From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Jun 20 21:16:19 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id VAA03051; Thu, 20 Jun 1996 21:16:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 21:16:19 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606210116.VAA03051@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #301 TELECOM Digest Thu, 20 Jun 96 21:16:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 301 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Andrew C. Green) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (lr@access2.digex.net) Re: Phone History Question (John Shriver) Re: Phone History Question (Ed Ellers) 4-Prong vs. Modular Plugs (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Future of X.25 Networks vs Internet (Garrett Wollman) Re: Caller ID with Pre-Paid Calling Card? (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: International 800 Numbers (Bob Goudreau) Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers (John Higdon) Re: Modem For Use in Greenland (Lars Poulsen) Re: Sending Faxes as Attachment to E-Mail (Keith W. Brown) Re: Sending Faxes as Attachment to E-Mail (Gordon McFadden) Re: New Nevada Area Code (Daryl R. Gibson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 16:02:38 -0500 From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? John Hall writes: > Could someone who has seen a PCS site describe it? Certainly. Here in the Chicago area, Ameritech ran an 18-month test of a PCS network in areas of Chicago and northwest suburban Arlington Heights in 1992-1993. I was a participant in the trial with about 500 other people and wrote a series of articles here in the Digest at the time. This is my non-technical opinion only: From what I saw of the visible hardware and what was shown on the instructional videotape accompanying the PCS phone, a typical site involves a straight rod antenna about two feet long, clamped in the middle by a small mounting arm to attach vertically about 20 feet off the ground on whatever's handy. Cables lead to what the videotape showed to be a shoebox-sized cabinet tucked out of sight nearby. It would presumably need a phone line and perhaps an AC power hookup. In the course of wiring up the downtown Arlington Heights area, they had to deal with various architectures. The train station sprouted an antenna at one end of its roof. A local tavern had one on the corner of the building right over its front door. Supermarkets had them hidden in the suspended ceiling, for indoor PCS service. It's safe to say that no one noticed the hardware unless it was pointed out to them, and in most cases it was completely out of sight anyway. > Does it have a "mini" antenna? Certainly; it was less obtrusive than a home satellite dish. > Would you want one in your back yard? I'd have no problem with that, but the wording of this question still seems to imply that it would require three trucks and a bulldozer to install, whereas in actual fact I think they would simply hang it on the nearest telephone pole and no one would be the wiser ... Andrew C. Green (312) 266-4431 Datalogics, Inc. 441 W. Huron Internet: acg@frame.com Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: lr@access5.digex.net (Sir Topham Hatt) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: 20 Jun 1996 22:27:21 GMT Organization: Intentionally Left Blank John Hall (john@kodak.com) wrote: > Here in the Rochester NY area, there have been recent cases where > suburban and rural residents have opposed the building of tall, > "unsightly" cellular antenna towers in their neighborhoods. > Now PCS is often described as having "mini-cells", compared to > existing cellular services. That would mean more antennas would need > to be built, but they would each cover a smaller area and so might not > be so intrusive. It's a blatent lie perpetrated by the local PCS industry. The towers are in fact no smaller. I regullarly get to hear the local PCS scum pleading their case for 100-200' monopoles in front of the county planning commision. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your reply seems to be completely at odds with that of Andrew Greene who participated in a PCS experiment here in Chicago in 1993, as per the earlier message. Can we perhaps get a resolution on the differences? PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Shriver Subject: Re: Phone History Question Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 18:55:45 -0700 Organization: Shiva Corporation Jon Parro wrote: > Does anyone know when they stopped hardwiring phones and started > installing phone jacks (in Southern California, particularly)? Telephone jacks have been there for a very long type. Yes, the modular jack was sometime after 1970. Before that was the four-pin jack (the 404B), which dates from roughly the mid 1930's. There was a real quarter-inch "phone" (tip, ring, sleeve) jack that was used for portable extensions before the four-pin jack. The plug was like a switchboard jack, but the wiring was done in a large square block. That was probably the original plug and jack used in houses. (I've never seen one in the flesh.) Of course, back when you rented a phone, you probably also had to pay extra every month for every non-hardwired phone. The "portable" phone was a billable feature. (However, a long cord on a phone was a one-time charge.) That's why plugs and long cords are unusual to find on old pre-modular phones. You usually find the short three foot cord with three spade lugs (red, green, yellow). By the way, before the one-peice phones (302), the jack went between the desk set (20, 40, 50, 150, 102, or 202) and bell box (534, 584). A given home was NOT to be wired with a mix of 302's and the older type phones on phone jacks, as the wiring of jacks for these different applications were quite incompatible. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Phone History Question Date: Thu, 20 Jun 96 16:11:38 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Jon Parro writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The first two phones I had in my own > name (1961 through 1965 I think) were hardwired. The first one was > 'installed in place' having been there from a previous subscriber. > My parents phones were hardwired. I honestly cannot remember but I > think my third phone in 1967 was modular. I know the ones I had in > the early 1970's were modular. It was quite common to see older > installations that were hardwired around the same time, but it was > also common to see 302 type phones from the 1940's still around also > in older installations. My best guess would be the change in standards > probably was about 1965-68. Other ideas or facts on this? PAT] As best I can tell, the present modular connectors were introduced by AT&T in the early 1970s -- several years before the FCC adopted Part 68 and the USOCs. WECo did have a different, earlier modular system starting with the Trimline sets in 1965 that allowed handsets, bases and mounting and handset cords to be assembled quickly to suit each installation, but it was only used on a few sets introduced after then. (The Trimline mounting cords had *five* wires -- the fifth was white -- to allow party-line and other such reconfigurations without actually rewiring the set, by just hooking up the wires differently in the connecting block or four-pin plug.) The new 4- and 6-pin modular connectors were deliberately made small enough that the older Trimline and other sets' handset cords could be replaced with new modular ones with adapters; replacing the base cord, with that weird wiring, was more difficult. I had two main gripes with the modular system at the time, one that the new mounting cords were clear rather than the same color as the phone -- which I thought (and still do) looked cheap and tacky -- and secondly that the modular-converted 500 and 2500 sets were poorly handled, with those ugly gray connectors on the base and the punched-out handset cord holes. And of course the modular plugs, which (I was told by installers at the time) were *not* designed for repeated removal and insertion cycles, break far too easily. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 16:52:20 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Four-Prong vs. Modular Plugs I would assume that four-prong plugs (in a trapezoidal arrangement) go back to the 1950's and maybe even the late 1940's. Years ago, you always seemed to pay extra, either one-time or monthly, depending on your local telco's tarrifs, for 'extra features' such as a 'portable' phone with a plug, extension jacks and phones, color instead of basic black, extra ringer boxes, coiled handset cords instead of straight ones, handsets (WECO/NECO 202 phones) instead of 'stand-up' candlestick phones back in the 1920's and 30's, 'officially' issued shoulder rests, 'official' directory binders or covers, longer line or handset cords, etc. My parents' house was built in 1959, in a new subdivision. My dad told me that he wanted *one* telephone that could be moved between the kitchen and their bedroom. There were (still are) four-prong plugs in those rooms. The other two bedrooms used to have a plate with a small hole in them, flush against the wall. There was an old-style (bakelite) ringer box hardwired in the attic with a ringer used in 302 phones. A single rotary dial 500 set (ivory) had been used for over fifteen years in the house, moved every morning into the kitchen, and every evening into their bedroom. If there was an incoming call while the phone wasn't plugged in (such as moving between rooms), you'd still know about it since the ringer box was clanging. The subdivision was developed in the late 1950's and throughout the 1960's. I remember that some neighbors had a standard 500 desk set in their kitchen, but the line cord went into a little hole in a plate mounted flush to the wall. So at least here, Bell was still installing phones hard-wired to the wall in the 1960's. I saw articles on 'modular' equipment: phones, handset cords, line cords, jacks in {Bell Labs Record} and {Bell Telephone Magazine} in the early to mid 1970's (1972 to 74 period). These articles mentioned that WECO was going to manufacture modular connectors exclusively. One day in 1976, the old hardwired coiled handset cord had split, with exposed wires on my parents' circa 1959 ivory 500 desk set. SCBell Repair came by to replace the phone. The telephone man brought in an ivory phone from the truck, with modular connections on the handset cord and line cord. BUT he wanted to change over the four-prong outlets in the kitchen and bedroom to modular outlets. Knowing how the little plastic tab is sometimes difficult to manueuver, and also eventually weakens and breaks off after a lot of use (that phone was going to be moved between the kitchen and bedroom every day), I protested that we wanted to keep four-prong jacks, but use a 'converter' modular-to-four-prong plug. He snapped one of those on to the end of the modular line-cord. Now, for an even older piece of nostalgia ... When looking through an old telephone directory from the 1930's, I saw some sketched promotional ads for Bell services and equipment. One of them was for a 'portable' phone. It was the 'French' 202 model phone which you could move from room to room! It had a 'phono' jack type of plug on the end of the line cord, something like the larger plugs used on an operator's switchboard plug. So plug-in portability dates back to the 1930's! MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Future of X.25 Networks vs Internet Date: 20 Jun 1996 12:10:39 -0400 Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , albert pang wrote: > In article , Jean-Francois Mezei > wrote: >> I would like opinions on what will happen to worldwide X.25 networks >> such as TYMNET, SPRINTNET and national X.25 nets connected via X.75 >> with the Internet becoming so popular. > One of the advantages of X.25 over TCP/IP is the inherent capability > for accounting since each X.25 connection (call setup and call clear) > is tracked. These events are recorded by most switches and can be > reported for billing purpose. This is a rather dubious "advantage". It often costs more to collect, manage, and bill all this accounting information than it would actually cost to simply sell the service at a flat rate. After all, the most significant advantage of packet networks over circuit networks is the ability to do statistical multiplexing over a large number of independent overlapping connections. This suggests that the current Internet model of charging customers for available bandwidth rather than for the total amount of data transferred makes more economic sense; in essence, all the costs of service provision are "fixed costs" with respect to the amount of data users actually exchange, in a properly-provisioned network. (The unfortunte thing right now is that many important choke-points in the current Internet are dramatically underprovisioned. This indicates poor planning on the part of the ISPs, however, rather than a failure of the economic model.) > Therefore, I don't think the Internet will be replacing public X.25 > network entirely (although, some corporation will migrate some of > their data traffic to the Internet). However, what will happen is > that you will see applications who used X.25 networks are migrating to > public Frame Relay or eventually to ATM networks. Of course, one major provider's Frame Relay network is already implemented on top of IP. >> Or will corporations simply go with the actual Internet and concentrate >> on encryption of the data? > It really depend the size of the corporation and how critical the > network applications are. It also depends to a great deal on the ability of major service providers to give service guarantees and live up to them. If I'm a major corporation, I would have no more difficulty handing my inter-campus network traffic over to AT&T, MCI, or Sprint, than I would to give them my telephone traffic, if I could buy the same sort of service guarantees from their data operations that I get from their voice operations. Certainly I might want to encrypt some of my data traffic; this is a service I should be able to purchase from my ISP and have him install it in his on-site routers. Garrett A. Wollman wollman@lcs.mit.edu ------------------------------ From: jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com Subject: Re: Caller ID with Pre-Paid Calling Card? Date: Thu, 20 Jun 96 09:30:54 PDT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. In article , writes: > If you call a 800 number for one of the companies that offer a > Pre-Paid Calling Card what number displays on a Caller ID box once > your call is put through? Does it matter who the company is that > carries the call? When you dial *671800+seven digits (and the call completes) then either "Private/Anonymous" or "Out of Area" shows on the translated number's Caller ID display. The ANI of the calling terminal will be available to the 800 provider and can be displayed separately. When you dial 1800+seven digits (and the call completes) then either "Out of Area" or the calling terminal's number shows on the translated number's terminal caller id display. The displayed calling number may or may not be the ANI that can be displayed separately. When the call completes with companies that provide ISUP SS7 signaling end-to-end the display is able to show the calling number or the privacy indication. When the call does not complete with ISUP SS7 signaling end-to-end then the display is "Out of Area" even though the calling ANI is available to 800 providers separately. Calling ANI is not equivalent to Calling Number. Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 10:53:59 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: International 800 Numbers benlev@aol.com (BenLev) writes: > In either case you all see how confusing this is. What is remarkable > is that 800 service has expanded from regional to statewide to > national to North American but when it was finally going international, > all of a sudden AT&T and MCI do nothing to help people who currently > have 800 numbers keep those numbers. You now run the risk that > someone else will get your 800 number for international use. Nonsense. For one thing, the number of digits in the two numbering spaces is different: +800 must be followed by eight digits, while 1-800 (and 1-888) numbers have only seven digits. Even if someone wanted to get, say, +800-FLOWERS, it won't be a valid number. > For some reason they would rather have a whole new numbering plan > for international 800. Well, yeah. That's rather the whole point, isn't it? The current situation is that every country has its own separate free-phone number space, which is usually not even reachable from outside that country. Even if every such number space were opened up to allow international charge-back, how are users supposed to be able to keep track of what's free and what isn't? (I.e., how likely is it that a North American would realize that "+44 800" would hypothetically lead to a toll-free number in the UK, or that "+33 5" (??) would do likewise for France? Not to mention Europeans having to know that +1-800 and +1-888 are North American toll free numbers...) The point of country code 800 is to provide a single easy-to-remember access code that the whole world can use to dial international toll-free numbers. This is no way replaces or obsoletes any intra-national free phone numbering spaces that countries may already have (or choose to introduce in the future). Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 15:37:58 -0700 From: John Higdon Subject: Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers At 13:13 on 6/18/96, TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > **And I feel > certain it is just a bluff -- just an idle threat.** You who have > been in this business for years with many sophisticated contacts in > the industry would have to spend some time looking for a way to get > your billing tapes over to an agency for conversion to chargeback to > the caller. I've been around for years and I right now could not put > my finger on the exact process for getting this accomplished although > we all know it *can* be done, illegally of course. 800 charges via the Third Number or Collect route are now very much in disfavor. While it is technically possible to use this mechanism, to do so without the prior approval of the billee is an almost certain way to have any LEC or other end-billing arrangements cancelled. No provider offering 800 facilities is going to risk having those arrangements threatened. Furthermore, the whole show is over if the billee in question has "billed number screening". All of the major operators (like the ones who would have such billing arrangements in place to begin with) honor the LIDB lookup. Even the not-so-major players subscribe to and honor this information. It should be noted, however, that the particular scam in question does record the number of the calling party and uses this information to create a dynamic "reject" database. I discovered this when placing my own inquiry. This prevents, for example, someone from calling in repeatedly from the same telephone over and over again. I have used this mechanism myself on some facilities that I set up years ago. John Higdon | P.O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | +1 500 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 | http://www.ati.com/ati/ | [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you very much for this additional confirmation, John. Generally I would say when you see spam with a threat made to charge callers you should just ignore it. In fact, I am almost in a frame of mind to say that if the spammers are going to try to insult our intelligence that much they deserve whatever financial ruin comes their way as a result of calls to their 800 number. Now comes the tricky part however and a bit of psychology: if you call those numbers and leave nasty messages, you can probably be assured that your number will be blacklisted and you will need to use other phones on subsequent calls. On the other hand if you merely listen to their complete message and say something nice and sweet like 'gee, I really want to think about it for a day or and I will get back to you' it is unlikely they will block your number. After all, you are still a prospective customer in their mind. So string them along and stall them as long as you can. See if you can get five or six calls of inquirty into them (each call as long as possible of course) before they finally give up on you and block you out, if they ever do. And if you have to move to a different phone at some point go ahead and do so. What are they going to, eventually block out every phone belonging to a netter? Remember, the community goal for Jeff is a hundred thousand dollars in charges during June to the 800 carrier he is using. I beleive someone said that was LCI. Perhaps someone able to pull the record could look at his account for this month and let me know -- in complete confidence of course -- how close we are to reaching that goal now two thirds of the way through the month. I would like to see him have to mortgage his home (or get a second mortgage) just to pay telco and avoid litigation with them over his bill. And don't forget there are many other spammers worthy of attention also but I know each of you can only do so much. Still, a call here and a call there, each one of two or three minutes in length to inquire about their products should not be too much of a sacrifice for anyone and those calls do mount up! If there are not at least several thousand netters each 'chipping in' a couple dollars to Jeff's phone bill this month I would be very surprised. Finally, remember not to harass the spammers since that is illegal. Just simple calls of inquiry from day to day will be fine. