helped the upstart wireless telephone company sell thousands of phones in its first two months of service. But it has also led to frequent disruptions for customers as Sprint can't handle the resulting heavy volume of calls. Sprint PCS launched its wireless phone service July 1, about seven months behind the other PCS phone company in South Florida, PrimeCo Personal Communications. To attract customers, Sprint recently began a promotional deal offering new customers 1,500 minutes a month of calling time for a flat monthly $75 fee for two years with the purchase of a new phone, which costs about $200. The rate amounts to five cents a minute for wireless calling, substantially less than the 35 cents to 40 cents a minute typically paid by cellular telephone customers. But Sprint acknowledges the offer has boosted sales more than expected, so that the company's network has been overwhelmed from Oakland Park to Key West. "The demand for service has been tremendous," says Dan Olmetti, Sprint PCS' area vice president. "It's exceeded our expectations in this market. We probably are leading the country in all of the Sprint markets for adding new customers." Olmetti said Sprint's wireless equipment supplier, Northern Telecom, is working around the clock on a $10 million expansion of the system. "We hope to have the upgrade completed by early next week," Olmetti said. "That should alleviate the problem." Sprint PCS stopped the $75 promotion on Wednesday, but is still running a promotion that offers 500 minutes of service per month for $50. Juan Carlos Barreto, partner in Genesis Communications Systems in South Miami and a dealer for Sprint PCS, says the promotional rate sparked more demand than Sprint anticipated. His own customers have been reporting troubles since Monday, but Barreto said he was confident Sprint would resolve the problem soon. "They are working very hard at it," he said. The Herald received complaints from three Sprint PCS customers on Friday. Efforts to call those customers back on their Sprint phones were generally unsuccessful as circuits were busy on Sprint's network. One Sprint PCS customer who didn't want to be named said he'd had problems making and receiving calls on his phone for two weeks. "They tremendously oversold the $75 deal and the ad is still running," he complained. Olmetti asked customers to be patient. "It's something we understand," he said of customer frustration. "We're doing everything we can to catch up." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 03:31:56 -0400 From: George Gilder Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Kim Brennan writes: > In a nutshell (and pardon any lapses of memory), there are three > digital cellular phone technologies. TDMA, CDMA, and GSM. Not exactly, since GSM is TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access). The distinction you want is between compatible TDMA (IS-136), retrofitted to US AMPS analog, and incompatible TDMA (mostly GSM in the US). > TDMA was established first, and has fair amount of coverage. CDMA > in theory has about as much coverage as TDMA, but it still > (apparently) has some problems. Both of these phones types operate in > the 900Mhz range. TDMA operates in the 900MHz range, in the 1.9 GHz range, and in the form of Nextel's iDEN dispatch oriented special mobile radio system, is now moving toward full cellular services in 55 cities using several bands around 800 MHz. However, in all forms, TDMA still suffers from serious problems. CDMA (IS-95) is Code Division Multiple Access, a spread spectrum system that operates in the 900 MHz range compatible with AMPS as an overlay and in the 1.9 GHz band for PCS. The beauty of CDMA is that the very pseudo noise code used to spread the signal for transmission is inverted and used to despread the signal at the receiver, popping up the message and simultaneously spreading any real noise or interference spikes. This results in strikingly superior acoustics and dramatically lower power. Like all digital wireless technologies, CDMA is undergoing growing pains, but not as many as American TDMA, stubbornly offered by ATT wireless whose technical chief long depicted CDMA as a violation of the laws of physics. CDMA uses some 100 times less transmit power than TDMA and employs all the allocated spectrum all the time and thus is much more efficient for bursty data than any Time Division system. TDM, whether in wire or wireless form, wastes empty time slots whenever data is scant and drops bits during data bursts. > GSM, which is the European standard, is just getting > off the ground in the states. Sprint Spectrum (not to be confused with > Sprint PCS) uses GSM technology. This is in the 1.8 Ghz range (Europe > uses 1.9 Ghz). The coverage for GSM is not as broad as either of the > other two. Sprint Spectrum, a system inherited in DC from Personal Communications (as I recall, a Washington Post diversification failure), plans to join the rest of Sprint PCS as a CDMA system at 1.9 GHz (when it does, you will notice the superior acoustics and longer battery life). With a five year head start, GSM has global coverage (137 countries, I believe, mostly at 1.8 GHz). CDMA currently prevails in South Korea, where I last week examined the system in Seoul, with some 2 million users the most heavily loaded cellular system in the world. CDMA also thrives in Hong Kong, where it outperforms GSM head to head with half as many base stations. CDMA has recently been endorsed in Japan for its next generation service. When the GlobalStar satellite service is launched, CDMA will also command global coverage. > The full BYTE article (August 1997) goes into a lot more detail. Snowed by Ericsson, the BYTE geeks blew it, accepting the idea that CDMA is a technically dubious gamble. The article showed no idea of what is at stake, failing to recognize that CDMA is the compute intensive system that benefits most from the advance of Moore's Law and best accommodates computer data. In an upset, Ericsson -- the leading GSM TDMA exponent -- has nevertheless now endorsed CDMA for the next generation of data intensive wireless networks. QED. George Gilder ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #218 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Aug 27 00:36:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA02927; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:36:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:36:06 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199708270436.AAA02927@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #219 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Aug 97 00:36:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 219 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Extending Lives of Area Codes (Tad Cook) Learning to Live With `650' (Tad Cook) Re: CIR v. Port Speed in Frame Relay (Greg Monti) Re: CIR v. Port Speed in Frame Relay (Lars Poulsen) 56k Circuit and Problems (Rick Sommer) Recent Caller ID Changes? (Mike Fox) Looking For Information About X.25/CCS7 Convertor (Lee, Hyun Min) Free Wireless Comms Newsletter (Richard Schwarz) LD Carrier 10056 -- Any Stories? (Jim Van Nuland) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: Extending Lives of Area Codes Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 09:47:24 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (Proposals mentioned in this article bring up some interesting questions regarding calculating distance between wire centers based on the area code and first three digits of the phone number. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com) Texas Regulators Seek Key to Extending Lives of Area Codes BY JENNIFER FILES, THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Aug. 26--Contrary to popular belief, Dallas and its suburbs are not running out of phone numbers. Nor is out-of-control consumption of telecommunications technology the reason the vicinity probably will need two new area codes in 1998. The 214 area code contains nearly 8 million usable seven-digit phone numbers, and 972 added nearly 8 million more last year. That should be more than enough, mathematically, for every person in each area code to have two phone lines, a pager, a cellular phone and a fax machine. Companies that sell those services only wish demand were so high. Telecom businesses have been assigned 11 million numbers in the 214 and 972 area codes with the idea that they'll pass them on as customers need them. While Southwestern Bell estimates 75 percent of those numbers are being used, regulators and competing phone companies say only about one in three is actually in service. So what was that about needing more? "Something is very wrong here," said Leslie Kjellstrand, a spokeswoman for the Public Utility Commission of Texas. "You just got 8 million new numbers, and now you need 16 million more. It doesn't take a mathematical genius to say, Wait a minute we haven't had that many new pagers."' Simply put, a 45-year-old system that assigns numbers to phone companies in blocks of 10,000 regardless of need hasn't kept up with the times. Whether a carrier has one customer or one million, to provide basic phone service throughout the 214/972 region, it needs at least one block of numbers in each of 71 smaller zones, called rate centers. As a result, phone companies routinely reserve hundreds of thousands of numbers more than they can use at any given time. Regulators now refer to the seven-digit phone number as a scarce resource, and "number conservation" has become one of their biggest challenges. The PUC predicts that dialing any local call in the Dallas area will take 10 digits before the end of next year. Some say that could increase to 14 or 15 digits by 2025 unless the number crisis is solved soon. On Tuesday, commission officials in Austin will meet with representatives from major phone companies and from other states to begin devising an antidote. Chairman Pat Wood, still a bit bruised from public outcry against recent area code additions in Dallas, Houston and Fort Worth, has made area code reform a pet issue. "I want to be that prophet on the mountain that's just screaming, Guys, we just have to solve that problem before it's too late,"' he said. Bill Adair, the Southwestern Bell employee in charge of assigning Texas phone numbers, says a reasonable person could not have predicted the problem five years ago. The fact that it has so taken phone industry officials by surprise is proof of the startling speed at which the telecom industry is changing, he said. Until recently, assigning phone numbers in Southwestern Bell territory was a ho-hum job. All the work was done on paper ledgers, and there were no categories for competing local-phone companies. Numbers were distributed according to the North American Numbering Plan, a system put in place in 1951 that uses phone numbers as addresses for routing phone traffic and billing customers for their calls. The first three digits, the area code, identify a city or part of a state. The next three digits are unique to a group of computers, or "central office," located in a smaller zone called a rate center. Phone companies charge for long-distance service based on which rate centers are at either end of the call. Numbers are doled out in blocks of 10,000, such as (214) 977-0000 through (214) 977-9999. Because all the numbers in each group are in one rate center, all calls to numbers starting with those digits are billed at the same rates. For more than 40 years, one local-phone company in a given area took up almost all the assigned phone numbers because only that company provided local-phone service. When a town added a new block of phone numbers, it was a big deal because it meant the population was growing. Paging and wireless phone companies needed their own numbers when their technology took off in the 1980s. But the way they charge for calls hasn't traditionally required them to have a presence in each rate center, so the increase in assigned numbers was gradual. Then came the promise of local-phone competition, formalized 18 months ago when Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Now new companies that build part of their own networks need phone numbers, too. And though they may cherry-pick their customers passing over consumers for the more profitable business market most still opt for a relatively broad geographic service area. And to do that today, they must acquire far more phone numbers than they have customers. MCI Corp., which won't start selling local-phone service for months, already has more than 250,000 phone numbers on hold. Other would-be competitors are claiming a rising share of numbers long before customers can sign up for their service. To try to solve the problem, regulators on Tuesday will consider reprogramming computers to route phone calls on the four digits after the area code, rather than the current three digits, so that numbers could be assigned in groups of 1,000. Another idea is combining rate centers so that a group of numbers could serve a larger region. Regulators also will look at ways to loan unused numbers back to other companies and examine the effects of a new, federally mandated system that some say is the most fundamental change to the numbering system ever. Called "number portability," it will allow people to keep their phone numbers even when they change phone companies. Federal regulators have ordered the system in place in Dallas by May, and it should vastly reduce the amount of new numbers competitors need. "We're right on the teetering edge of having this solved," said Southwestern Bell's Mr. Adair. "With the solutions that the industry and the commissions are looking at, that relief will last well into the next millennium. We'll have an opportunity to do this right and do it once." ------------------------------ Subject: Learning to Live With `650' Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 11:09:47 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Learning to live with `650' New area code has some out of sync BY MICHELLE GUIDO Mercury News Staff Writer Let's face it: Change is tough. The