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:10:23 -0700 From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Modem For Use in Greenland Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article is written: > I am looking for a modem suitable for use in Greenland. > I understand that this is the same spec as in Greenland and is V27. Did you mean to say "same as in Denmark" ? V.27 is a FAX specification. > The real problem is that it must go in a rack (it cannot be a PC > internal) and there is only 48 volts available. This sounds like something for installation into a telephone switching office. There's obviously a story here. You are installing some kind of FAX system in a telephone central office in Greenland, and the telephone company ought to be able to recommend you a modem that is compatible with the system and the application. If they aren't cooperative, is that because you are a co-locating competitor? Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@RNS.COM RNS / Meret Communications Phone: +1-805-562-3158 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Internets: designed and built while you wait [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Leave it to Lars to pick up real quick on a scent somewhere and begin following it! That reference to 'same as Greeland' was a typo that missed my eye, sorry. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Keith W. Brown Subject: Re: Sending Faxes as Attachment to E-Mail Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 16:30:12 -0700 Organization: AllCom International Marone Giuseppe wrote in article : > I wonder if there is any products (hardware /software) to use a > standard fax machine as a scanner connected to a PC; the application > would be to get files in proper formats (.TIF, .GIF, .JMP or whatever) > to be sent as e-mail attachment out of plain paper documents; the fax > machine, anyway, should also be connected to PSTN to be able to send > and receive standard faxes. Does anybody know of some trick to do > that? The software I prefer is Delrina WinFax PRO. Once the fax has been received into the computer, you have the option to export it into to four different formats; tiff, bmp, pcx and winfax's fxs format. Simply export it into the directory of your choice, log on to the internet, and e-mail your fax attachment to the destination of your choice ... what could be simpler? Keith Brown AllCom International kwbrown@allcom.com ------------------------------ From: Gordon McFadden Subject: Re: Sending Faxes as Attachment to E-Mail Date: 20 Jun 1996 21:42:40 GMT Organization: TeleLink Technologies Inc Marone Giuseppe wrote: > I wonder if there is any products (hardware /software) to use a > standard fax machine as a scanner connected to a PC; the application > would be to get files in proper formats (.TIF, .GIF, .JMP or whatever) > to be sent as e-mail attachment out of plain paper documents; the fax > machine, anyway, should also be connected to PSTN to be able to send > and receive standard faxes. Does anybody know of some trick to do > that? A company I used to work for in Vancouver BC did this pretty well. The company name is TGI Technologies, and I believe the number is (still) 604 872 6676. The root part of TGI's e-mail is XXX@tgivan.wimsey.bc.ca so you might try sales@... or info@.... Hope this helps. Gordon McFadden Manager, Software Development Telelink Technologies Inc gmcf@telelink.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 15:23:02 -0600 From: Daryl R. Gibson Subject: Re: New Nevada Area Code > The division is likely to be along geographic lines, possibly dividing > the north and the south and almost certainly will trigger a pitched > battle over who retains the 702 area code. The losers will be throwing > away outdated business cards, stationery and advertisements. Hey ... they could just make it Las Vegas, and use "666" as the area code. Oddly enough, a few years ago, I called one of the big hotels in Vegas to make some reservations, and their 800 number was mostly sixes. When I commented to the reservations operator about their "evil" 800 number, she said that there were a few other hotels there that were even closer to the proverbial bibical "666" string ... I can only assume they had asked for it, or that someone in the phone company who assigned the numbers had a real sense of humor. Daryl (801) 378-2950 (801) 489-6348 drg@du1.byu.edu 71171.2036@compuserve.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well back in the late 1960's when the City of Chicago and the Chicago Police Department dumped their old cordboards (312-RAndolph-6-8000 and 312-WAbash-2-4747 respectively) to go with a centrex serving all city departments some clown at Illinois Bell had the correct number in mind for them. You will recall this was the Vietnam era; the tension in the air was so thick you could cut it with a knife. The police hated everyone and everyone hated the police. War protestors demonstrated daily in the streets and had numerous plans to disrupt large corporations, etc. At the time Illinois Bell had more phreaks and protestors in their employment than you could count but they were all pretty closety about it for good reason. So the centrex for all administrative departments of the City of Chicago was assigned 312-744 ... thats 7-4-4 as in P-I-G as in a very derogatory name for police officers in those troubled times in America. The wicked part was no one put it together at all until about a year after it was up and running. No one apparently even noticed. Then one day one of the 'underground' newspapers had an interview with 'an anonymous employee of Illinois Bell' who admitted that 744 had been deliberatly selected 'by a couple of co-workers' who were ROFL as they say in computer chat (rolling on the floor laughing) as they contemplated their selection. Later editions of the same paper (and soon some of the other undergound papers) ran bogus 'city directories' in which when mentioning the Police Depart- ment they would note, "to reach the pig of your choice just dial PIG and the four digits of the pig's extension. If you do not know or care which which pig you speak with then call the Pig Switchboard at PIG-4000." (Which is even today the main number for the City Hall centrex operators). For awhile the city fathers were annoyed by it and made a few threats to Illinois Bell, but eventually it all died down. After all, what were they going to do, change all the numbers at that point? Things have expanded so much now that the city also uses 745 and 747 as part of its network. At the time though it was all quite humorous to many of us. Now we are all watching eagerly to see if the convention here next month is as much fun -- a real riot! -- as the one in 1968. We got cheated out of a good riot when the Bulls had the nerve to win on a rainy weeknight instead of a warm and balmy weekend night but maybe the thousands of peculiar visitors who plan to be here the entire week of the convention will remind us of our heritage and encourage one and all to act out and sufficiently frustrate the Democrats enough to cause them lose the election again this year. Two losses in a row when Chicago was the convention site and you know they would never come back to this town again. Have a nice weekend! PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #301 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Jun 21 12:10:41 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA02481; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 12:10:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 12:10:41 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606211610.MAA02481@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #302 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Jun 96 12:10:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 302 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Overlay Area Code Chosen for Pittsburgh (Tad Cook) Re: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn (Eric Friedebach) Re: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn (Mike Fox) Re: Nynex <-> Sprint Cross Usage Agreement (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: 900 MHz Cordless Telephones (Steve Schear) Re: 911 Call From my Phone Number (Greg Abbott) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tad Cook Subject: Overlay Area Code Chosen For Pittsburgh Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 01:03:50 PDT Regulators Approve New "Overlay" Area Code for Pittsburgh By Michael L. Rozansky, The Philadelphia Inquirer Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Jun. 21--Pennsylvania regulators Thursday approved a new "overlay" telephone area code for Pittsburgh. This means that homes and businesses in what has been the 412 area code will get numbers in the new area code when all numbers in the 412 area have been given out. Establishing the "overlay" area code avoids carving the Pittsburgh region into two geographic areas with different codes and changing thousands of phone numbers. That was the sort of upheaval that hit the Philadelphia area two years ago when it was divided into the 215 and 610 area codes. But the new code also means that phones with different area codes may be found in the same neighborhood, on the same block or even in the same house. The new code -- needed because of the coming competition in local phone services and the explosive growth in the use of cell phones, fax machines, modems and pagers -- will add 7.9 million phone numbers within the boundaries of the 412 area. The actual number of the new code isn't yet known. Local phone competitors say the overlay favors Bell Atlantic because people who choose a new phone company would get stuck with a new area code. "There is no option that is without inconvenience," said Robert K. Bloom, a member of the state Public Utility Commission, which approved the plan 3-2 and rejected two alternatives that would have split the region. Bloom called the overlay "the least inconvenient." The new code will go into operation by January, and become mandatory in July 1997. The new code is Pennsylvania's first since the 610 area code came into use in January 1994. Within two years, at least three more area codes -- in the 215, 610 and 717 areas -- will be needed, observers said. The PUC's choice of an overlay in Pittsburgh suggests it will favor that elsewhere, too. In a separate move Thursday, the PUC released a management audit of Bell Atlantic Corp. that said the phone company could save $200 million yearly through efficiency moves. The $2.3 million study by Liberty Consulting Group, of Baltimore, also said Bell's plans for building a high-speed phone and video network across Pennsylvania by 2015 were "wholly inadequate." Bell Atlantic vice president Bill Mitchell disputed the auditor's estimates and said the company would not implement some of its recommendations. For example, he said, the auditor projected saving $100 million by cutting wages fixed in union pacts. Mitchell said the criticism of Bell's network plans used out-of-date information (although some PUC officials said Bell was to blame for refusing to cooperate promptly). One common problem with an overlay is that callers might have to dial 10 digits for all calls, even those within an area code. But the PUC did not require 10-digit calling, and Thursday, Bell Atlantic executives were evaluating whether to let consumers continue to dial seven digits for calls within an area code. The overlay was opposed by Pennsylvania's consumer advocate and its small-business advocate, who said it could stifle competition. They said people would be unlikely to switch to a competitor if they had to move to a new area code. "We're disappointed," said Jay Young, a regional director of public policy for MCI, which plans to ask the PUC to reconsider its ruling. The two dissenting PUC commissioners, John Hanger and David Rolks, said they could not support an overlay system until the technology is available to let consumers take phone numbers with them if they switch phone companies. Bell Atlantic contends that an overlay is not anti-competitive. "We're pleased, because we think this is a pro-consumer ruling," Mitchell said. "It causes the least disruption to customers." --------------- ON THE INTERNET: Visit Philadelphia Online, the World Wide Web site of The Philadelphia Inquirer. Point your browser to http://www.phillynews.com ------------------------------ From: aerostar@ccia.com Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 01:30:56 EDT Subject: Re: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn chris@kosh.punk.net (Christopher Ambler) wrote: {Chris sends a fax to a spammer and}: > Today, I got an unsolicited fax from an unrelated company. I called them > and asked them why it was sent, and they told me that someone at my fax > number had requested to be put on their list. I assured them that nothing > of the sort had been done. The gentleman on the other end insisted that > I was wrong, and offered to fax me a copy of the request. Upon receiving > the request, I immediatley understood the situation. > The request said, "Please send me more information on your offerings, and > add me to your regular fax list," and was signed with the false name that > I had given the original spamming firm. The identifier on the sending > machine had been taken off and my fax number hand-written on the request. In 1987 I got my first fax machine: a big 'ole Ricoh 5000 that took up the same space as a small Xerox machine. Not too long after, I would get spam faxes (to update the term) telling me if I would fax back one hundred additional fax numbers, I would receive *FREE* a boom box radio. I guess the thinking went that some _seceretary_ would be there to intercept the fax before giving it to her boss. She could go over to her Rolodex, dig out a bunch of fax numbers, send it in and get the reward without anyone knowing the better. The thing was, fax numbers were a valuable commodity at the time. Having a fax number to send solicitations to was a great step forward, since a fax at the time was something to be dealt with with more urgency than a telephone call or piece of mail. Well, it seems those guys are up to the same tricks. But now they have somehow been able to "qualify" you as an individual/company that is seeking information by fax. I've always had some fascination with the direct mail industry: I reply to a piece of junk mail using a coded name. I still receive totally unrelated solicitations to an item that my *coded* name responded to years ago. You see, a so-called list of qualified names is very valuable. A less-than-honest company will offer mailing addresses of people to a company that wishes to target a certain demographic, but fail to purge their list of useless names. Chris, you may get a few more faxes of the same type. But remember a few points: The fax was sent on their LD nickel. Your cost amounts to small change if you use cheap fax paper. I would _hope_ that the DO NOT CALL law would apply: tell 'em to quit it. Per FCC regs, all faxes must identify the faxee's number on top, if not, there are some actions to be taken. Eric Friedebach aerostar@ccia.com ------------------------------ From: Mike Fox Date: 21 Jun 96 8:28:16 EDT Subject: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn So, to summarize: > 1. I did a stupid thing in giving them my fax number; > 2. They did a dirty thing in spamming in the first place, and sending > a forged request in the second place; > 3. Watch out. Someone really wants to make your life miserable, they can > give your fax number to fax spammers, and since there was a request, > USC 47 probably doesn't apply (due diligence and all that, IANAL). I know that when you're bored you may not want to go through a lot of preparation when you do something like you did, but you if you're willing to do some preparation, you can do this kind of thing with impunity. Just make use of Ringmaster, or Distinctive Ring, or whatever. Here in BellSouth territory, they haven't been charging hookup fees for Ringmaster. So it can be used to get disposable phone numbers. Order a Ringmaster number for your fax line, give the Ringmaster number to the scammer, get the fax you want, and drop the service. You will only be out the $3.50 fee for one month, or even less if you only keep it for a couple of days and they pro-rate it. Subsequent scam faxes will get the "we're sorry, the number you have reached is no longer in service" intercept. It may not be worth doing this just to get one spam fax, and it's probably terribly wasteful of NANP resources, but I have found it useful when selling things thru classifieds or on bulletin boards. Once you sell the item drop the Ringmaster number to avoid getting calls for the next couple of weeks from people who look up old newspaper classifieds in the library. (Before I figured this out, I once sold a used car and kept getting calls for it for weeks after I had sold it even though I only ran the ad once). Later, Mike ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 09:52:32 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Nynex <-> Sprint Cross Usage Agreement Danny Burstein wrote: > Calls made with a Nynex card, if inside a Nynex LATA, will be handled > by Nynex. If crossing a LATA, _or_ if in a non-Nynex area (i.e. if > you're using the card in Denver) will be handled via Sprint (which > will, I'm guessing, pay up something to the LEC). Someone mentioned to me that this NYNEX/Sprint Calling Card arrangement is a NYNEX 800 (or 888) number access. From what I gathered, NYNEX will be (now is?) going to promote an 800 toll-free access number to use NYNEX cards and operator services, similar to AT&T's 800-CALL-ATT or the 800 (and seven-digit 950) access used by MCI, Sprint, etc. Since divestiture and equal-access, many independent telcos have applied for and been granted fg.B (950-xxxx) and/or fg.D (10-XXX/101-XXXX+) codes. I know that EATEL (East Ascension Telephone), an independent in the Baton Rouge LATA has such a code. I don't think that they have their *own* network facilities outside of their own territory, except for a small perimeter into the BellSouth LATA, therefore they are re-selling network services of BellSouth and/or AT&T and other carriers. Even the two "semi" Bell telcos (Cincinnati Bell and Connecticut's SNET) have a "long-distance" service using 950-xxxx and/or 10-XXX/101-XXXX and/or 800/888- access codes and numbers. AT&T also has "USA Direct" from many locations outside of the NANP, and promotes 800-CALL-ATT to access an AT&T operator/switch from Canada. AT&T also has 800-USA-ATT-1 from many NANP Caribbean locations. Canada has "Canada Direct" using toll-free codes from individual countries outside of the NANP and 800-555-1111 from the US. MCI and Sprint have similar toll-free access codes from countries outside of the NANP. Other countries have their own "country direct" using 800/888- numbers from the US, and amongst other countries around the world. GTE's Hawaiian Telephone markets International outbound, even though they are the local and intra-LATA carrier in Hawaii. AT&T has their own IDDD from Hawaii. GTE Hawaiian Telco has their own 10-XXX/101-XXXX code. Alascom is now owned by AT&T, but even though they were the intra-LATA carrier in Alaska, they have their own access codes and numbers. The other major compeitor in Alaska is GCI, which has had their own access codes. As to the NYNEX/Sprint card arrangement, if it is by an 800- access number, I don't know if it goes to a NYNEX switch/operator or a Sprint switch/operator. It might depend on the ANI and location of the party calling the 800 number. And it could answer as "NYNEX", even though it will be a "resale" of Sprint. Most every Interexchange Carrier (MCI, Sprint, etc.) accepts fourteen digit line-number-based calling cards issued by the LEC. AT&T is probably *still* going to accept these LEC cards. The real fuss is that AT&T doesn't want the LEC's accepting AT&T issued cards for intra-LATA calls placed over the LEC's LATA networks. LEC-issued line-number-based cards and RAO-based (non-line-number) cards are all included in the network of "LIDB's", which the various LEC's, AT&T, "other" common carriers (MCI, Sprint, etc), *and* most A-O-Slime have access to. If you are in BellSouth's territory and place an intra-LATA call via the BellSouth network, and bill it to a NYNEX issued card (line-number-based or RAO-based), BellSouth will check it in a part of the interconnected network of LIDB's. The call will be billed at BellSouth intra-LATA rates. It will probably show up on your NYNEX bill on the NYNEX intra-LATA page of charges, but in a separate section there as "connecting" or "participating" carriers billed via NYNEX. It might even show up on a page *all to itself* as a "participating LEC" charge, just like the Long-Distance company card charges do. Even though you might have chosen AT&T as "your" LD company, you can still have charges from MCI, Sprint, etc. including A-O-Slime on their own pages included in your local telco monthly billing. The above paragraph describes calls which would be dialed as traditional 0+ or the 10-XXX/101-XXXX+0+ of an interexchange carrier such as AT&T. But if you use this new NYNEX 800- access number, you would be billed and routed according to this new NYNEX/Sprint joint-venture package, probably on the NYNEX pages of the bill, *as* a NYNEX (or NYNEX/Sprint) charge. So much is changing these days, and it might even happen that the various LEC's will begin feuding with each other, as they all begin to invade each others' territories, so the above descriptions might even become obsolete in the near future! BTW, I've heard of a "BellSouth Long Distance". The BellSouth (wireline) service reps have heard of the name, but don't know much about it (yet). It is a BellSouth Mobility service plan you can choose if you have a BellSouth Mobility cellphone. Presently, I have AT&T as my main LD company on my cellphone, and I get a separate billing from AT&T for their handled calls. But if I choose BellSouth Long Distance, I can get all of my (default without a 10-XXX+) toll calls from a cellular on the same monthly bill from BellSouth as their local airtime charges. I think that MCI is the carrier which actually handles the network routing of BellSouth Long Distance inter-LATA calls from BSM cellphones. And eventually, BellSouth wants to market inter-LATA toll on its traditional POTS wireline as well! MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 06:15:12 -0700 From: azur@netcom.com (Steve Schear) Subject: Re: 900 MHz Cordless Telephones Thanks for your informative survey of user experience with 900 MHz phones. I have some experience in this market, having led development at Cylink Corp. of the chip family used in both the Escort and Uniden phones. I hope the following information is of some benefit. There are three modulation technologies used in 900 MHz phones: analog, digital and digital spread spectrum. The analog models are similar in design to the 47-49 MHz units and operate under FCC Part 15.249 (low-power) rules, their major benefit is the generally lower noise levels in the 900 MHz band. The digital units (e.g., AT&T/Tropez) also operate under 15.249, but digitally encode the audio (using either 64 kbps PCM or 32 Kbps ADPCM, same as digtial PBXs). If properly designed digital units exhibit excellent audio characteristics. They also feature better security since current consumer scanners cannot listen in (look for that to change soon.) Link encryption is straightforward, but (mainly due to lack of obvious consumer demand) isn't available. Due to unavoidable inefficiencies, digital units suffer from a 10 dB reduction in radio link performance (all other things being equal) against analog models and will generally have shorter range. Digital models will also exhibit sharp cut-offs in operation when approaching their range limits, as opposed to analog models which tend to more gracefully and predictably degrade. Spread spectrum models operate under FCC Part 15.247 (high-power) rules. All current models use the same digital audio encoding as in the digital models. Their main advantage is that they can operate at considerably higher power levels (typically 100 mW vs. about 1 mW for the Part 15.249 devices) to overcome the 10 dB digital penalty. This extended range comes at the expense of either larger/heavier batteries or shorter talk/standby time. Security is increased over digital models as designing scanners to eavesdrop on spread spectrum is much more difficult. Sharp cut-off problem same as digital models. Cost for the 900 MHz models is still well above 47-49 MHz units. Look for continued reductions in street prices as new models, using more integrated technology (e.g., Rockwell's chip set) are designed in. PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 Steve Schear | Internet: azur@netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 01:39:15 -0500 From: Greg Abbott Subject: Re: 911 Call From my Phone Number > Tuesday afternoon when I returned to my home from work, my voice mail > contained a number of 'blank' messages (10 seconds of silence) all > about 5 minutes apart, followed by a message from the Pasco County 911 > operator stating that they had received a call from *my* telephone > number. He continued to state that the call was completely silent, and > that if no one picked up the phone, he would be forced to dispatch a > Sheriff to investigate. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think I will place the blame on your > cordless phone also, and suggest that you get rid of it or at the very > least see about new batteries and an overhaul for it. I'd have to place the blame on the cordless too. We get a couple of these a week. Just last week I spoke with one very nice elderly lady who had a similar instance, however, she WAS at home and just didn't make it to the phone before our 9-1-1 operator hung up on ring back (she said she was in the basement and didn't hear the phoen and then when she finally did, it took her too long to get up the stairs to get to it) and we dispatched a police unit to check it out. To make a long story short, she didn't think it was the cordless either, but I explained the situation to her and she agreed to change her batteries in the cordless. As luck would have it, while she was out buying the new batteries, another 9-1-1 call came from her residence. I happened to be in the dispatch center, standing near the console where the call was coming in and recognized the address. Of course, we had to send a unit again to check it out since no one answered, but there was nothing wrong. In the next few minutes before she got back home we got about three or four more calls. Just as soon as she put the new battery in the cordless, the problem stopped. Some cordless phones just start to chatter and like Pat said, they just hit the right sequence and the next thing you know, you've got 9-1-1! GREG ABBOTT 99999 11 11 http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/gabbott 9-1-1 COORDINATOR 9 9 1 1 KB9NBH 99999 == 1 == 1 INTERNET: GABBOTT@uiuc.edu 9 1 1 COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107 METCAD 9 1 1 VOICE: 217/333-4348 1905 E. MAIN ST. 9 111 111 FAX: 217/384-7003 URBANA, IL 61801 PAGER: 800/222-6651 PIN #9541 ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #302 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Fri Jun 21 12:43:27 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA06152; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 12:43:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 12:43:27 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606211643.MAA06152@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #303 TELECOM Digest Fri, 21 Jun 96 12:43:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 303 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Stu Jeffery) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (NTC/Dallas) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Jim Hopkins) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Lee Hardiman) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Henry Baker) Public Meetings on New 415 NPA (Tad Cook) Public Hearing Notes - 714 split (Dave Close) Monaco Switches Tonight to 377 Country Code (Patrick Raffin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 01:04:08 -0800 From: stu@best.com (Stu Jeffery) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? In TELECOM Digest V16 #301, Andrew Green writes: > but the wording of this question still > seems to imply that it would require three trucks and a bulldozer to > install, whereas in actual fact I think they would simply hang it on > the nearest telephone pole and no one would be the wiser ... while Sir Topham Hatt writes: > It's a blatent lie perpetrated by the local PCS industry. The towers > are in fact no smaller. I regullarly get to hear the local PCS scum > pleading their case for 100-200' monopoles in front of the county > planning commision. thus our Esteemed Editor writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your reply seems to be completely at > odds with that of Andrew Greene who participated in a PCS experiment > here in Chicago in 1993, as per the earlier message. Can we perhaps > get a resolution on the differences? PAT] I think I can help, but it won't be short! There is a lot of confusion as to what PCS means. The original term was Personnel Communications Service and it was meant to mean an advanced cordless telephone. This advanced cordless phone had the following key features: 1. It was cheap (the instrument cost about $100 2. It had very long battery life (couple of days between charges) 3. It was small and light. 4. It had toll quality voice (as good as your wired phone) 5. It could be use away from your home, on the streets, etc. Several radio technologies have been developed that meet these requirements. The more well know include: a. CT-2 (Cellular Telephone Rev 2) This is the system that Andrew Green trialed in Chicago. (Hi Andrew!) This is also called Bibop in France, Green in Holland, and was a roaring success in Hong Kong. b. DECT (Digital European Cordless Telephone) growing slowly in Europe. c. PHS (Personnel Handiphone System) growing rapidly in Japan d. PACS (Personnel Access Communication System) a technology developed by Bellcore; now being aggressively pushed by Hughes, Siemens but so far without wide deployment. If you flip though current wireless trade journals you will see ads for the PACS EDGE. Now here comes the problem. If you carefully look at the list of features, (1 to 5) you will notice it does not include a requirement to operate in your car. That omission is not an oversight. The requirement for vehicular speed operation was specifically dropped from the wish list, because this one factor causes tremendous additional complications that in turn translate into increased costs. If the radio technology is going to work with cars, then coverage range has to be increase from several hundred feet to at least several thousand feet and most likely a few miles. Why must the range increase? If the range is short (200 feet), then you have to have 12 to 15 site per linear mile of highway. This gets expensive. Also if a car is moving along the highway at 60 miles per hour, the network will have to switch the call between cell sites 12 to 15 times per minute or every 4 to 5 seconds. All in all not very practical. So if you want to work with moving cars, you need a technology that can support bigger radial coverage. That means more power in the mobile unit, which conflicts with long battery life and light weight (the systems - a to d above - use about 10 millwatt transmit power) In addition to needing more power, the larger radius cell sites and moving mobiles result in much more complex communication channel than the smaller radius and slow moving mobile. The larger cell sites mean longer multipath spread and the moving mobile means the path length (in wavelengths) is changing. At 60 miles per hour and 1800 MHz the change is about 200 wavelength per second. All of these complexities can be address, but at a complexity cost. Usually equalization, diversity and channel coding are added. And more DSP are put in the unit, and the power consumption goes up. In addition, a portion of the transmission time is used to support either channel coding or equalization, meaning user data rate goes down. So when the dust settles, if you want a system that will work at vehicular speeds, you end up with the technology that is used in cellular today. The main cellular type technologies being deployed in PCS today are: a. PCS-1900 (This is GSM shifted to 1900 MHz) b. Upbanded IS-136 (North American TDMA) This is what you get today if you have a digit cellular phone. c. Upbanded IS-95 CDMA. This is the spread spectrum technology that has been experiencing a slow and often delayed birth. It is supposed to be commercial late this year. d. IS-661 - This is Omnipoints technology that won them a pioneer preference. Omnipoint considers their technology also a cordless type as described at the beginning of this memo. Within the technical community, the first group (the cordless telephone type) are called Low Tier and the last group (the cellular type) are called High Tier. There is one more factor that differentiates the and Low and High Tier group and that is data rate per talk channel. The Low Tier systems have low power and small cell site and thus can reuse the frequency every thousand or so feet. Thus they can get a lot of users in the same radio band. This means they can afford to give each user a more data bandwidth. A typical Low Tier system allocate 32 Kbps per second per user. The conversion from audio to digital is usually ADPCM, which is commonly used in PABX. Thus you get wireline quality, and you can plug a fax machine or modem into the phone and it will work. The High Tier systems use high power and large cells and thus have a much lower frequency reuse per unit area. Typically cell sites must be separated by miles before they can reuse the same frequency. In addition, because these radio technologies use equalization, channel coding, etc. data rate is used for those functions. This means these systems can not afford to give a user anymore bandwidth than absolutely necessary. Therefore these systems use 8 or 13 Kbps Vocoders. While Vocoders are getting better each year (and consuming more power - battery life!), they still produce artifacts. Vocoder operate on some sort of predictive assumptions on what a voice sounds like. When you input a signal that has not been anticipated, strange things can happen. The world is full of unanticipated signals, like music, two people speaking at the same time, modems, fax, etc. Thus Low Tier means: 32 Kbp ADPCM, or equilvant no vehicular speed very low power (1 to 10 mWatt) small cell size And High Tier means: Vocoder voice vehicular speed medium power (50 to 600 mWatt or more) large cell size The defining issue is that the High Tier supporters claim they can do everything the low tier systems can, and more (ie. work in cars). The Low Tier supporters claim their hand units are cheaper and talk sound better (32 ADPCM versus 8 or 13 KBps Vocoders). What this all means is the North American PCS band is going to have High Tier systems (which is what Sir Topham Hatt is describing) and may have Low Tier systems (which is what Andrew Green is describing). The FCC is issuing 6 PCS licenses in each area. (three have been auctioned and three are still to go). There are already 2 operating cellular operators, and there are several SMR systems being built (Nextel, Geoteck). Thats a lot of spectrum for operators and thus a lot of choices for the consumer. So who is deploying what technology today? In PCS bands A, B and C High Tier has been selected by about 90 percent of the winners. The specific High Tier technology choices are: CDMA - the big winner as to selection, but no one has commerical PCS operation PCS-1900 (North American GSM) and IS-136 (North American TDMA) are close to being tied for second place. So far only a few operators have announced a Low Tier selection, but the D, E and F bands haven't yet been auctioned and they are good candidates for the Low Tier, as they have less spectrum. When will we see these systems? The first systems with commerical operation are all PCS-1900 technology. APC is on the air in Washington DC and Western Wireless is on in Hawaii. Several more PCS-1900 operators are planning to launch this fall. PacBell Mobile Systems will be in San Diego supporting the Republican Convention with PCS. The CDMA systems are supposed to be on late this year as are the IS-136. So quite a few late this year and a lot next year. BTW, there are more PCS technologies than just these that I have mentioned. Stu Jeffery Internet: stu@best.com 1072 Seena Ave. voice: 415-966-8199 Los Altos, CA. 94024 fax: 415-966-8456 ------------------------------ From: Osman Rich Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: Fri, 21 Jun 96 07:40:00 PDT John Hall said: > Here in the Rochester NY area, there have been recent cases where > suburban and rural residents have opposed the building of tall, > "unsightly" cellular antenna towers in their neighborhoods. > Now PCS is often described as having "mini-cells", compared to > existing cellular services. That would mean more antennas would need > to be built, but they would each cover a smaller area and so might not > be so intrusive. PCS installations can range from the size of existing cellular installations down to a big breadbox on the wall. In densely populated areas (urban, not suburban) these smaller cell facilities make technical sense. > Could someone who has seen a PCS site describe it? Does it have a > "mini" antenna? PCS antennas tend to be physically smaller than the equivalent AMPS service antennas, but you are not likely to notice the difference. > Would you want one in your back yard? My answer doesn't count. I'm an amateur radio operator who just bought a new house and I'm in the permitting process to erect a tower to support my hobby. That said, I suspect that you'd seriously consider putting up with the installation for the ground lease payments the provider offers. The fact is that these installations are needed to provide economical coverage of an area. Many are present that you never notice because they are very effectively camouflaged when that is possible. They are necessary to provide service, just like overhead high voltage lines. It _is_ possible to bury some high voltage services, but the cost is prohibitive. Burying PCS (or conventional AMPS cellular) is not possible. The industry is getting better at making it less obtrusive. Many cities are trying to concentrate all services on a small number of towers. This helps a lot, but isn't practical for all cases. Oz ------------------------------ From: hopkins@dfw.dfw.net (Jim Hopkins) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: 21 Jun 1996 03:01:15 GMT Organization: DFW Internet Services - DFWNet: 800-2-DFWNet (some discussion of PCS sites deleted...) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your reply seems to be completely at > odds with that of Andrew Greene who participated in a PCS experiment > here in Chicago in 1993, as per the earlier message. Can we perhaps > get a resolution on the differences? PAT] There's a PCS company here in the Dallas area that's using existing high-voltage electric towers for at least some of its sites. They have a small 8 by 10 foot or so building at the base of the tower and an array of flat panel antennas at the top, up about 80-120 feet. So no, you probably don't want one in the backyard. I assume that they are constructing a conventional tower, monopole, etc. in places where they need coverage and there's no existing power structure. Hopkins ------------------------------ From: hardiman@airmail.net (Lee Hardiman) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: Fri, 21 Jun 96 04:37:00 GMT Organization: Internet America In article , John Hall wrote: > Here in the Rochester NY area, there have been recent cases where > suburban and rural residents have opposed the building of tall, > "unsightly" cellular antenna towers in their neighborhoods. > Now PCS is often described as having "mini-cells", compared to > existing cellular services. That would mean more antennas would need > to be built, but they would each cover a smaller area and so might not > be so intrusive. > Could someone who has seen a PCS site describe it? Does it have a > "mini" antenna? Would you want one in your back yard? Here in the Dallas, TX area one of the Primeco is installing their PCS towers in or on existing high voltage power line towers. The towers look ugly but the basic structure was already present. I actually do have one in my backyard. Lee Hardiman ------------------------------ From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 03:08:01 GMT I've seen some 'mini' antennas that are mounted on cables strung between telephone poles. The antenna & repeater looks about the same size as some of the smaller transformers, except that they are mounted _between_ two poles instead of on a pole. This sausage-looking thing also has perhaps 2 short antennas sticking out of it. I believe that the cable is actually part of a CATV cable TV system, and the PCS 'borrows' some of the CATV channels. 