Peninsula's new area code -- 650 -- has raised the ire of some people who are simply trying to conduct business as usual. Luckily for them, there are still 23 weeks left in the grace period. Peninsula dwellers -- and the people who call them -- should be happy to know that these minor annoyances are par for the course. Area code and phone officials say most of the problems people experience are with private -- mostly business -- phone systems, which have to be manually reprogrammed to accept new area codes. What that means is that people making calls from work -- or other places with private systems -- are getting that annoying, really fast busy signal much more often than those using their home phones. "We've only been telling people that we were going to (split the area code) for 15 months," said Doug Hescox, the California-Nevada code administrator. "But I still hear a lot of yelling." Hescox said that when someone calls to complain that they can't get through using the 650 area code, the first thing he asks them is, "Are you at a business location?" If they are, he asks if there's a private phone system, and if so, whether it is programmed correctly. That takes care of most problems, Hescox said. But the fact is, most people are not even bothering to dial 650 because they know they have over five months to make the transition. And it's a good thing they do, because in Silicon Valley, it's not just a matter of letting friends know you have a new number. People must change their stationery, business cards and advertising; they must also update fax machines and reprogram speed dialers, auto dialers, alarms and private phone systems. After that, they have to retool out-dial lists on personal computers and check with wireless phone and paging service providers to find out if they must reprogram those, too. Not everyone is complaining. Some people have actually been proactive about the change. Helen Person, manager of Congdon and Crome Inc. stationers in Palo Alto, said they alerted customers six months ago that the change would be happening by posting bright orange signs all over the store. Person said some of her regular customers put in early orders for new stationery or rubber stamps with their new phone numbers. She suspects business will pick up as the Jan. 31, 1998, cutoff date approaches. "We didn't even do our own business cards until last week," Person said. "And we only did it then because we thought we'd better set an example." But don't rush out and order a lifetime supply of business cards or stationery. Even the new 650 area code -- which extends to Mountain View and Los Altos and along the coast south of Pescadero -- is expected to last only 12 years before it splits again, Hescox said. The 415 designation had been the Peninsula area code since 1947, but because of the explosion in multiple-use telephone services, new area codes are springing up everywhere. Earlier this year, the utilities commission approved plans to split the 408 area code to create an 831 code for most of Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Benito counties. That will take effect next July. During this six-month get-acquainted period, if you still dial 415 when calling the Peninsula -- or if you omit the 415 when calling San Francisco or Marin from the Peninsula -- you'll get through. After January, there will be a three-month mandatory dialing period. This means that if you persist in dialing 415 when you mean 650, you'll hear a tape telling you that you've dialed the wrong area code. Hang up, and use the correct area code. After that, you're on your own. At Stanford University, where 29,000 telephone lines are home to 40,000 telephone numbers, the change has been relatively painless, according to Maureen Trimm, the university's assistant director of communication services. Stanford has its own telephone switch, which has already been reprogrammed to accept the new area code. But Trimm said that on Aug. 2, the first day of the changeover, there were people who were unable to make calls into the 650 area code from other places in the country. There's a trouble number on campus that people can call if they're having difficulty, but Trimm said that line hasn't seen much action. "I think that's because we put a lot of planning into this," Trimm said. "But it is summer. We'll see what happens when all of our faculty and students get back next month." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 01:27:36 -0400 From: gmonti@mindspring.com (Greg Monti) Subject: Re: CIR v. Port Speed in Frame Relay On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Stephen B. Kutzer wrote: > According to Sprint, they sell and route virtual circuits based on > "port speed"; if you buy a 56K port from them, you'll get 56K from > first bit to last. > Also according to Sprint, MCI and AT&T's frame connection are routed > based on committed information rate. They tell me that this involves > starting out at 16kbps and then "throttling up" to the CIR (e.g. 56k). It's more complicated than that. Frame Relay service has three components: 1. the "port" that talks in and out of the Frame Relay network (sometimes called the "cloud" because it's diagrammed that way); 2. the "permanent virtual circuits" that talk between ports inside the Frame Relay "cloud"; 3. the local loops, which connect each of the cloud ports to your customer premises. You, as customer, can order the "speeds" of any of these elements to be any of a series of numbers the common carriers offer. They don't have to be numerically related to each other. However, you should pick the cheapest combination that gets the job done. Ports have a fixed speed, which you specify at time of order. In this case, which I'll call City A, it sounds like you will be ordering a 56kbit/sec port speed. This is the speed at which data will pass into and out of the Frame Relay cloud in City A. You then have to pick a speed for the local loop in City A. You could pick 56k, which would match the port speed. But you might want to pick a faster number (see below for why). You then have to pick the port speed and local loop speed for City B. Then you have to pick the speed of the permanent virtual circuit between City A's port and City B's port. Permanent Virtual Circuits (PVCs) have TWO speeds associated with them. There is a minimum data rate, which you are always guaranteed to get, called the Committed Information Rate (CIR). And, optionally, there can be a second "speed" for the PVC, which is called the "burst speed". This is the data rate you can achieve on the PVC if the network is not particularly busy. Often, the burst speed is set to be twice the CIR. If data is passing at the burst speed and the network suddenly becomes too busy to handle it, some random packets will be thrown away until your net speed is throttled down to the CIR again. The packets that are lost are called "discard eligible." It's up to you as the end user to figure out which packets got lost and resend them. If you are doing FTP sessions over TCP/IP this detection and retransmission are