'Intrusive' is a matter of taste. Do you want a few major eyesores, or a whole bunch of minor eyesores? In Japan, one company mounts their PCS antennas on the tops of their phone booths (which they own). In the Middle Ages, people built very pretty pager antennas -- they were called church bell towers, and operated on sound instead of radio. So there's some precedent for building prettier antennas! www/ftp directory: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/home.html ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: Public Meetings on New 415 NPA Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 20:25:11 PDT Public Meetings Next Week On New Area Code For 415 Region; Consumers Can Comment On Three Relief Alternatives At Three Bay Area Sessions SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 20, 1996--Residents of the 415 area code, please lend an ear. Three public meetings will be held next week where the public can comment on three options for adding a new area code in the Bay Area region now served by 415. "A new area code is needed in 415 to keep up with the increasing demand for new telephone numbers," said Bruce Bennett, California area code relief coordinator, noting the new area code needs to be introduced as early as December 1997. "The need for a new area code in 415 is a foregone conclusion," Bennett added. "The question still remaining is what option will be used to implement that new area code. These meetings will give the public an opportunity to comment on the three alternatives under consideration." The telecommunications industry has proposed three alternatives for adding an area code in the 415 region -- two using a geographic split, the other using an overlay. The 415 area code currently serves San Francisco, San Mateo and Marin counties, the northern portion of Santa Clara County and a small portion of Santa Cruz County. Dates and locations of the meetings are: Monday, June 24 San Francisco Noon to 2 p.m. California Public Utilities Commission Auditorium 505 Van Ness Avenue Monday, June 24 San Rafael 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Marin County Civic Center Board of Supervisors Chambers, Rm. 322 3501 Civic Center Drive, Third Floor Tuesday, June 25 San Mateo Noon to 2 p.m. San Mateo City Council Chambers 330 West 20th Avenue Bennett said 415 is not alone in its need for a new area code. Plans call for doubling the number of area codes statewide from 13 to 26 in the next five years to keep up with the phenomenal growth in number usage. `Californians are using phone numbers at a record pace,` Bennett said, explaining that the high-technology explosion of cellular phones, fax machines and pagers is driving the rapid growth. The opening of local telephone service to competition this year is also fueling the growth, he added. At the meetings, telecommunications industry representatives will present the three alternatives -- two using a geographic split to add the area code, the other using an overlay. A public comment period will follow. In a geographic split, the area served by the existing area code is divided with roughly half the customers being required to change the area code portion of their phone number and the remaining customers keeping the old area code. In an overlay, the new area code is placed over the existing area code. Both have the same geographic boundaries. The new area code would be given to people who request a new phone number. Existing customers would keep their present area code. None of the alternatives would impact the price of calls. Call distance determines call price and is not impacted by the creation of a new area code. The options under consideration for the 415 area code are: -- Geographic Split -- Option 1. In this option, the city and county of San Francisco, the northern portion of San Mateo County including the cities of Brisbane, South San Francisco, the eastern portion of Daly City, the northern half of Millbrae and most of the city of San Bruno (including the San Francisco International Airport) would stay in the 415 area code. The remaining 415 area including Marin County, the rest of San Mateo County, the northern part of Santa Clara County and a small portion of Santa Cruz County would receive a new area code. This would create a non-contigious area code, with Marin County and most of San Mateo County in the new area code, but separated by the city and county of San Francisco which would stay in the 415 area code. -- Geographic Split -- Option 2. This option is identical to Option 1, with the exception that Marin County would also stay in the 415 area code. While fewer customers would change to the new area code in this option, the reconstituted 415 area code would run out of telephone numbers again in about four years. -- Overlay -- In the overlay option proposed for 415, the new area code would be placed over the existing 415 area code. The two codes would have the same geographic boundaries. The new area code would be given to people requesting a new phone number. Existing 415 customers would keep their area code. If an overlay is chosen, the CPUC has determined that 1 + 10-digit dialing (1+the area code and the seven-digit telephone number) will be required for all calls within and between the new and old area codes. -0- Under state law, the telecommunications industry is required to meet with customers and consider their input before a final area code relief plan is filed with the Commission. The Commission makes the final decision on area code relief. Customers unable to attend a meeting can send written comments to: Chief, Telecommunications Branch Commission Advisory and Compliance Division California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness San Francisco, CA 94102 For information on the 415 area code public meetings and any other updates, customers may call 1-800-544-0355. ------------------------------ From: Dave Close Subject: Public Hearing Notes - 714 split Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 23:28:35 -0700 Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California Thursday night I attended the third of three public meetings held at the direction of the California Public Utilities Commission to receive public comments on possible solutions to the exhaustion of phone numbers in NPA 714. 714 is essentially equivalent to Orange County, though some of those present were very concerned about the few exceptions. Tonight's meeting was held in the council chambers of the city of Huntington Beach. The meeting was chaired by Laura McDaniels who introduced herself as "with the CPUC." I found out after the meeting that she is a summer intern with the Commission. Nonetheless, she ran a very well organized meeting with good cheer. Also present was Bruce Bennett, the California Code Administrator, whose position is sponsored by the telco industry and not by the CPUC. In attendence on the dias were representatives from PacBell and GTE (the two LECs), Airtouch, Sprint, and a cable TV trade group. Comments indicated that industry attendance was not the same at each of the meetings. The Code Administrator, after consultation with the industry, has proposed three alternative plans. The plan which is eventually recommended to the CPUC may be one of them, or may be different. The plans presented have been described here previously. One plan is an overlay of the entire NPA. The other two plans were slightly different splits. Both splits assign 714 to the northern portion of the county and a new code to the southern portion. According to the Administrator, option #1 leaves about 53% of the existing numbers in 714 while option #2 leaves about 60%. Geographically, the northern portion of the county left in 714 is obviously much smaller than the southern portion given to the new code. It was asserted that, although population growth is heaviest in the southern portion of the county, phone number growth is greater in the northern portion. Thus if a split is adopted, this makes it likely that the area keeping 714 would have to split again in a few years, sooner for option #2, and sooner than the new code area for either split. Ms. McDaniels began the meeting by declaring that the CPUC wanted public input to "minimize the adverse impact" of whatever plan was adopted. The unspoken assumption was that all plans would have adverse impacts. Aside from the negative benefit of not running out of numbers, there were no expressed positive attributes assigned to any of the plans, except in comparison to the other plans. No one was engaged in any long-term planning; everyone seemed afraid of the "vision thing." It was obvious to this observer that, by presenting two plans for splits, the Administrator has focused the debate almost entirely on where the line should be drawn. Almost no one, other than myself, made any mention of the overlay plan. Even representatives from the Orange County government and from the city of Santa Ana, the county seat, who complained bitterly that both split plans would move them to the new area, and wanted all county offices, county wide, to remain in the same area, did not even mention that the overlay plan would accomplish their desire completely. Nor did any members of the official panel ask these speakers if they would back an overlay as a way to meet their concerns. The representative from Sprint did ask one speaker to consider that putting more territory into the area keeping 714 would force that area to split again sooner. But he didn't ask, and neither did anyone else, if the overlay would be acceptable. Instead, almost all comments about the overlay were directed to the fact that it would force all calls to be dialed with 1+10D and that neighbors and other household members might have numbers with different area codes. Several speakers advocated creating an overlay code solely for new technologies. The panel explained that the FCC has prohibited that solution and that it wouldn't do more than delay the problem anyway. But some speakers wanted fax machines and pagers, not merely cell phones, placed in separate areas. No one explained to those speakers that telco does not now ask the purpose of a line nor prohibit customers from later attaching a fax machine to what was previously a voice line. Although technologically impractical and a straight-jacket for consumers, the idea was respectfully accepted. Several people commented that, if "the people" wanted such a solution, the FCC was wrong to prohibit it, and promised to petition for changes to the rules. One industry representative commented that their group had considered and rejected 7-9 additional plans, mostly splits. But no one said that any of those plans had called for more than one new code and no one in the audience suggested that idea. It seemed clear to this observer that we will all be back again every two to four years to re-hash all these issues again because no one is willing to take the initiative to propose a solution with longer life. Just as with CPID, the CPUC is toadying to the know-nothing reactionaries in their constituency. I hope that, just as with CPID, the FCC or some other body will be able to force the CPUC to open their eyes, even against their will. The lady from PacBell told me after the meeting that the NANP committee on which she serves expects the entire NANP to run out of numbers, even with the new "interchangable" NPAs, by about 2025. She expects that 1+10D dialing will be a mandated national standard within five years, making the objections to the overlay plan mostly moot. And the industry is counting on that conversion to reclaim the initial 1 for other purposes, such as extending the length of a standard NANP number. Of course, by 2025 we may all be using domain names and IP numbers instead of NANP numbers anyway! Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA "Politics is the business of getting dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359 power and privilege without dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu possessing merit." - P. J. O'Rourke ------------------------------ From: P.Raffin@frcl.bull.fr (Patrick Raffin) Subject: Monaco Switches Tonight to 377 Country Code Date: 21 Jun 1996 16:09:47 GMT Organization: Fluctuqt nec mergitur This Friday 21 June, at 21h local time (CET), Monaco switches to its own country code: 377. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #303 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Jun 24 14:31:25 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA10729; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 14:31:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 14:31:25 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606241831.OAA10729@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #304 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Jun 96 14:31:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 304 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Proposal For LEC Internet Access (Stephen Satchell) Carpet Capital [Dalton, GA] - Cellular and Coin (Stanley Cline) Small Firm Stung By Bad 800 Calls (Tad Cook) Book Review: "Web Publishing with Word" by Dornfest (Rob Slade) Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today (TELECOM Digest Editor) Another AOL Teenage Runaway Gets Caught (TELECOM Digest Editor) The Virtual Institute of Information (Shameless Self Promotion) (A Wolfson) 1-700-555-1212 on ISDN (Kurt A. Melden) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: satchell@accutek.com (Stephen Satchell) Subject: Proposal For LEC Internet Access Organization: Satchell Evaluations Date: 24 Jun 96 00:55:05 GMT Several telephone companies have been looking at getting into the internet access business. Internet access would consist solely of the ability to connect to the net; other services such as DNS, mail, news, and server support would be supplied by others. Most of the RBOCs have been screaming for years that modem usage screws up their message traffic models, and as a consequence the cost of providing telephone service is increased because of us people who stay connected for hours or even days at a time. BellSouth has even made a formal statement that Internet access pricing is going to have to be measured service in order to reduce the abuses. ISDN data rates are surcharged in many areas just for this reason. The proposed overlay of the 415 area code in Northern California has been proposed because the growth in data services has put pressure on telephone numbers in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Marin Counties, the counties served by 415. When you consider that room-mate living is the norm there, and that each person is ordering telephone service for phone, fax, and modem, you can see why the growth is such that Pacific Bell estimates that they will be out of numbers by December 1997. All the current telco product offerings for data suffer from the same malady: inappropriateness to Internet users. Existing switched and leased-line data service tariffs include guaranteed uptimes and guaranteed channel capacity. Internet users don't need absolute availability, nor do they need guaranteed channel capacity. The PSTN is not the best avenue for data connections, because the typical usage is such that a lot of channel bandwidth is wasted: even in FTP and Gopher one side of the conversation is virtually silent while the other is running full-tilt-boogie to transfer the data. I propose a shared-access leased-line service for Internet access which does *not* guarantee 100 percent availability, and guarantees 4000 bps (that's right, four thousand bits per second) transfer rate in the worst case. The only thing the customer would "own" is the access box (nothing more than a simple router with 10 base T connector for the user's computers) and the first link from the house or business to a concentrator. From the concentrator on, the equipment is shared all the way to the point of presence for the Internet backbone provider. Borrowing some cellular termonology, the user would be linked using leased ISDN 2B bonded, ADSL, HDSL, or other high-speed technology to a neighborhood concentrator. The backhaul starts at the concentrator and continues to the final connection point into the Internet itself. That backhaul can be composed of frame relay links, dedicated T1/T3 links, SONET rings, whatever. In one model of the backhaul, a single T1 link can serve 256 homes and meet the guaranteed-channel requirement specified above. Two T1 links in a ring configuration can continue to offer service to 512 homes even if one link is broken by a backhoe. Interestingly, 512 homes is above the limit in reach in a densly-built neighborhood of single-family homes from a concentrator if you don't want to put repeaters or "range entenders" in the local loop. This is also close to the size of a moderately-sized apartment complex or small high-rise building. These neighborhood concentrators can be brought via T1 to routers in the central office, not unlike the way that speech circuits are brought into the COs. Routers in the CO can then bridge the data onto high-speed circuits (such as T3s) to a toll office, at which point everything is bridged into an Internet backbone provider and out on the net. Other models can have neighborhood concentrators bridging data into channels of a SONET ring, while others can use other technology such as coax. The access box would have an Ethernet 10 base T connection. This is because the cheapest high-speed interface available for personal computers today is the UTP Ethernet card. These can be purchased for as low as $50 complete with patch cable. The communication between the computer and the access box would be PPP over Ethernet. Neighborhood concentrators don't need extensive battery backup because the tariff for this service would specify that access would be on a best-effort basis -- although I'd expect the concentrators to have at least 5 minutes of battery so as to bridge brownouts and power company switching transients. The central office concentrators and routers could use the regular -52V battery bus; equipment already exists that can live on existing telco power. Why high-speed links and Ethernet? THe idea is to provide a service that will be significantly better than PSTN solutions -- ISDN and voice-grade modems -- to get them off of the PSTN. By promising fractional-T1 rates like 384 kbits/s during light usage, people will be willing to pay for the new service. Some back-of-the-envelope estimates of eventual costs: terminal adapter would run around $300, existing local loops could be reused, and the shared cost for the backhaul including capital equipment would be roughly $30 per month per user. In one model of this system, routing would be simple and based on electrical geography. IP addresses would be associated with an electrical path at the router at the Internet point of presence; the terminal adapter need not know the exact path up to the IPOP router which simplifies that interface. It's possible that at some point IPOP-to-TA communications would follow a broadcast model instead of a point-to-point model in order to further reduce costs. This could be done, for example, by having the neighborhood concentrator broadcast all data to each of its 256 TAs, and have the TAs select the packets destined for them. Security concerns could outweight any simplification that might enable. Telcos would need to restrain themselves from charging by the packet or by the minute -- the goal is to have customers share the bandwidth in the same manner as the Internet itself does. Remember, when you are sitting starting at a Web page, the only resources that this system has you using is the physical loop, the concentrator input card, and the TA. NO OTHER RESOURCES ARE CONSUMED WHEN NO DATA IS BEING TRANSFERRED. A further rationale for using a monthly-billing model is that children would then be encouraged to explore the Internet without worries about cost. By the way, there is a method to boost revenue: you can sell additional guaranteed capacity for a certain amount per month. If basic Internet access (4kbit/s) is $30 a month, you can guarantee 8 kbit/s for $10 more, for example. In short, a person wanting to surf the net faster can pay more money to do so, up to some limit like 128 kbit/s. This is useful for roommate situations, and also for business access. Copyright 1996, Satchell Evaluations, all rights reserved. Permission to republish, but not for profit, the above proposal is granted. Persons wishing to republish this proposal in for-profit magazines should contact the author at satchell@accutek.com for permission. Stephen Satchell, Satchell Evaluations http://www.accutek.com/~satchell ------------------------------ From: scline@usit.net (Stanley Cline) Subject: Carpet Capital [Dalton, GA] - Cellular and Coin Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 02:20:41 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services If any of you have been through north Georgia, especially Dalton, you probably have noticed one thing -- carpet, carpet everywhere -- carpet MILLS, carpet STORES, and carpet EVERYTHING! Well, Dalton has some other, *telecom-related* things worth note -- "new" cellular service and (worse) mangled payphones -- including a COCOT at BellSouth Mobility's local office. The Cellular: United States Cellular has FINALLY pulled out of Georgia RSA 1, which includes Dalton -- it is now controlled (on the A side) by Palmer Wireless. They are switching traffic out of Columbus [GA], rather than going through GTE's switch in Chattanooga (which is what I expected they'd do.) They're charging their newly-obtained customers 25c/min throughout Georgia and in the Chattanooga-Ocoee corridor, and 49c/min in all of Alabama, Florida, and the rest of Tennessee. NACN is available, both in and out. BUT -- right now, Palmer has not made a very smooth break with the past -- their store still has a "United States Cellular" sign over it; the roamer access number [that used to work] for Dalton now does not work (they told me to use the one for Columbus for now!); and GTE has no earthly idea what we Chattanoogans (who use CellOne) will pay to roam in Dalton ... they STILL told me to "switch to B" (which I already know to do, since I have a line with BellSouth as well. I will know what Palmer charges when I get my CellOne bill next month. ARRRRGH!) I may have been CLONED over the past few days -- ever since I got back from Atlanta (yesterday), incoming calls (when my phone is turned off) have been misbehaving -- some going to voice mail, others going to BellSouth recordings in Birmingham, AL (note: I HAVE NOT BEEN THERE!), all doing an excessive amount of clicking and ringing (up to seven rings to VM -- VERY unusual) ... to everyone at BellSouth [so far] this is a mystery. (Come Monday, this WILL get taken of ... I have had to turn off voice mail AND call delivery for now :( ) The Payphones: Coming back from Atlanta yesterday, I stopped at a convenience store in Dalton to refuel both body and car -- while there, I noticed a bank of odd-looking ALLTEL (LEC) payphones nearby. The phones, by Nortel, have a display and card slot, as well as the usual coin slot, etc., and are presubscribed to AT&T. I thought I'd try my BellSouth calling card to see if it worked -- lo and behold, it didn't. (I could not use my LCI card in the slot; LCI's have no magstripe for the phone to pick up.) The phones seem to be programmed to accept *ALLTEL*, major IXC (ATT/MCI/Sprint), and Visa/Master cards, but *not* those issued by other LECs. (AT&T's card phones do NOT reject LEC cards, from what I can remember. I haven't used one of THOSE since I dumped AT&T -- in 1992.) With the Olympics coming to Atlanta next month, I would expect those phones to honor BELLSOUTH (and other LEC) calling cards! (The number format is the same -- 10 digits + PIN, etc. I assume the magstripe coding format is the same across LECs, too -- am I right?) This same phone also tried to charge me $2.55 for a LOCAL call (interLATA -- to Ringgold, GA) -- the "standard" ALLTEL/Automatic Electric "GTE leftover" payphone next door wanted NO money for the call, which should have cost 25 cents! (Ringgold's telco payphones, all AE's, also do not want money for calls to Dalton. The interLATA/local call is just too much for the phones, ACTS, etc. to handle, perhaps?) To their (rare) credit, COCOT's DO handle the situation correctly, demanding 25 cents. As for COCOT's, there is one sitting right in front of BellSouth Mobility's new Dalton office, just across the street from the convenience store mentioned above. The previous lessee of the building (only BellSouth is housed there now, and they obviously didn't holler "OUT OUT DAMNED COCOT!") apparently didn't have the COCOT owner pull the phone! If this had been a *BellSouth* LEC area and not ALLTEL, I would not be amused -- I don't think BellSouth divisions should house COCOTs (but with the telecom law deregulating coin service as it does, who knows what will happen -- a BELLSOUTH payphone in ALLTEL territory, maybe?!) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:scline@usit.net ** http://www.usit.net/public/scline/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ** AOL SUCKS! ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: Small Firm Stung By Bad 800 Calls Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 15:58:04 PDT Small Firm Stung by Calls After Computer Giant Prints Wrong Number SEMINOLE, Fla. (AP) -- A wrong number in a computer manual has caused headaches and a huge phone bill for a small educational toy distributor. Compaq Computer Corp., the world's biggest personal computer maker, printed the toll-free number for Play 'n Learn Sales Inc. in manuals as the help line for a WordPerfect program that is installed on its Presario 7100 machines. As a result, dozens of calls a day come into the family-run Play 'n Learn, sometimes through the night, from people who have a question about the program WordPerfect Works. Some callers turn angry when they realize the tiny firm can't help. "On top of the nuisance of it, we're losing business because our lines get tied up and our customers can't get through," said owner Kathleen Henn. She sued Compaq earlier this week, seeking payment for the more than $6,000 in erroneous calls to her company's toll-free line. The problem first began in January 1995 when operators for Novell Inc., which then owned WordPerfect, occasionally gave people the wrong number. It snowballed last fall when the Compaq manuals were distributed with the wrong number. The help line for the software is not a toll-free number. It has the area code 801, which is the area code for Utah where Novell and WordPerfect are based. Play 'n Learn's 1-800 number is the same as the software help line's 1-801 number. Novell runs the help line even though it sold Word Perfect to Corel Inc. earlier this year. Henn said her attempts to get any of the companies to fix the problem have produced no concrete response. "It's impossible to get hold of anybody at Compaq, Word Perfect or Novell," she said. The lawsuit she filed in state court against Compaq alleges negligence, invasion of privacy and emotional harm. Yvonne Donaldson, a spokeswoman for Compaq, declined comment on the lawsuit, saying she was unfamiliar with the mix-up. Play 'n Learn represents about 30 manufacturers and sells wholesale to about 1,400 stores, specializing in science and nature toys. Three rooms in Henn's home have been converted to offices and three friends and her daughter work at the company. Henn has ordered a new toll-free number, but she doesn't want to drop her old one because some customers still use it and and it's listed in lots of flyers and trade catalogs. "The worst thing you can do is change your 800 number," she said. "I'm going to be answering WordPerfect's calls forever." Her attorney, Lee Atkinson, said he suggested that Compaq put out a message on its Internet home page, or send out new manuals. "They have not been very responsive," Atkinson said. "Their basic response was `Change your 800 number,' as if her business wasn't as important to her as their business is to them." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:27:25 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Web Publishing with Word" by Dornfest BKWPWORD.RVW 960523 "Web Publishing with Word", Asha Dornfest, 1996, 0-7821-1807-0, U$24.99 %A Asha Dornfest %C 2021 Challenger Drive, Alameda, CA 94501 %D 1996 %G 0-7821-1807-0 %I Sybex Computer Books %O U$24.99 510-523-8233 800-227-2346 Fax: 510-523-2373 jjigarjian@sybex.com %P 296 %T "Web Publishing with Word" The Internet Assistant add-on module for MS Word is a very simplistic HTML (HyperText Markup Language) tool, and this book fits very neatly with the IA target audience. It is a simple, lock-step, keystroke by keystroke guide to the HTML production portion of Internet Assistant. This approach only works well, of course, with the page markup aspect of Web page production. The sections on forms and CGI (Common Gateway Interface) programming really only tell half the story, and even the creation of anchor links is a slightly more complicated task than the book makes out. Unlike Ross, in "The Underground Guide to Microsoft Internet Assistant" (cf. BKMSINAS.RVW), Dornfest does not delve deeply into the intricacies of the use of IA as a browser and so forth. On balance this is a good thing, since it allows the book to concentrate on a field independent approach, and the simple page layout where IA is strongest. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKWPWORD.RVW 960523. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca slade@freenet.victoria.bc.ca The best defence is a good non-sequitor Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:18:28 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Subject: Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today The InterNIC organization says it has gotten tired of asking people to pay the bill for their domain name, and in some cases has asked several times without getting a response or payment. As a result, they have decided to remove the non-paying sites from the 'White Pages' beginning today, June 24. About 25,000 sites are involved in the purge which will begin today and continue until it has been completed. An assumption being made which may or may not be accurate is that the glamour of a WEB page and the love affair with the Internet may be over. InterNIC believes many of the delinquent / non-paying sites have been abandoned, or at least the WEB pages are now abandoned. You will find a large number of 'home pages' are inacessible on a permanent basis beginning today as InterNIC cleans out the files of those sites which have not responded to demands for payment of its fee. No doubt at least a few will hastily get their bill paid when they discover no one is able to reach them electronically any longer. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 13:09:13 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Another AOL Teenage Runaway Gets Caught Call it love at first byte I guess. James Wilson, 15, of East Dundee, Illinois is the latest America On Line teenage chat user to run off to meet a new friend from online. He rode his bicycle to Chicago, bought a $149 Greyhound bus ticket to Boston and then *walked* twenty miles to Hingham, MA -- just to meet a girl he corresponded with on his computer. This time it really was an actual female -- a fifteen year old Hingham girl he had chatted with for four months every Friday and Saturday night via America Online. During that four months he had saved up money from his paper route and from mowing lawns. She was expecting him and they planned to meet at her home last Wednes- day afternoon, although she had no idea of the pains he went through to meet her. Later she expressed amazement at the effort he had gone to for the planned meeting. James, an honors student at St. Edward High School in Elgin, Illinois originally planned to ride his bike all the way, but he gave up on that after about a forty mile bike ride from his home to the Greyhound Station at the junction of Interstates 90, 94 and 57 on the south side of Chicago. He finally got to Hingham and a mere half-block from the girl's house Wednesday morning at 3:00 a.m. (he left home Monday morning; boarded the bus later Monday and arrived in Boston Tuesday in the late afternoon) when he was stopped by the Hingham police for being out after their curfew. It did not take long for police to find out the kid was already listed as missing by his parents back in Illinois. By 6:30 a.m. just three hours later James was on a plane from Boston back to O'Hare International Airport in Chicago where Chicago Police met the plane with his parents when it arrived later that morning. James never did get to meet his computer pal. Hingham police Lt. John Kichler said James had planned to wait until a decent hour in the morning to actually go to the door of the house. Police did confirm that the planned meeting was 'legitimate', i.e. the person he planned to meet was a girl his own age. Kichler noted that, "This is our first Internet love affair in Hingham, and I am sure it does not happen to many people across the country." James now complains that he has been 'severely' grounded. He is not permitted to leave his house, his AOL account has been cancelled and the money from his paper route and lawn mowing job have to be turned over to his parents entirely to help pay for the plane ticket from Boston back to Chicago. He said he still hopes to meet his online friend face to face but agrees it will probably not be in the near future. The girl and her parents were embarassed by the whole situation and she has been warned by her parents about giving out addresses and phone numbers to people over the computer. Call it a modern day Romeo and Juliet story I guess, but one which had a safe if not altogether happy ending for Romeo. PAT ------------------------------ From: Alex Wolfson Subject: The Virtual Institute of Information (Shameless Self Promotion) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 17:11:16 -0700 Organization: Columbia University I would like to take a moment to invite your evaluation of The Virtual Institute of Information, a research tool on the World Wide Web for locating and finding information on Communications and Mass Media. The V.I.I. was created by the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information at Columbia University. The site is unique in the sense that we have combined links to communications and mass media sites, academic papers, original works, events, interactive forums, and much more into an easy to use research tool. I have not yet come across a site on the Internet that offers the type and quality of original information coupled with existing information before. (of you know of other site I would be very interested in checking them out. The V.I.I. is located at: http://ctr.columbia.edu/vii I would appreciate any imput you might have to offer. I hope that this has not offended any users, but I thought that some people might be interested. (We only came on-line last week.) Thank you, Stephen Messer Assistant Director Columbia Institute for Tele-Information Please direct all comments to: smesser@claven.gsb.columbia.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 10:42:21 -0400 From: Kurt A. Melden Subject: 1-700-555-1212 on ISDN I have an analog phone and 2B (two voice and two data) ISDN service from NYNEX. Except for the higher than promised install charges (future topic), the service is very reliable and fast. I am on the 508-870 switch (DMS-100) in Westboro, MA. When I use the 700-555-1212 from my analog phone, I get ATT as the subscribed service. When I use it from the ISDN POTS lines on the back of a Bitsurfer Pro., I always get NYNEX directory assistance. I ask the operator to call up the number that they think I called and it is 508 555-1212. Am I trying something that is not supposed to work? Thanks, Kurt Melden kam@interramp.com Church of Eternal Profit - Westborough MA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the number you should actually be dialing for the function you want is 700-555-4141 rather than 1212. You might try it that way and see what happens. I have a few questions of my own about this number: When I dial it or any 700 number from my cellular phone which is via Frontier (which is reselling Ameritech here in the Chicago area) I always wind up in the voicemail box of some person by the name of John Freeling (?). It does not matter what 700 number I dial, I always get him. Any ideas why? PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #304 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Mon Jun 24 23:00:49 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA28805; Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:00:49 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:00:49 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606250300.XAA28805@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #305 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Jun 96 23:00:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 305 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Splitting Area Codes Causes Consternation (Tad Cook) Heartline and Excel Fined by FCC For Slamming (Barry Mishkind) Getting Spammed to Death (Ken Levitt) Pacific Bell Files CPUC Complaint Against AT&T (Mike King) BellSouth Signs Long Distance Agreement With AT&T (Mike King) 888 Deployment Not (Bob Frankston) Part of NPA 704 to Move to 910 (Bob Goudreau) Discount Long Distance Services (kavedoggie@aol.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tad Cook Subject: Splitting Area Codes Causes Consternation Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 15:39:26 PDT Splitting Area Codes Causes Consternation Among Public, Phone Companies By Michael L. Rozansky, The Philadelphia Inquirer Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News PHILADELPHIA--Jun. 23--When Philadelphia's area code was carved in half two years ago, dividing towns and streets, Bell Atlantic Corp.'s experts predicted that the split of the 215 and 610 area codes could last for 30 years. It has been just 30 months -- and the phone company says both area codes are in danger of running out of numbers by 1998. So the question is: How to cut up the region again? It's a question that has spurred angry debate in state after state, where two options are discussed. One is a geographic split, which fragments an area into ever-smaller zones that, some joke, will eventually resemble zip codes. The second choice is to "overlay" a new area code atop the old one, which means that phones in a region may be assigned either area code. Phone numbers in the new area code would be given out when none is left in the old one. A geographic split would require thousands of businesses and homes to change numbers. But an overlay offers the prospect of phones in the same neighborhood, even in the same house, with different area codes. And it quite likely means requiring 10-digit dialing -- an area code plus a number -- for all telephone calls, even local calls that remain within an area code. One option would carve the region into tinier area codes every few years -- and the other could require dialing a brain-straining ten digits for all calls. "What you're really dealing with here is the lesser of two evils," said Irwin A. Popowsky, Pennsylvania's consumer advocate, who favors the geographical split. The code crunch was created in part by the remarkable growth of cellular phones, fax machines, computer modems for Internet access and second home lines. But another cause is new: The coming of local phone competition, hastened by this year's federal telecommunications law. In the Philadelphia area, five companies that have been given approval to offer local phone service have reserved nearly one million phone numbers, although they have barely begun to sign up customers. "We're at a stage in the industry that is unlike anything we've ever experienced before," said Josephine Gallagher, a Bell Atlantic employee who works for an impartial industry group that coordinates the area code system. "There was never local competition before, and it's putting a strain on the numbering resources around the country." The original 144 U.S. area codes lasted from 1947 until 1995; since then, 35 more have been assigned. In Pennsylvania, four of the five area codes will be exhausted within two years. In years past, the phone industry would quietly decide how to set up a new area code. But that backroom approach has disintegrated into war between the regional Bells and their competitors, creating debates everywhere that state regulators are asked to resolve. The Bells prefer the overlay codes, saying it is the least disruptive. Their local-phone competitors, including cable-television companies and long-distance giants, such as AT&T and MCI, prefer geographic splits because they say overlays put them at a competitive disadvantage. If Bell Atlantic gets to keep its huge base of customers in the old area code, and its competitors must assign its customers numbers in a new area code, that would deter people from moving to a competitor, they contend. The telephone industry says 10-digit dialing is an inevitable standard, though experts who study human behavior say it will be disastrous. "Certainly, going