automatic. But it's provided outside of the Frame Relay network. Now, why might you want the local loop speed to be higher than the port speed? Because it may be the only economical way to implement the network. In some cities, the monthly rate for a 256 kbit/sec circuit is only slightly cheaper than a 1.544 Mbit/sec T-1 circuit. Ripping out the 256 and converting it to T-1 will incur an installation fee far exceeding several months' price difference between the two. It might be worth installing the T-1 now. Also, the port speeds don't need to equal the CIR's of the PVCs that are being connected to that port. Let's suppose you add a City C to the network. And suppose you order a CIR from A to C of 56 kb. And a CIR from A to B of 56 kb. What should the port speed at A be? If you set it to 56k, and both B and C try to send at their full 56k rate to A, each will only get half of the 56k rate to City A. Because the slowest shared element in the system will determine speed. You might want to set City A's port speed to 256. Then, even when bursty traffic is arriving from B and C, both at the burst rate of 112 kb/s (a total of 224 kb/s from both sites), Port A will not "run out" of bandwidth and will not be the bottleneck. It comes down to how important instant delivery is. If you can wait 30 seconds, or 2 minutes, even those 2 MB files you mentioend will eventually get through. You'll have to consider the business application (can you wait that long?). Greg Monti Jersey City, New Jersey, USA gmonti@mindspring.com www.mindspring.com/~gmonti/home.htm ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: CIR v. Port Speed in Frame Relay Date: 25 Aug 1997 20:54:28 -0700 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article Stephen B. Kutzer writes: > According to Sprint, they sell and route virtual circuits based on > "port speed"; if you buy a 56K port from them, you'll get 56K from > first bit to last. > Also according to Sprint, MCI and AT&T's frame connection are routed > based on committed information rate. They tell me that this involves > starting out at 16kbps and then "throttling up" to the CIR (e.g. 56k). Fundamental to Frame Relay networks is the notion that you can subscribe to a guaranteed bandwidth from each point on the network to each other point on the network. If this commited information rate is low, the network is generally inexpensive. Certainly, a lower CIR should be less expensive than a higher CIR. The CIR is priced separately from the access pipe (the leased line from your premises to the nearest frame relay switch on the network). If Sprint is truly unable to provision a CIR less than your access line, I would expect their service to be A LOT more expensive than their competition. If you really need fast transfer rates, why are you considering only 56K access lines? Many network operators will let you take a T-1 access line; contract for a 56K Committed Information Rate and let you use the excess on an "as available" basis, i.e. you can try to send more, but when the network is busy, they reserve the right to toss the bits you haven't paid for. Then if at the end of the month it turns out that you have been using the headroom a lot, they may try to sell you a higher CIR. As always, your best deal is never with ANY of the big ones. For frame relay, you definitely need to make sure your market research includes LDDS/WilTel, PSI and UUnet. Oh, and since you mentioned that your application is based on FTP ... how did you decide that you need FR service, not IP service ? Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@OSICOM.COM OSICOM Technologies (Internet Business Unit, formerly RNS) 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Telephone: +1-805-562-3158 ------------------------------ From: Rick Sommer Subject: 56k Circuit and Problems Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 11:43:05 -0400 Organization: Concentric Internet Services Reply-To: rsommer@concentric.net We have a problem with one of our 56k PPP connections. One CSU/DSU is showing a network alarm (not working) and the other shows a good connection. Now we figure that if you don't get a good connection, both CSU/DSU's will show an alarm. This was the case in a lab environment where we simulated our connection with a crossed CAT5 (1,2-7,8 reversed) which simulates a 56k connection, only we need to use the clock from one of the CSU/DSU's for timing, whereas a 56k connection provides the timing to the dcom equipment. If we changed cat5 cable to straight through, both CSU/DSU's would show an alarm. We figured that would be the case in the real world also. (Note: our other 56k connections work fine and are needed so there can be no experimentation there). We are avoiding Ma Bell (for now ...) if at all possible. Does anybody have any experience that could shed some light on this? Thanks for the reply. Rick rsommer@concentric.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 08:42:05 -0400 From: Mike Fox Reply-To: mikefox@ibmREMOVETHIS.net Subject: Recent Caller ID Changes? Between August 20th and now (August 26th) I have noticed some changes in caller id that make that feature a little less useful. On 8/20 and before, calls that were received from areas where the number is available but not the name (for example, from cell phones that support CID and from cities with other phone companies) would display the name as "CITY NAME, ST", where ST is the two-letter state abbreviation. Starting yesterday, 8/25, I have noticed that now they display as STATE NAME, with no city information. For example, scrolling through the memory of my CID box, I see a call received on 8/20 identified as: ROCKYMOUNT, NC 919-977-XXXX But when I got a call from the same person yesterday (8/25), it displayed as: NORTH CAROLINA 919-977-XXXX My carrier is Bellsouth. Rocky Mount, NC, is in Sprint territory I think. But it's not just Sprint->Bellsouth. I have a Bellsouth DCS digital mobile phone. When I called my home phone from it, it used to display as: RALEIGH, NC 919-272-XXXX Now it displays as: NORTH CAROLINA 919-272-XXXX So it appears to be a universal change? Or is it a change in how Bellsouth interprets the information? Has anyone else noticed it? This is much less useful to me, especially since I have a Nortel Maestro phone that just shows the name for incoming calls, and you have to press a button to get it to show the number. Just seeing NORTH CAROLINA is obviously not very useful. Later, Mike Spam busting: to send e-mail, delete capital letters from my address. By the way, I am not: webmaster@cyberpromo.com So don't extract the above address if you want to reach me! ------------------------------ From: Lee, Hyun Min Subject: Looking For Information About X.25/CCS7 Convertor Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:34:24 +0900 Organization: SK Telecom Reply-To: hmlee@sktelecom.re.kr I'm an engineer of SK Telecom in South Korea. SK telecom is a major wireless communication service provider has four million mobile phone subscribers and 6.5 million paging subscribers. I'm engaged in project about international roaming. And I'm gathering information about X.25/SS7 convertor, its price, shape, capacity and more detail. Give me a e-mail. Mail address is mailto:hmlee@sktelecom.re.kr Name : Hyun Min Lee Tel : 82-42-865-0613 Fax : 82-42-865-0530 e-mail : hmlee@sktelecom.re.kr ------------------------------ From: Richard Schwarz Subject: Free Wireless Comms Newsletter Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:36:17 -0400 Organization: APS Reply-To: aaps@erols.com A free online wireless comms newsletter is now available from SIGTEK at: http://www.sigtek.com/sigtek/Q3_97.html It contains some free downloads and Website reccomends, as well as an article on Multipath fading. You can subscribe to the the newsletter for free by responding to this email with the words WIRELESS SUBSCRIBE in the subject header. Richard Schwarz ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 01:21:36 PDT From: Jim Van Nuland Subject: LD Carrier 10056 -- Any Stories? I received an offer from a long-distance carrier -- 10056 -- that looks very interesting. 10 cents plus 12 or 10 cents/minute for day/evening calls. Within California 9.5 or 6.5/minute plus the 10-cent surcharge. Billing in 6-second increments. No monthly fee or minimum. Noticeably cheaper than my present LCI service, unless the call is rather short. Since I don't make many calls, this seems like a very good deal, unless there are some hidden "features". Has anyone some experience with these folks? The company name is "Qwest Communications" [sic]. Jim Van Nuland, San Jose (California) Astronomical Association ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #219 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Aug 27 08:36:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA23307; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:36:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:36:04 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199708271236.IAA23307@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #220 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Aug 97 08:36:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 220 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson California Telecom Deregulation and Pay Phones (Tad Cook) Where Do the Free Off-Shore Calls Go? (clintcrg@aol.com) Dialing Into a Line Shared by Fax and Data-Modem (Paul Bandler) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Payton Chung) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Ken Moselen) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Juha Veijalainen) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Jason Lindquist) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Kathy Kost) Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion (Kate Knill) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. 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: California Telecom Deregulation and Pay Phones Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 11:02:46 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) California Telecom Deregulation May Mean End of 20-Cent Pay Call BY REBECCA SMITH, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, CALIF. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Aug. 24--Say goodbye to one of the last certainties of a tumultuous telephone industry: the 20-cent local pay-phone call. Starting Oct. 7, owners of public pay phones can charge consumers whatever they want for local calls -- defined as those terminating within 12 miles of the caller. Same goes for 411, or local directory- assistance, calls. They must, however, continue to offer free 911 emergency service. Industry-watchers expect prices to jump -- perhaps dramatically -- at many of California's 280,000 pay phones. Some fear price-gouging where vendors have captive customers, such as in airports or shopping centers, as well as in poor neighborhoods. "This will have a tremendous impact on the poor," said John Gamboa of the Greenlining Institute in San Francisco, a consumer advocacy group. "Home-telephone penetration has been falling among the poor, pushing them onto coin phones. Now they'll be open prey for unscrupulous companies." If prices lurch upward or if service declines after Oct. 7, don't blame the California Public Utilities Commission. It fought the order issued in September 1996 by the Federal Communications Commission that deregulates coin rates for nearly 2 million public pay phones nationwide. The 87-page FCC order implemented a congressional directive to remove barriers to "fair compensation" of pay-phone providers "to promote the widespread deployment of pay-phone services to the benefit of the general public." It was intended to unleash competitive ingenuity and address industry complaints that owners weren't being compensated adequately for an explosion in toll-free calling and for local calls. Though it's been an ardent free-market advocate in recent years, the state PUC joined nine other states and asked an appellate court to block the order. The states argued that the federal mandate constituted "an unwarranted pre-emption of state authority" and would obstruct states' efforts to defend the public interest. California particularly worried about people who rely on pay phones for basic phone service. New York officials further cautioned that pay-phone deregulation would be met by "extreme customer reaction and antagonism" -- in other words, phone rage. Nevertheless, an appeals court last month upheld the FCC order. If the experience of states that already have deregulated coin calls means anything, the worst-case scenarios may not materialize. Nebraska took the deregulatory step a decade ago and "there was no real chaos," said John Burvainis, deputy director of the Nebraska Public Service Commission. "Prices," Burvainis said, "settled at 25 cents and we haven't heard `boo' about pay phones in years. The sky didn't fall in." Pay-phone providers haven't announced rate changes for California, but a price of 35 cents pops up frequently in industry discussions. "Thirty-five cents seems tolerable," said Tracie Nutter, executive director of the California Payphone Association. "Anything above that seems less tolerable." Thirty-five cents is the price that has become the norm in the four other Midwestern states that have deregulated local coin rates. Pacific Bell, which has 65 percent of California's pay-phone market with 140,000 units, says consumers want uniform pricing so they won't have to fish for the right change every time they approach a phone booth. "I don't know what we're going to charge," said Tom Weber, head of Pacific Bell's pay-phone business in San Ramon. "But I do know it's highly unlikely we'll charge different prices at different locations." Of course, that still leaves nearly 6,000 other pay-phone providers in California who may choose to follow some other strategy. If California's past experience is any guide, some pay-phone providers will take advantage of their newfound powers to jack up rates dramatically. For a brief period from late 1987 to mid-1990, independent pay-phone providers were allowed to charge whatever they wanted for local calls. The subsequent public outcry prompted a PUC investigation. And, in 1990, independent operators agreed to a settlement that imposed a 20-cent ceiling on local calls of less than 15 minutes. "We have no idea what's going to happen now," said Mary Cooper, a telecommunications specialist for the ratepayer-advocacy division of the PUC. "What's to stop them from charging $1 in locations where they have an exclusive contract, such as airports?" Consumer advocates fear that the deregulation won't benefit anyone but pay-phone providers because the market isn't competitive enough to unleash competitive benefits. Even though Pacific Bell has lost 35 percent of its pay-phone market to competitors, that competition has centered on high-volume locations. For example, MCI won the multimillion-dollar pay-phone contract for the state of California four years ago. AmTel Communications -- now in financial trouble -- won over Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART). But instead of offering competing phones, side by side, competition simply has allowed different companies to sew up key locations so consumers still have only one choice when they want to make a call. "The main issue I have with the FCC order is that it pre-empts the ability of states to protect consumers from outrageously high rates, particularly at exclusive locations," said Ken McEldowney, executive director of Consumer Action in San Francisco. "It creates an environment that will drive prices up, not down." That's because pay-phone providers split the revenues with site owners, often paying commissions equal to 15 percent or more of the revenues. Buried in the FCC order is another provision that could push prices up: Companies like Pacific Bell are prohibited from subsidizing their pay-phone operations with revenues from other sources. Pay-phone operators say there are many forces that will discourage price increases. The most basic is a desire to be seen as a good company. "We have no plans to raise our rates," said Taylor Ramsey, regional manager for GTE in Bellflower, near Long Beach, operator of 20,000 public pay phones in California. "We want to keep prices low to create brand recognition and loyalty." Site owners who contract with pay-phone providers to install phones care about their image, too, says the president of a national independent pay-phone trade group. Most see pay phones as a service to customers -- not as a profit center to be exploited. "As a pay-phone operator, I'm not going to want to tick off customers who will get mad at a store where I have my phones," said Vince Sandusky, president of the American Public Communications Council in Virginia. "If I make the site owner mad, I may lose the contract the next time around." For its part, the FCC says a growing cellular phone industry should help keep pay-phone prices in line. (Higher-than-average cellular phone rates in California may undercut this as much of a countervailing force, though.) If there's evidence of market abuse, the FCC has said, it will consider amending its order, but on a state-by-state basis. "We expect there will be unique circumstances where there will be market failures," said John Muleta, chief of enforcement for the FCC's Common Carrier Bureau in Washington, D.C. "We're willing to look at data the states provide and tailor individual solutions." It is not clear who will do that monitoring in California. The FCC order, though it usurps some state powers, leaves one potent tool for ensuring pay-phone availability: "public-interest telephones" that can be publicly subsidized. The FCC has instructed the states to develop policies on public-interest pay phones and report back by November 1998. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:05:54 -0400 From: clintcrg@aol.com Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: Where Do The Free Off-Shore Calls Go? I was recently in Sao Tome (Republica Democratica San Tome and Principe-two small islands off the coast of equitorial West Africa-Country Code 239). Co-incidently, the day before I left I received a spam advertising a "Hot Tub" line at +239 12 9XXXX. While on Sao Tome, population 300,000, I tried dialing 9XXXX. All city lines are 2XXXX, island of Principe 5XXXX, another small town 3XXXX. Of course the 9XXXX call got reorder. Communications with the local telephone operator assured me there were no 9XXXX numbers. +239 12 is the numbering plan for all numbers as there are no city codes. All communications to Sao Tome arrives by a satellite link through Portugal (excellent service). Thus a call to Sao Tome would switch to this satellite in Portugal. Therefore, if the 9XXXX numbers are NOT on the island, where do the calls go? What happens to the billing separations if the call does not route to the true destination? Is this fraud in the ITU plan of separations as I am sure the calls never go to the island? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The same technique is used with calls to certain conference bridges, etc operating in the USA. With the connivance of certain long distance carriers, calls are intercepted at the LD carrier's switch and routed over special circuits to some other place which may or may not be geographically related to the code being dialed. The conference bridge operator is paid for his work in the form of commissions by the LD carrier for the traffic he generates on their network. That's why there is no charge to the user of the service other than normal long distance rates. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Paul Bandler Subject: Dialing Into a Line Shared by Fax and Data-Modem Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 22:54:03 +0100 Organization: Compass Software Engineering I have a home office with a single phone line shared between my fax, phone/answer machine and dial-out modem on a PC. I would like to know if there is any way I could make a data-call to this line and ensure that it is answered my the modem on my PC as opposed to the fax machine. That is will my fax machine (which I understand listens to all calls and picks them up if it here's the 'right' signal) pick up the call when it hears a modem on the other end, or is there a distinction between fax and ordinary data call hand-shakes? Thanks in anticipation, Paul Bandler ------------------------------ From: paytonc@planetall.remove.com (Payton Chung) Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Date: Tue, 26 Aug 97 04:58:20 GMT Organization: The Happy Zoo - http://www4.ncstate.edu/eos/users/c/chung/payton George Gilder wrote: > Sprint Spectrum [APC]... plans to join the rest of Sprint PCS as a > CDMA system at 1.9 GHz (when it does, you will notice the superior > acoustics and longer battery life). After getting a new phone, I presume! > With a five year head start, GSM has global coverage (137 countries, I > believe, mostly at 1.8 GHz). Most are at 900 MHz. 1.8 GHz (DCS 1800) service is available in a few European countries but is licensed in China and parts of Southeast Asia. > When the GlobalStar satellite service is launched, CDMA will also > command global coverage. Iridium, ICO, and Globalstar all plan to offer global GSM roaming (that is, beyond the $60 billion in infrastructure already present). However, most of today's wireless users probably won't need to roam to Siberia, much less pay the considerable sum necessary to purchase a MSS-compatible handset, plus the airtime charges. > In an upset, Ericsson -- the leading GSM TDMA exponent -- has > nevertheless now endorsed CDMA for the next generation of data > intensive wireless networks. QED. Not CDMA as in IS-95, but CDMA as incorporated into UMTS. The GSM MoU organization and the UMTS Forum recently signed a cooperation agreement that will make evolution from GSM to UMTS much less frightful than a TDMA->CDMA transition sounds. In any case, UMTS will be heavily based on existing GSM technology. CDMA proponents in the U.S. appear to be winning in their proposal to make cdmaOne the third generation wireless standard. AT&T and BellSouth still want an IS-136 based TDMA standard, which is quite stupid for all involved excepting themselves. It will be interesting to see whether GSM providers in the U.S. "graduate" to cdmaOne or to UMTS -- the latter meaning that the U.S. will have competing wireless technologies well into the future. In any case, the Europe/U.S. incompatibility will be with us for a long while, excepting dual-band UMTS phones. (Payton Chung opines for himself * http://www.mainquad.com/web/paytonc) ------------------------------ From: Ken Moselen Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 08:26:40 +1200 In Issue #218, George Gilder wrote... [...deletia] > However, in all forms, TDMA still suffers from serious problems. Really? I hadn't noticed. (I use GSM-900 here in New Zealand, and I have yet to notice a "serious problem" with it.) If TDMA (and by implication GSM as GSM is a form of TDMA) still has serious problems, why is it in use in over 140 countries, when CDMA is only in use in a handful? [...Brief description of CDMA deleted] > This results in strikingly superior acoustics and dramatically > lower power. I'm afraid the acoustics of the phone service (on digital cellular) owe NOTHING to the air-interface (be it Digital-AMPS, GSM, or CDMA) and everything to the Vocoder; if the standard calls for a not-so-great Vocoder (because that's all that was invented when the standard was written) of course it won't sound as good as the latest whizz-bang Vocoder in the latest whizz-bang standard. [...] > TDM, whether in wire or wireless form, wastes empty time slots > whenever data is scant and drops bits during data bursts. TDMA does not drop bits during data bursts; however it may (depending upon implementation) waste timeslots if it has nothing to transmit. True CDMA is theoretically more efficient, but in practice; TDMA has the larger capacity today; and if you say "but CDMA will improve" the answer is so will TDMA. [Brief reply to who has what in TDMA/CDMA etc.] GSM is the Generic term for all implementations of GSM at any frequency. GSM-900 Used in 140 odd countries excluding North America GSM-1800 Used in many of the GSM-900 countries as capacity expansion. GSM-1900 Used in some North American TDMA implementations IS-95 (CDMA) is used mostly in North America, and a handful of other places. [...] > what is at stake, failing to recognize that CDMA is the compute > intensive system that benefits most from the advance of Moore's > Law and best accommodates computer data. In an upset, Ericsson -- > the leading GSM TDMA exponent -- has nevertheless now endorsed CDMA > for the next generation of data intensive wireless networks. QED. Yes, but all that really says is Ericsson thinks they can make a bit of money off the CDMA market, not that it will be a success or a failure, but simply will make them some money; and besides, no matter what you do, even CDMA is not exempt from Shannon's law. Regards, Ken Moselen CAD Administrator, City Design, Christchurch City Council, PO Box 237, Christchurch, New Zealand. Ken.Moselen@ccc.govt.nz Tel: +64.3.3711708 Fax: +64.3.3711783 Gsm: +64.21.337963 ------------------------------ From: Juha.Veijalainen@iki.fi (Juha Veijalainen) Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 01:04:16 +0300 Organization: Jkarhuritarit George Gilder (gg@gilder.com) wrote in : > Kim Brennan writes: >> In a nutshell (and pardon any lapses of memory), there are three >> digital cellular phone technologies. TDMA, CDMA, and GSM. > Not exactly, since GSM is TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access). The > distinction you want is between compatible TDMA (IS-136), retrofitted > to US AMPS analog, and incompatible TDMA (mostly GSM in the US). GSM is much more than just the radio interface, which uses TDMA -- a different version from the 'TDMA' in USA. Standards cover many aspects of the network. GSM's version of TDMA is compatible in all other continents than the Americas. AFAIK the press seems to report that GSM technology does not have all the licensing problems CDMA has single source holding main patents, lots of current and pending lawsuits. Technologically the CDMA radio interface looks good, but it has suffered from the initially claimed unrealistic performance figures. Juha Veijalainen, Helsinki, Finland http://www.iki.fi/juhave/ Mielipiteet omiani / Opinions personal, facts suspect ------------------------------ From: linky@see.figure1.net (Jason Lindquist) Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Date: 26 Aug 1997 01:05:52 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign An infinite number of monkeys masquerading as Kim Brennan wrote: > In a nutshell (and pardon any lapses of memory), there are three > digital cellular phone technologies. TDMA, CDMA, and GSM. For reference, GSM is a TDMA technology. Several PCS (1900 MHz) carriers in the United States, such as Pacific Bell Mobile Services, are using GSM, selling phones made by Ericsson, Motorola, and Nokia. Some use the smart card (commonly referred to as a "SIM card") common to GSM phones sold in Europe, some do not. Qualcomm still has the lion's share of the CDMA handset market in the United States and much of the rest of the world. However, Samsung and Motorola, I believe, have also announced the release of their own CDMA phones, though I have yet to see them here in the States. Samsung I know is definitely selling overseas. > As I recall, TDMA was established first, and has fair amount of > coverage. Many cellular (800 MHz) carriers have been offering TDMA service for some time, based on TIA standard IS-136. This is not GSM, it's a TDMA implementation grafted onto the existing analog cellular system. (Cellular One in Chicago and the San Francisco area are examples.) > CDMA has been getting a lot of the recent attention from the phone > companies and in theory has about as much coverage as TDMA, but it > still (apparently) has some problems. As with any new technology, CDMA systems are having their growing pains, as the major infrastructure vendors (such as Lucent, Motorola, Nortel, and Qualcomm) work out the early problems in their hardware, and the providers troubleshoot and optimize their new networks. Cellular providers adopting CDMA and TDMA have the obvious advantage of already- proven setups, while many PCS carriers, GSM and CDMA both, must solve geographic and RF dilemmas. Remember, as analog cellular grew a decade or more ago, many of the same problems were common. (It's interesting to note that some PCS carriers, such as Sprint PCS in San Diego, have set up miniature cells that hang from cable television lines. Building the well-recognized triangular tower isn't always an option, and it's forced the carriers to be more inventive.) > Both of these phones types operate in the 900Mhz range. Not in the United States. There is spectrum around 800 MHz allocated for two carriers, which has been used for analog systems, and is now being migrated to include digital systems. There is also spectrum allocated around 1900 MHz, divided into six blocks, used by GSM and CDMA (J-STD-008) systems. If there are systems operating ~900 MHz, these are likely SMR (Specialized Mobile Radio) systems, such as those run by Nextel. The original poster was examining a choice between Airtouch PowerBand service (800 MHz CDMA), AT&T Wireless (800 MHz TDMA, 1900 MHz GSM as well?), and Sprint PCS (1900 MHz CDMA). There are two questions that might merit consideration while you shop for service... the technical and the business/political aspects of coverage. At present, 800 MHz phones are dual-mode, meaning they will fall back to analog service when they cannot find their respective digital service. Roaming with a dual-mode 800 MHz phone is just as easy as roaming with the plain analog phone you've had for years. Roaming with 1900 MHz phones is a bit more limited. PCS carriers don't have roaming agreements as robust as the cellular carriers quite yet. (Buy a PrimeCo, Sprint, or PacBell phone, and go to a non-{PrimeCo, Sprint, PacBell} city, and you might be out of luck.) And as PCS networks are still in their infancy, so when you run out of their range, for the moment you might also be without service. The PCS phone manufacturers are beginning to offer dual- and tri- mode phones. Ericsson has a dual-band/tri-mode phone that supports 1900 MHz GSM, 800 MHz TDMA, and 800 MHz analog systems. Qualcomm has announced a dual-band/dual-mode phone that will support 1900 MHz CDMA and can fall back to 800 MHz analog cellular. Jason A. Lindquist linky@see.figure1.net ========================NOTE============================ Senders of unsolicited commercial/propaganda e-mail subject to fees. Details at http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/jlindqui ------------------------------ From: kkost@intermec.com (Kathy Kost) Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Date: 26 Aug 1997 18:38:23 GMT Organization: Intermec, Inc. Hello everybody, I just wanted to publicly thank everyone who answered my questions on the subject of Digital services. I now know a *whole lot* more than I did before and in some ways it made my decision more difficult because I could see all the various permutations! I ended up going with AT&T's TDMA service, using a Nokia 2160 phone and I fully realize that the voice quality won't be up to CDMA and/or GSM. AirTouch in the Seattle area was my first choice because they have CDMA and analog in all of Washington State, but the idiots wanted a one year contract, which none of the other telecom companies wanted. Sprint PCS seemed good, but unless you stayed along the I-5 corridor, you wouldn't get any service which was unacceptable to me. AT&T, until this weekend, didn't have any rates that were competitive and so I was actually considering the one year AirTouch contract. Turns out that over the weekend, AT&T came up with a plan for existing customers only to get 600 minutes airtime for $50/month, and that includes paging/alpha-numeric to your phone. The deal is good for a year, but you have no yearly contract. So, even though I consider the AT&T technology behind the times and CDMA (as well as GSM) far more interesting technically, right now I need connectivity more than voice quality. Either way I had to invest $200 in a phone, and without a yearly contract, that's really the worst of my risk. I also have a hard time believing that AT&T will remain behind the times for long, so hopefully they'll come up with some better voice decoder technology sooner than later. For now I'll sit back and see what happens in the future months and at some point in my life will think about changing again. Thanks again for all the help. Kathy ------------------------------ From: Kate Knill Subject: Re: CDMA vs. TDMA Confusion Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 11:11:47 -0700 Organization: Nuance Communications Kathy Kost wrote: > 1. I'm assuming that AT&T PCS and Sprint PCS is TDMA and *not* CDMA. > Is that correct? As mentioned by others the PCS services are TDMA. PCS was originally intended to signify 1900MHz operation, but is now used for both that and 900MHz. > 2. What are the pros and cons of TDMA versus CDMA? I know that > Qualcomm's CDMA is supposedly newer and better but I'm sure the > service area is not very extensive for the moment. I would imagine > this would change (?) IMHO, in terms of speech quality I would rate the 3 digital systems as: 1. CDMA - the 13kHz vocoder system sounds excellent, I believe there are some 8kHz vocoder systems (e.g. LA) which will have worse quality; 2. 1900Mhz GSM/PCS - suffers inside buildings from more dropouts; 3. TDMA (IS-136) - by far and away the worst. Coverage: 1. TDMA; 2. CDMA - combined with analog beats GSM but GSM may have wider digital coverage; 3. GSM/PCS. Extra features: 1. GSM/PCS 2. TDMA PCS 3. CDMA TDMA is the oldest technology so has the best coverage. For both TDMA and CDMA you should be able to get dual analog-digital phones. So the overall phone coverage is the same, you just won't get as opportunites for digital service features with a CDMA phone. Triple-mode GSM phones are supposed to be coming - actually Ericcson at least are advertising them on their webpages. This field is developing very quickly with new cells and phones being launched all the time. > 3. Air Touch is giving me the story that the Sony CM-D500 that they > sell is the only CDMA phone in existence right now. Is this bull or > reality? AT&T sells Nokia and Ericsson which leads me to believe that > they're using TDMA and a different service. The Nokia 2180 is a dual-mode CDMA/AMPS phone. Couldn't find a CDMA phone on the Ericcson website. (see http://www.nokia.com/americas/phones/index.html for Nokia phones) (see http://phones.ericsson.se/phones/eridigph.html for Ericcson phones). Hope this helps. Kate Knill Phone: +1 650-614-8284 Nuance Communications Fax: +1 650-462-8201 333 Ravenswood Ave., Bldg. 110 Menlo Park, California 94025. E-mail: remove nospam from above ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #220 ****************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Aug 27 09:28:02