to 10-digit dialing is a problem," said Tom Landauer, a psychology professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder who worked at Bell Labs and Bellcore, two industry research organizations. "That exceeds most people's ability to remember a telephone number by a fair margin ... "It will be harder to dial, you'll get a lot more wrong numbers for a while, and people are justified in thinking that will be terrible." Arnold Glass, a psychology professor at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, says that with 10-digit dialing, more people will need directory assistance, more people will choose to pay the phone company to complete calls, and children will find it harder to learn their own phone numbers. He said an area code is one of the crucial pieces of information people use to order their world. "There will be real consequences of ripping this little bit of information away from people," Glass predicted. "It'll affect people's lives, degrade it in certain ways." In the Philadelphia region, there are two plans. One calls for area-code overlays in the 610 and 215 areas. The other, calling for a geographic split -- which would follow the boundaries of telephone switching offices rather than political lines -- would divide Philadelphia. It would put Center City and North, West and South Philadelphia in the 215 area code, and assign the city's northeast and northwest sections, along with parts of Montgomery and Bucks Counties, to a new area code. In the current 610 area, the western suburbs nearest the city, including Delaware County and much of Montgomery County, would form one area code and the outlying areas would compose a second. There's been no decision on which would keep the 610 designation. The state's Public Utility Commission hopes to decide between the plans by the end of the summer, according to a staff lawyer. He said the PUC wanted to give the public time to comment on the plans. The PUC made its preference clear last week, when it narrowly approved an overlay plan for Pittsburgh's 412 area code. PUC Commissioner Robert Bloom called the overlay the "least inconvenient." Andy Stofan, president of the Latrobe Area Chamber of Commerce outside Pittsburgh, agreed. "If you have an overlay, it would probably save a lot of businesses a lot of money from switching over stationery, business cards, advertising and so forth," he said. The PUC's action made Pennsylvania, after Maryland, the second state to recently approve an overlay. In most cities -- from Los Angeles to Houston, Chicago to Atlanta -- regulators have opted for geographic splits. Chicago tried to use an overlay solely for wireless devices such as cellular phones and beepers, but the Federal Communications Commission killed that plan as discriminatory. Pennsylvania's consumer advocate and small-business advocate had opposed the overlay, saying it would deter local-phone competition. Bell's competitors say the playing field will be leveled once consumers can take their numbers with them when they switch local phone companies, but they say that won't be possible for several years. The Bell companies prefer overlays now "because of the confusion it injects in the marketplace," said Paul Kouroupas, a regulatory vice president with Teleport Communications Group, which offers local phone service in Pittsburgh. "You can just picture their telephone ads. Things are swirling around the distraught consumer and they say: 'Don't worry, just sit still and everything will be OK.' Overlay plans are anticompetitive on their face." Bell Atlantic vice president Bill Mitchell counters that his competitors want to see Bell Atlantic carve up areas geographically precisely because it will annoy people. In the ensuing confusion, he said, customers might decide that if they have to switch area codes they may as well switch phone companies. "They see it as a marketing opportunity," he said. Until late last week, Bell Atlantic had said it would switch to 10-digit dialing for everyone in Pittsburgh if the overlay was approved. But in its ruling, the PUC said Bell and other local phone companies could still use customary seven-digit dialing for local calls if they wanted. Bell Atlantic said it would consider that. The telephone-number shortage is both real and fictional. When the King of Prussia Chamber of Commerce started in 1987, "We had just two phone lines," said its president, Albert Paschall. "Today, there's nine, plus two cellular units. That's 11 lines we require for our basic needs." Everywhere, the use of phone equipment is booming. Cellular-phone companies have reported 40 percent growth in customers. Bell Atlantic sold 205,000 secondary phone lines in the first quarter. Even so, those figures don't quite explain the mystery: What happened to more than seven million phone numbers that were added when the 610 area code began in 1994? To understand that, you must realize that the number drought doesn't mean that every phone number has been assigned. Instead, the problem is a shortage of exchange codes, the three-digit prefixes that begin a seven-digit number. There are 792 exchange codes in an area code and each comes with a set of 10,000 phone numbers that can be formed from it. Once a three-digit exchange code has been assigned to a local calling area, its 10,000 phone-number combinations are stuck in that local area. It doesn't do any good if there is a nearly unused exchange available in Center City if new numbers are needed in Doylestown. Consider what's happening in Pittsburgh, where the Teleport Communications Group decided to offer local phone service in competition with Bell Atlantic. It obtained 20 three-digit local exchange codes, locking up 200,000 phone numbers. It doesn't have anywhere near that number of customers. In fact, in one exchange of 10,000 numbers, it may have just 100 customers. But it needs that exchange to provide service in that local area. "We hope to grow into that, obviously, and fill them up," says Teleport Communications' Kouroupas. ON THE INTERNET: Visit Philadelphia Online, the World Wide Web site of The Philadelphia Inquirer. Point your browser to http://www.phillynews.com ------------------------------ From: Barry Mishkind Subject: Heartline and Excel Fined by FCC For Slamming Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 10:03:48 -0800 Organization: The Eclectic Engineer COMMISSION FINDS HEARTLINE COMMUNICATIONS APPARENTLY LIABLE FOR FORFEITURE OF $200,000 FOR SLAMMING AND ISSUES NOTICE OF FORFEITURE AGAINST EXCEL FOR $80,000 (Report No. CC 96-15, Common Carrier Action) The Commission has issued a Notice of Apparent Liability finding Heartline Communications, Inc. apparently liable for a forfeiture penalty of $200,000 for willful or repeated violations of the Commission's telephone slamming rules. In addition, the Common Carrier Bureau assessed a forfeiture of $80,000 against Excel Telecommunications,Inc. for its violations of the Commission's slamming rules. The practice of changing a consumer's long distance company without that consumer's express approval is commonly known as "slamming." Action by the Commission June 20, 1996 by NAL for Forfeiture (FCC 96-272). __________________________________________ Barry Mishkind Tucson, AZ http://www.broadcast.net/~barry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 96 16:47:02 EDT From: levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) Subject: Getting Spammed to Death In a recent development in spamming, my Internet to Fidonet Gateway is taking a big hit. Someone is selling Internet mailing lists with thousands of names. About 100 of them point to my gateway. About 30% of the addresses are to non-existent Fidonet nodes, so my system bounces them back. They bounce back to non-existent addresses, or get mail box full messages. This causes bounce messages to come back to me. My effective transfer rate for messages is about 400 cps and I have to manually delete each of these messages from my system. So this is really bogging me and my system down. Fidonet, this gateway and my agreement with my ISP do not allow commercial messages, so I have to keep updating my filter program to block passing these messages on. If this goes on much longer, I will have to shut down this gateway and hundreds of people will loose E-Mail access to the Internet. I am just getting the third set of these in the past month. This one is is the first that can be traced to someplace real. They came with several different sources and reply to addresses on idt.net and aol.com, but the messages refer people to a web page that has a real mail address and a toll free number to call. The address is hardwear@icanect.net and the toll free number is 888.427.3932. Today (Saturday) I called the toll free number and got a live answering service. The answering service was very nice, but didn't understand a thing about what I was saying. I left a message to stop sending E-Mail to Fidonet.org. Maybe other readers would also like to leave messages with them about spamming the net with unsolicited mail messages. If you call, please be polite if you get the answering service. They are just doing their job. Speak slowly when leaving your message, they have to type all of your message into their computer. Here is what they are sending out: > Authenticated sender is > From: "Neil" > To: hardwear@idt.net > Subject: Jewelry for Computer Lovers > Reply-To: hardwear@idt.net > Hello, > If you like jewelry and computers check out the WEB site > http://hardwear.com > You will not receive any more messages from us > Thank you Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390 levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please make a note of the number Ken is passing on and let them know your feelings about this: 888.427.3932. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: Pacific Bell Files CPUC Complaint Against AT&T Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:48:41 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 06:17:46 -0700 Reply-To: NEWS-LIST@list.pactel.com From: sqlgate@list.pactel.com Subject: Pacific Bell Files CPUC Complaint -- AT&T Starts Billing Program Without Approvals June 20, 1996 FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jerry Kimata (415) 394-3739 jerry.kimata@pactel.com Pacific Bell Files CPUC Complaint -- AT&T Starts Billing Program Without Approvals SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Bell today filed a complaint with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) charging AT&T with illegally starting a program to begin billing residence customers directly for its services in California, without getting all the necessary approvals. "This end run around the CPUC is not acceptable," said John Gueldner, Vice President-Regulatory. "AT&T is ignoring the Commission's explicit instructions and their own customers' convenience," he said. "On top of that they're not giving people a real choice. "We've already had complaints from customers reporting that when they call AT&T to tell them they want to continue receiving one bill instead of two, they're being wrongly told that Pacific Bell doesn't want to do the billing anymore. Customers are not being offered the option by AT&T representatives to continue being billed by Pacific Bell. That's deceptive, anti-competitive and untrue." Gueldner said that as many as one million customers could be receiving the letter which announces the change. He said that in 1994 when AT&T asked the CPUC for permission to do its own billing and collection in place of local phone companies, the Commission required AT&T to "provide 60 days written notice to its affected customers if the LEC will no longer be providing the bill rendering and collection functions for AT&T-C. Such a notice shall be reviewed and approved by the Commission's Public Advisor's office prior to mailing." (PUC Decision 94-05-021, May 4, 1994) "We understand that the Commission's Public Advisor's Office never even saw the notice prior to its mailing," Gueldner said. AT&T just ignored the Commission's order. "The change means that AT&T customers will get two bills, one from us with local charges, and one from AT&T with long-distance charges, and lots of AT&T promotional material. "If customers do nothing, their billing will automatically change, so they get two bills instead of one," he said. "If customers call AT&T and say they'd prefer to continue to receive one bill from Pacific Bell, AT&T should not be allowed to mislead the customers about Pacific Bell's willingness to continue to provide a single bill. Pacific Bell would be happy to continue this service." Gueldner said that Pacific Bell's complaint seeks to prevent AT&T from switching their customers' billing without their informed authorization and asks that AT&T submit a new notice to the Commission for its approval. In the meantime, customers should continue to receive one bill from Pacific Bell, since AT&T's notice was improper. He said the new notice should clearly describe the alternatives a customer has. "In short," Gueldner said, "Pacific Bell is trying to prevent AT&T from teeing these customers up for a new twist on slamming." ----------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Signs Long Distance Agreement With AT&T Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:54:41 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 19:52:22 -0400 From: BellSouth Subject: BellSouth Signs Long Distance Agreement with AT&T Reply-To: press@www.bellsouth.com BellSouth .......................................June 21, 1996 BellSouth Signs Long Distance Agreement with AT&T ATLANTA -- BellSouth Long Distance Inc., a subsidiary of BellSouth Corporation (NYSE:BLS), announced today it has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for purchasing wholesale long distance services from AT&T. BellSouth made its selection after completing an intensive analysis of the capabilities and proposals of a broad range of long distance carriers earlier this year and additionally, jointly evaluating the proposals of five interexchange providers in conjunction with the long distance subsidiaries of SBC Communications Inc. and Pacific Telesis Group. The agreement covers the pricing, services and transport components BellSouth will use to complete an end-to-end long distance service that will be primarily comprised of BellSouth's own extensive fiber-optic network and its all-digital switching systems. The MOU may be broadened to include the long distance service BellSouth's cellular companies are already providing and which its PCS (personal communicatons service) subsidiary will begin offering this summer. "From the beginning our goal has been pretty striaghtforward -- to provide our customers with the highest-quality package of end-to-end long distance services at the best price and performance levels, as quickly as possible," said William F. Reddersen, group president of long distance and video. Over the past several months, we have scrutinized every detail of each of the proposals to be sure they would help us meet that goal. All of the proposals were very competitive. But in the final analysis, we selected the package of prices, services, features and capabilities that will meet our needs and those of our customers. "The joint RFP process was a significant success in that it allowed us to establish a new price level for the industry, while still meeting our aggressive timetable for entry into the long distance business," said Reddersen. "We intend to satisfy the necessary regulatory requirements, and to be offering wired long distance services within our region to a number of states early next year, and to all nine states within our operating region by the end of 1997." BellSouth expects to finalize the details of the agreement and sign a definitive contract with AT&T this summer. BellSouth is a $17.9 billion communications services company. It provides telecommunications, wireless communications, directory advertising and publishing, and information services to more than 25 million customers in 17 countries worldwide. ### For Information Contact: Tim Klein (404) 249-4135 Al Schweitzer (404) 249-2832 -------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: 888 Deployment Not Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 14:5:00 -0400 I don't know if it is Best Western's problem or more global but the last two I stayed in (Brooklyn Pk, Minn and Hillsoboro, Or) can't place 888 calls. Is there a legal requirement that 888 be supported like 800? Is there a standard number for reporting 888 problems? What's frustrating is that operators can't or refuse to place such calls. Where does one report these problems? What is a work-around? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 14:18:47 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Part of NPA 704 to Move to 910 The following notice appeared in my latest bill from BellSouth: DAVIDSON COUNTY MOVES TO 910 AREA CODE On August 1, 1996, all telephone numbers in Davidson County currently in the 704 area code will move to the 910 area code. The change involves the cities of Lexington, Churchland, Reeds, Southmount, Welcome and Denton. Thomasville is currently in the 910 area code and will not be affected. The change was requested by Davidson County customers and approved by federal regulators. In addition to the area code change, some telephone prefixes will also change: Lexington -- 246 will change to 248 -- 352 will change to 357 -- 858 will change to 853 Churchland -- 762 will change to 752 Denton -- 869 will change to 859 The last four digits of telephone numbers beginning with these prefixes will not be affected. This raises a number of questions in my mind: 1) Who were the "federal regulators" (the FCC)? 2) And why was their approval necessary? Was similar approval required, say, to move the Bronx from 212 to 718 a few years ago? 3) Why wasn't this change made years ago, if it's what Davidson County customers really wanted? Surely it would have been just as easy to move that part of the county into NPA 919 ten or twenty years ago (before 910 was split off from 919 a few years ago) as it is to move these exchanges into 910 today. Sure, some or all of the prefixes might have had to change, but that's happening even with the current switch. Until 919 started approaching a jeopardy situation in the late 1980s/early 1990s, there should have been no major obstacle to realigning the 919/704 boundary in this fashion. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: kavedoggie@aol.com (Kavedoggie) Subject: Discount Long Distance Services Date: 24 Jun 1996 13:13:27 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: kavedoggie@aol.com (Kavedoggie) I am a telecommunications consultant in California and New York working with small to medium sized customers. I've noticed over the last year that the second tier carriers are offering rates and great service for a fraction of the cost of the big three. In particular, two companies, Frontier Communications and LDDS/Worldcom, seem to be the most competitive. This probably does not come as a surprise to most of you, but what I've found most interesting is that dealing with either one of those two companies direct does not always get you the best deals. Each one of these companies has in place what they refer to as a Direct Agent Program. What this essentially means is that they've subcontracted with a third party to sell their services. Unlike a reseller however, these agents sell the services for Frontier and then Frontier takes over the accounts. The agents receive a percentage of the monthly billing and Frontier services the account. Working with a Direct Agent gets you the best price that Frontier has to offer because of the volume of business the Agents do with Frontier. This is an advantage to the customer by providing them with even lower prices without having to sacrifice service. If this is something of interest, one of the best agents I've worked with is a company called Pacific Coast Communications. Their main office is in California, but they have representation nationwide. They currently rep for Frontier Communications. Should you desire more information on Pacific Coast Communications, they can be reached on 818-705-5955. kavedoggie@aol.com for questions ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #305 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jun 25 14:45:11 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA04784; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:45:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:45:11 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606251845.OAA04784@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #306 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 96 14:45:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 306 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "HTML: The Definitive Guide" by Musciano/Kennedy (Rob Slade) BellSouth Remote Call-Forwarding (Chris Telesca) BellSouth Opposes Delays in Competition (Mike King) BellSouth Asks Georgia Public Service Commission to Reconsider (Mike King) Can Call Go to an RCF to POTS Line With CF-DA to DID on DMS100 (Costello) Jun 30, 1996 Last Day to Redeem AT&T Points For Value (Joel M. Snyder) Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (David Whiteman) Recommendations Wanted on Network Monitoring Software (Jim Bachesta) Experiences Wanted With Lindsay, Other Emergency Cellular? (Howard Gayle) Slamming Article in Daily Oklahoman (Wes Leatherock) Life in Prison For Phraud Phone Calls (Jorene Downs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 12:11:43 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "HTML: The Definitive Guide" by Musciano/Kennedy BKHTMLDG.RVW 960522 "HTML: The Definitive Guide", Chuck Musciano/Bill Kennedy, 1996, 1-56592-175-5, U$27.95/C$39.95 %A Chuck Musciano cmusciano@aol.com %A Bill Kennedy %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1996 %G 1-56592-175-5 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$27.95/C$39.95 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 410 %S Nutshell Handbook %T "HTML: The Definitive Guide" If you are serious about designing documents and Web pages with HTML (HyperText Markup Language) then you *must* have this book. First of all, it *is* definitive. Graham's "HTML Sourcebook" (cf. BKHTMLSR.RVW), though much longer, doesn't begin to match the depth of this current work. Musciano and Kennedy cover the standard HTML 1.0 and 2.0 (and explain why there *isn't* any 3.0) and include the non-standard extensions of Netscape and Internet Explorer. The basics, text, rules, multimedia, links, lists, forms, tables, frames and more are all thoroughly covered, point by point and attribute by attribute. There is even the SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language) DTD (Document Type Definition) for HTML 2.0. (This must be definitive: it's the definition of the language.) Second, it *is* a guide, and a very good one. Lemay's "Web Publishing With HTML" (cf. BKWPHTML.RVW) still holds an edge as the most approachable beginner's introduction to Web page creation, but Musciano and Kennedy can easily welcome the newcomer as well. The structure is logical and the explanations are crystal clear. In spite of all this, the book contains even more. Web design is not given a separate section, but seamlessly permeates every section of the book. Readers are constantly reminded that while extensions may be fun, not everyone in the world has the same browser. Alternative methods are suggested for non-standard effects and functions. Shortcuts, suitable to only one browser or server, are recommended against in order to ensure the utmost compatibility with all systems. The authors apologize for the lack of coverage they give to CGI (Common Gateway Interface) programming, but their illustration of the basic functions is clearer than in any specialty text I've reviewed to date. All this, and readable, too. The content is straightforward and lucid. While you might not read this book for laughs, it is not the tome to choose to put yourself to sleep at night, either. I can recommend this book, without reservation, to anyone who wants to learn HTML programming and use. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKHTMLDG.RVW 960522. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. ============= Vancouver roberts@decus.ca | "Metabolically Institute for rslade@vcn.bc.ca | challenged" Research into slade@freenet.victoria.bc.ca | User rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | politically correct Security Canada V7K 2G6 | term for "dead" ------------------------------ From: Chris Telesca Subject: BellSouth Remote Call-Forwarding Date: 25 Jun 1996 06:32:43 GMT Organization: CampusMCI Can anybody help me out with this? I have had Remote-Access Call-Forwarding for the last three years. When I first signed up for it, I had some troubles and did some testing (forwarding my phone number to various other numbers - including long- distance numbers) to see how it worked. When I called the phone company to complain about how the service worked some of the time, the phone company techs seemed to know where and when I forwarded my calls. I didn't have a problem with it then - I just wish they could do it now! It seems as though someone else had gotten hold of my pin number, and was forwarding my local phone number to various out-of-town locations. I caught on to it through dumb-luck (they remotely call-forwarded my phone while I was at home), and my neighbor came over to tell me what happened - and I know I didn't forward my phone that night. I immediately tried to get BellSouth to change my pin number. It only took them two tries over two weeks. Then when I try to find out which of my LD calls were the result of forwarded calls, they first tell me that they have no way of knowing which LD calls were made due to call-forwarding. After I point out to them that their own rate code for calls (on the back of page one) lists rate code F - for Call Forward-ed calls, they then say that I didn't get charged for any forwarded calls - except that I know I made some on my last phone bill. Clearly BellSouth has buggy software. Does anybody know a technical term or special phone company code for trying to find out what I'm looking for? Chris Telesca PO Box 98102 / Raleigh, NC 27624-8102 Voice/Fax (call first for fax): (919)676-2597 Check out the NOREDNC web page at - http://www.angelfire.com/pages0/norednc ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Opposes Delays in Competition Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 10:09:19 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 11:28:11 -0400 From: BellSouth Subject: BELLSOUTH OPPOSES DELAYS IN COMPETITION Reply-To: press@www.bellsouth.com BellSouth .......................................June 18, 1996 BELLSOUTH OPPOSES DELAYS IN COMPETITION Asks Commission to Facilitate Negotiations with AT&T MONTGOMERY, AL., June 17, 1996 Indicating it is completely frustrated with the lack of progress in local interconnection negotiations with AT&T, BellSouth (NYSE: BLS) filed with the Alabama Public Service Commission today requesting the Commission to mediate negotiations to move the companies toward agreement. BellSouth and AT&T began negotiations in March as allowed by the national telecom act. Congress intended that competitors would negotiate in order to facilitate competition in local service, and further competition in long distance, as soon as possible. "We've been meeting almost daily with AT&T since early this year and we're not anywhere close on the major issues needed for a comprehensive agreement," noted Charlie Coe, Group President of Customer Operations for BellSouth. This request for mediation will help to bring the issues up for discussion with an objective third party in order to move the process along, indicated Coe. He noted that even as the talks with AT&T have been slow, BellSouth has been able to to sign comprehensive interconnection agreements with two national competitors including TimeWarner. BellSouth has also signed other agreements as well including a regional, 14 point agreement with Hart Communications, which has received permission to offer local service in Alabama. There are also several more agreements which are very close to closure. "Our position is very clear," stated Coe. "We're in favor of competition developing immediately because the sooner this happens, the sooner we'll be able to begin offering our customers one stop shopping for their telecommunications needs including long distance -- a service they've indicated they want us to provide. AT&T has plans to enter BellSouth's markets soon. On the other hand, in remarks attributed to AT&T's CEO Bob Allen, AT&T does not believe that BellSouth will be in the long distance business before the turn of the century because of AT&T's 'birddogging' of the FCC and state regulatory commissions. This is a policy to slow competition down, not promote it as the legislation intended," Coe stated. The national telecom legislation enacted earlier this year set up the mediation process as a way to resolve differences between competitors on local negotiations. BellSouth has asked for mediation at this time only in Alabama because the key issues are the same state to state, and therefore mediation in all nine of its states would be redundant. BellSouth is a $17.9 billion communications services company. It provides telecommunications, wireless communications, directory advertising and publishing and other information services to more than 25 million customers in 17 countries worldwide. Its telephone operations provides service over one of the most modern telecommunications networks in the world for approximately 21 million telephone lines in a ninestate region that includes Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. For Information Contact: Joe Chandler, BellSouth Telecommunications (404)529-6235 Bill Todd, BellSouth Telecommunications (205)972-2984 ------------------ Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What *is* AT&T doing lately? It seems like they have taken numerous actions designed to alienate them from the local telcos and the customer base. Refusing to honor calling cards, setting up their own isolated billing programs, dragging their feet on local service, and where they do have some modicum of local service in place such as Chicago, the deals they are offering customers is really nothing to brag about and in Chicago at least, more expensive than what Ameritech -- the established company with the customer base -- is offering. I think this strategy may backfire and AT&T will find out all the customers they expect to come flocking to them abandoning the traditional local carriers just won't be there. They are not reporting any real measure of success here in Chicago in grabbing Ameritech customers where 'local-toll' is concerned. I do not know what success they are having elsewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: BellSouth Asks Georgia Public Service Commission to Reconsider Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 10:01:13 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 19:50:52 -0400 From: BellSouth Subject: BellSouth Asks Georgia Public Service Commission to Reconsider BellSouth .......................................June 21, 1996 BellSouth Asks Georgia Public Service Commission to Reconsider Ruling on Discount Rates Atlanta, GA.,June 21, 1996 Today BellSouth asked the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) to reconsider its June 12th order establishing the level of discounts applied to the resale of BellSouth services. BellSouth believes that the Commission's order on resale is wrong and cannot be supported either on the law or the facts presented to the Commission, and will not help the development of competition in this state. Instead, the high discount rates will only serve to stall the development of facilities based competition in Georgia. As a result, the Company is asking the PSC to reevaluate its decision based on the evidence submitted during recent proceedings on this issue. According to Carl Swearingen, president of Georgia operations for BellSouth, "If the discount rate is set excessively high, it will only serve to allow a few local exchange competitors to profit at BellSouth's and its customers' expense. In addition, artificially steep discounts will discourage the capital investment and job creation that was the intent of both the state and national telecommunications legislation." Further, the PSC ordered the provision of electronic interfaces to BellSouth's operational support systems. This requirement is both unrealistic and untimely, since parties have been working at length for an orderly, coordinated implementation to meet competitors' needs and to ensure that our customers' records are properly protected," said Swearingen. BellSouth supports competition and looks forward to the day when it will be allowed to provide a full range of local and long distance services to the citizens of Georgia. BellSouth's efforts to support full and fair competition is further evidenced by the fact that comprehensive local interconnection agreements have been signed with national communications companies, most notably TimeWarner, as well as agreements with regional competitors. As of this date however, BellSouth is unaware of any agreement that AT&T has produced or entered into with any local exchange company in this state, or for that matter, in this region, to provide local service either on its own or as a reseller. "Our position is very clear," stated Swearingen. "We're in favor of competition developing immediately. All we ask is that the rules of competition be set fairly without favoring any one competitor or one form of competition." We hope that the PSC chooses to act in a positive manner on our motion which would serve to encourage resale where it is economic to do so, but which encourages AT&T, and other carriers, to develop their own facilities to provide telecommunications services for the benefit of all Georgians." For Information Contact: Lynn Bress, BellSouth-Georgia (770)391-2484 --------------------------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:26:11 -0700 From: E. Thomas Costello Subject: Can Call go to an RCF to POTS Line With CF-DA to DID on a DMS100? In San Diego, PAc Bell "experts" just told me that a call going to a Remote Call Forwarding (RCF) number which terminates in a POTS (or any other line) will not activate Call Forward-Don't Answer. They quickly threw this response out when I brought the problem to their attention so I have my doubts about their real understanding. My doubts are further increased because this process works on the 5ESS swtich. I know because I recently moved my offices and am using it! They didn't know it worked on the 5E. When they regained their composure, they wisely pointed out that the DMS100 is a different switch than the 5ESS. (That must be why they have different names and different manufacturers.) Now that I know they are different switches, I'd like to have the answer to the really hard question of how to get the call to the RCF to a POTS line forwarded in the Don't Answer situation. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: jms@tennis.opus1.com (Joel M Snyder) Subject: June 30, 1996 Last Day to Redeem AT&T Points For Value Date: 25 Jun 96 07:08:27 -0700 Organization: Opus One, Tucson, Arizona For those of you who are accumulating AT&T True Rewards points, remember that 30-June-1996 is the last day you can redeem them for cash or cash-like value (long distance certificates, wireless messaging certificates, credit card credit). For more info: 800-869-9900. After that, you're limited to wonderful opportunities such as Gevalia Kaffee (the equivalent of $40 in points for 2 pounds of coffee) or Travelpro luggage (the equivalent of $65 for a tote bag). Effectively, the discount appears to have been halved with the new "bigger, better, and more rewarding" program, standard practice for most of these programs. There are still a few loopholes which retain the original $0.05/point value, but these are hidden among overpriced Disney prints and 5-disk Commemorative Olympic Music collections. I just wish they wouldn't lie to us about how much "better" it is getting. Joel M Snyder, 1404 East Lind Road, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Phone: +1 520 324 0494 (voice) +1 520 324 0495 (FAX) jms@Opus1.COM http://www.opus1.com/jms Opus One [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The only thing I thought was really good about the True Rewards program or whatever it was called were the gift certificate checks they would send out whenever you wanted to redeem your points. A little over a year ago they announced a short lived program where you could transfer your points to someone else if you wished to do. There were quite a few people 'enrolled' in the program who never specifically asked to be and who cared less what happened to the points in their account. At that time those people called AT&T and had the points transferred to my account and I wound up with a few thousand points which when converted into those 'Pay to the Order of the Telephone Company' vouchers generated about $200 in credits on my Ameritech account and got my billed paid up to current status. May I respectfully suggest that those of you with lines defaulted to AT&T check in the next couple days to see what if anything remains in your account and have it cashed out in the form of gift certificates at the rate of five dollars per a certain number of points. Why leave good money sitting there to be forfeited? I do not think they any longer allow transfer of points between accounts but if you do not want whatever they send you please forward it to me for use. Remember, it has to be done this week since the program is ending. PAT] ------------------------------ From: aardvark@ni.net (David Whiteman) Subject: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 23:14:13 -0700 Organization: Network Intensive This evening I was trying to send a fax to my parents who are on a cruise in the Alaska sea area. Believing that the Alaska sea was in the Pacific Ocean, and wanting to use AT&T I dialed 10288 (for AT&T) 011 (for international) 872 (for Pacific Ocean) and then the seven digit number for the ship's fax number. This connection failed, so I called the AT&T operator for help (10288 0). I was transferred to another operator who told me to use 10222 (MCI) instead of 10288, and to call 1 800 MARISAT if I have any more trouble. I never heard of AT&T refering business to MCI before. The call still failed, so I called 1 800 MARISAT and got the same operator. He reconfirmed the seven digit fax number for the ship, and then asked me whether I was sure that the ship was in the Pacific Ocean. I told him that it was an Alaskan cruise -- guess what, my geography lessons to date have been wrong -- Alaska is in the Indian Ocean. I used the code for the Indian Ocean and the fax went through. Third surpising thing: Out of curiosity I called the MARISAT operator (the same one answered) again to get the rates; he told me to dial 10222-0. The MCI operator told me to dial 10288-0. The AT&T operator subsequently transferred me back to that same MARISAT operator who quoted the rate. Fourth surprise: the total cost of sending the fax (about $35) is cheaper than sending the documents to the next scheduled stop for the cruise ship by courier, mainly because none of the US courier service ship there directly and a second Alaskan courier would be need. Furthermore, faxing to the next port, even though it is still a landline direct call, would be more expensive because the port agent charges a fee for receiving faxes which my parents would be charged -- the ship itself charges no direct fee. [TELECM Digest Editor's Note: How could the water around Alaska be considered part of the Indian Ocean? To the south/southwest of the Alaska coast would surely be the Pacific Ocean; what about the water off the north/northwest coast, in the Arctic region? How could the Indian Ocean possibly fit into this? I guess my geography knowledge must be poor also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jim Bachesta Subject: Recommendations Wanted on Network Monitoring Software Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 10:14:26 -0700 Organization: Tera Computer Company I'm looking for a network monitoring software package. We have a medium sized, mostly Unix network and probably don't require anything extravagant. 99% TCP/IP with some Mac and Window machines. Anyone have suggestions. A Cabletron salesman said their $3400 package for Windows is great. Any comments on this? Are there any free packages under Unix? Thanks, Jim Bachesta ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Jun 96 07:56:25 PDT From: Howard Gayle Subject: Experiences Wanted With Lindsay, Other Emergency Cellular? Reply-To: howard@hal.com I want cellular service with low per-year cost, for emergencies. I want to be able to call any number, not just 911, and I don't want to give a credit card number on the air. In a message last year, Keith Jarett mentioned Lindsay Communications. They have service for $35 per year, $45 activation, and $3.77 per minute airtime, including tax. Emergen-Cell Communications offers a similar plan for $75 per year. Does anyone have any experience with these companies? Does anyone know of any other companies that charge less than $100 per year in fixed charges? I'm also looking for a hand-held phone that will run on primary (non-rechargeable) batteries. The Motorola Flip phones have an accessory battery pack for AA batteries. Does anyone know of any other, preferably smaller, phones that do this? I'm not interested in building a battery pack. As usual, please reply directly to me by email. I'll mail a summary to the mailing list if response warrants. ------------------------------ Subject: Slamming Article From Daily Oklahoman From: wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu (Wes Leatherock) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 96 10:47:00 GMT Organization: The University of Oklahoma From _The Daily Oklahoman_ (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma) for June 19, 1996; by Bob Vandewater, Staff Writer: Southwestern Bell Telephone and the Tulsa Better Business Bureau are trying to protect customers from "slamming." Slamming is the unauthorized change in a consumer's long distance company by long distance carriers, resellers or affiliated promotional companies. Bell and the bureau want to educate customers about slamming by distributing a free brochure that details consumers' rights and offers tips on how to guard against slamming, Bell said. Bell official Richard Dietz said, "Slamming is a growing problem for our customers. In 1995, Southwestern Bell interceded on behalf of more than 350,000 customers in Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas and Kansas who had been victimized in slamming schemes." Bell each month gets more than 470,000 legitimate requests to change customers' long-distance carriers, but there are another 30,000 customer-disputed changes, he said. Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com ORIGINS BBS E-Mail, SysOps (Mike Shipp/Troy Carpenter), (405)325-5883 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 10:58:34 PDT From: Jorene Downs Subject: Life in Prison for Phraud Phone Calls [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The final item in this issue should serve as an example and inspiration for phreaks everywhere. PAT] China Technology Newsbriefs 06/20/96 BEIJING, CHINA, 1996 JUN 20 (NB) Man Sentenced To Life Imprisonment For Illegal Phone Calls A 61-year-old man has been sentenced to life imprisonment in a city of Hebei province for phone theft. The Shijiazhuang City Intermediate People's Court announced the temporary doorkeeper of a traffic police station made 180 international calls to sex lines during the period from April 8 to May 10, 1995, while he was on night duty. He got the phone numbers from overseas radio broadcasts. His employer paid more than RMB51,000 (US$6,144) for his international calls. (Chih-Ho Yu & Ning Huang/19960620) Newsbytes Pacifica Headlines [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In Iran until a year or two ago, the same crime would have been punished by getting your head chopped off, however they have apparently liberalized things there a lot and become 'soft on crime' in that middle eastern country. A year ago this month, about 250 people had been beheaded for various crimes; this year to date the total number of beheadings is less than a hundred and none at all were due to toll phraud. China was never big on beheading people, with firing squads more to their liking in the event life in prison was considered too soft. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #306 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jun 25 16:42:08 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id QAA16877; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:42:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:42:08 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606252042.QAA16877@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #307 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 96 16:42:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 307 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Ericsson And Pacific Bell Mobile Services Win Award (Mike King) Book Review: "Web Publishing with HoTMetaL" by Jaworski (Rob Slade) Overload / Congestion Questions (gkarmi@qualcomm.com) New Cellular Phone w/o Service? (John Starta) Cellular vs Pager; Better Information Wanted (Jason) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Robert Jacobson) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Ed Kleinhample) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (SJSlavin) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Stu Jeffery) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Jim Gottlieb) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (John McGing) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Marty Bose) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Eric Kammerer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike King Subject: Ericsson And Pacific Bell Mobile Services Win Award Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 09:41:47 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 08:24:09 -0700 Reply-To: NEWS-LIST@list.pactel.com From: sqlgate@list.pactel.com Subject: NEWS: Ericsson And Pacific Bell Mobile Services Win National Access Award From Self Help For Hard Of Hearing People (SHHH) FOR MORE INFORMATION: Linda Bonniksen, Pacific Bell Mobile Services (213) 975-5061 Kathy Egan, Ericsson (212) 685-4030 Ericsson And Pacific Bell Mobile Services Win National Access Award From Self Help For Hard Of Hearing People (SHHH) RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC -- Ericsson Inc. and Pacific Bell Mobile Services (PBMS) received the National Access Award for their innovation in developing technologies that allow hard-of-hearing people to use new digital wireless telephones. The award was presented by the Self Help for Hard of Hearing People (SHHH) organization at its national conference in Orlando, Florida on June 21, 1996. Some people with hearing aids experience interference from many electronic devices, including wireless phones. Hearing aid users want to take advantage of the newest digital wireless technology, so Ericsson and Pacific Bell Mobile Services collaborated in developing solutions based on Ericsson's PCS 1900 digital wireless mobile phones. These solutions are being tested with hearing aid users under the assistance of SHHH. Techniques that prove successful will be offered by Pacific Bell Mobile Services when it launches its Personal Communications Service (PCS) in January 1997 in California. Some prototype models will be demonstrated at the Republican National Convention in San Diego in August. Mike Farese, Vice President of Global Product Management at Ericsson, said, "We are very pleased that SHHH has chosen us for this award. Ericsson's researchers and engineers in the U.S. and Sweden worked with both PacBell Mobile Services and representatives from SHHH to develop solutions that will help hearing aid users enjoy the benefits of mobile communications. It has been a real joint effort." Some of the most recent developments and solutions include: * Special circuitry that reduces magnetic output that interferes with hearing aids. * Special speaker that increased magnetic coupling of the telephone to a hearing aid. * Remote and swiveling antennas that reduce RF interference. * A handsfree kit with a noise-canceling microphone and aninductive coil that is compatible with ITE and BTE hearing aids. "We want hearing aid users to be able to enjoy the security and convenience of advanced digital wireless communications, just like everyone else," said James Tuthill, vice president and general counsel for Pacific Bell Mobile Services. "We are grateful for SHHH's assistance in helping us understand the needs of hearing aid users and test Ericsson's modified handsets. Hearing loss varies among individuals, and we believe that a range of solutions is needed to help hearing aid wearers use wireless phones. We expect that these new handsets will be a good first step in making our phones more usable for people who wear hearing aids." Ericsson and Pacific Bell Mobile Services will continue working on ways to reduce or eliminate interference. Other companies are also expected to develop means for enabling hearing aid wearers to use wireless phones without interference. Ericsson's 85,000 employees are active in more than 100 countries. Their combined expertise in switching, radio and networking makes Ericsson a world leader in telecommunications. Pacific Bell Mobile Services is the wireless subsidiary of Pacific Bell. Pacific Telesis Group, the parent company of Pacific Bell and PBMS, is a diversified telecommunications corporation based in San Francisco. -------------------------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:13:25 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Web Publishing with HoTMetaL" by Jaworski BKWPHMTL.RVW 960523 "Web Publishing with HoTMetaL", James Jaworski, 1996, 0-7821-1691-4, 24.99 %A James Jaworski %C 2021 Challenger Drive, Alameda, CA 94501 %D 1996 %G 0-7821-1691-4 %I Sybex Computer Books %O 24.99 510-523-8233 800-227-2346 Fax: 510-523-2373 jjigarjian@sybex.com %P 325 %T "Web Publishing with HoTMetaL" HoTMetaL is a more professional HTML (HyperText Markup Language) editor than the simple page layout assistants. Therefore Jaworski's text carries more explanation than simply "push this button to get that tag". Each section introduces the concept and HTML before walking you through the keys and buttons for that specific markup. It doesn't replace a full HTML handbook, but it provides enough information to decipher an HTML file. While HoTMetaL relieves much of the tedium of marking up a Web page, it isn't WYSIWYG. Therefore, you need a browser to view your creations. The CD included with the book provides a browser--but not the one recommended or used for all the examples and screen shots. On second thought, this might be a good thing. It'll get young webmeisters used to the fact that not all browsers, or screen displays, are created equal. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKWPHMTL.RVW 960523. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. ============= Vancouver ROBERTS@decus.ca | "Remember, by the Institute for rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | rules of the game, I Research into Rob.Slade@f733.n153.z1/ | *must* lie. *Now* do User .fidonet.org | you believe me?" Security Canada V7K 2G6 | Margaret Atwood ------------------------------ From: gkarmi@qualcomm.com Subject: Overload / Congestion Question Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 18:55:25 -0700 Organization: QUALCOMM I'm interested in information on overload detection / processing algorithms in switches. Any references to algorithms and/or existing performance requirements would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, e-mail: gkarmi@qualcomm.com ------------------------------ From: starta@primenet.com (John Starta) Subject: New Cellular Phone w/o Service? Date: 25 Jun 1996 01:01:00 -0700 Organization: Primenet Services for the Internet I recently dropped my Motorola cellular phone and need to replace it. Obviously I already have service so I only need the phone itself. Are there companies (i.e., mail order) where I can purchase a new Motorola cellular phone at a reasonable price? john [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing you might consider is that if you can drop out of your existing service without any penalty at this point (because you met any agreement you had with the carrier where the first phone is concerned) it would be perfectly legal to go to a dealer and get a new phone with a new one year contract or whatever is required to get the new phone for free or at some reduced price. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jason Subject: Cellular vs Pager; Better Information Wanted Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 12:22:30 -0400 Organization: IBM I've just begun to look into purchasing either a cell phone, pager, or both and I'm surprised that real meaty and complete info is difficult to find. Questions like the following linger ... What is the battery life and discharge period for a pager? for a cell phone? (Under what conditions/mode?) I've heard stray comments about pagers available at various frequencies ... and that this may effect range and penetration. Where's the definitive info? Can the same pager handle both frequencies? Which penetrates better, a cell phone or pager? Is the penetration function on a cellphone different for initiating calls verses waiting for calls? Are cellphone/pager hybrids available? Attractive? I've heard of calling regions and local regions, etc. Why is it so hard to get info on what my local paging/cellular regions are? Why? ------------------------------ From: cyberoid@u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: 25 Jun 1996 10:21:31 GMT Organization: University of Washington, Seattle In article , Sir Topham Hatt wrote: > John Hall (john@kodak.com) wrote: >> Now PCS is often described as having "mini-cells", compared to >> existing cellular services. That would mean more antennas would need >> to be built, but they would each cover a smaller area and so might not >> be so intrusive. > It's a blatent lie perpetrated by the local PCS industry. The towers > are in fact no smaller. I regullarly get to hear the local PCS scum > pleading their case for 100-200' monopoles in front of the county > planning commision. There are two phases to PCS expansion. The first, conveniently called "digital cellular," uses new digital technologies to replace or supple- ment existing analog cellular systems. The same tall masts are used for transmitters as before (or new ones are added). The second phase will use "microcell" technology, with much smaller basestations tucked away in all sorts of improbable spaces -- on roofs, in office windows, under the front stairs, wherever. The unsightly tall masts will now be replaced by other problems, like possible ambient EMF (non-ionizing radiation) right nearby. It's a good question whether these two phases represent the growth of the same technology or rather two technologies that will coexist and even compete with each other. Another good question might be not how "mini," but how "many": a recent estimate put the number of PCS microcell sites, in North America, in the year 2000, at one million. That's 250,000 basestations installed each year, or 5,000 a week, or 1,000 each work day, from here on out. The source was one of the major PCS service providers, so they should know. Believe it or not. Bob Jacobson ------------------------------ From: edhample@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 07:59:37 -0700 Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? John Hall said: > Here in the Rochester NY area, there have been recent cases where > suburban and rural residents have opposed the building of tall, > "unsightly" cellular antenna towers in their neighborhoods. > Now PCS is often described as having "mini-cells", compared to > existing cellular services. That would mean more antennas would need > to be built, but they would each cover a smaller area and so might not > be so intrusive. In the Tampa area, the GTE "telego" PCS system has been available for about a year. A friend who lives in Pasco County invested in one of the "TeleGo" phones and was rather disappointed. This phones is the combination "cordless"-like unit that behaves much like a cordless when it can contact it's basestation, or like a cellular when it is beyond the range of it's base. My friend's experience is that the coverage in south Pasco (which is about 20 miles from downtown Tampa) was very spotty, with poor voice quality and many dropped calls. Also, GTE only provides coverage within a limited area surrounding Tampa. In an area that has two major cellular carriers (GTE and AT&T), the past two years have seen a proliferation of cellular towers all over the Tampa area. At one particular site near the intersection of Interstates 4 and 75 (east of Tampa) there are no less than 4 cellular-like antennae within about a 4 square mile area. Two area obviously 800Mhz AMPS sites, the third is also of the cellular-like triangle design with antennae at each of the verticies, but the antennae are smaller than the typical AMPS design. The fourth tower was erected recently, and consists of an hexagon shaped rigging with a several very short antennae at each vertex. While I agree that competition is a good thing, I hate to think that competition in the cellular (more generic - wireless) market is going to mean more of these unsightly antennae structures dotting the landscape. There is already talk in numerous communities in the area to prohibit the construction of additional towers of this type -- in fact one community near Tampa successfully blocked the construction of a cellular tower some months ago. The carrier involved (who shall remain nameless), simply located the tower in an adjacent community -- a hundred yards away. Ed Kleinhample - edhample@sprynet.com ------------------------------ From: sjslavin@aol.com (SJSlavin) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: 24 Jun 1996 20:58:17 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: sjslavin@aol.com (SJSlavin) First of all, there are variations. There is no one type. I have spec's from at least three major PCS licensees who are installing on our properties. Ours operate at a height (clearly the local terrain would affect this) of 150'. In two caes thay are on/in a building; a third rural location is adjacent to Hwy 99 in central Calif. on a 150' pole/tower. The antennae are boxes 9" wide, 5" deep, and 36" in ht. - they look like a church public address speaker. They are mounted in a radial pattern, circular if on a (150') pole, on the sides of the building in that case, and are rather unobstrusive in that installation. If covering a 360 degree pattern there are about 12; 3 facing toward each 1/4 sector. Steve Slavin, Sr. Regulatory Analyst San Ramon, CA 510-842-4757 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:33:53 -0800 From: stu@best.com (Stu Jeffery) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? hardiman@airmail.net (Lee Hardiman) said: > Here in the Dallas, TX area one of the Primeco is installing their PCS > towers in or on existing high voltage power line towers. The towers > look ugly but the basic structure was already present. I actually do > have one in my backyard. and hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) said: > I've seen some 'mini' antennas that are mounted on cables strung between > telephone poles. The antenna & repeater looks about the same size as some > of the smaller transformers, except that they are mounted _between_ two > poles instead of on a pole. This sausage-looking thing also has perhaps > 2 short antennas sticking out of it. > I believe that the cable is actually part of a CATV cable TV system, and > the PCS 'borrows' some of the CATV channels. A High Tier system needs a high antenna location and high power (Macro Cells) if it is going to have a large radius cell; if your technology is inherently short range (Low Tier) then you can readily put the base stations on lamp post, telephone booths, etc. But if you are trying to do large area coverage, as is typical with High Tier, then you will need to get your antennae up in height to lower the path loss. For these larger radius cells you will want 100 to 150 foot towers, tall buildings, high voltage power towers, etc. Lee Hardiman describes Primco's installation. Primco has picked CDMA (IS-95) for their technology and I am sure they are planning on cell radius of two to ten miles, at least at first until they get some customers on their system. [All PCS -- and cellular systems -- are initially coverage limited. As an operator you dream for the day when you become capacity limited!] This is not to say that the High Tier won't also use want to use mini cells, as is common today with cellular. By installing mini cells at low heights, the High Tier operator can do cell splitting and get more capacity on his system. Henry Baker, in describing boxs on cable television, could be describing either a Low or High Tier System. [I suspect he is describing a CDMA base station, as most of the CATV operators who are deploying PCS are using CDMA. It works very well when there is a lot of signal contamination from multiple radiating cell sites in the same area. He also could be describing a PCS-1900, Omnipoint IS-661, PACS, or DECT. Some of these are High Tier and some are Low Tier.] While High Tier will use both Macro Cells and Mini Cells, this is not true for Low Tier. Low Tier will NOT use high towers and high power base station, because their technology can't work with one to three mile cell radius. This leads to the situation where the High Tier supports say their technology can do everything the Low Tier technology can do: a. run at lower power in high density areas; b. support a lot of users by cell splitting; while offering something the Low Tier can not do: a. offer vehicular mobility and large area coverage. Vehicular mobility is considered extremely important in the US and it is the key reason why most of the operators have selected a High Tier technology. Consumer acceptance of a Low Tier technology (in the US) is a giant unknown. However in some markets in the Far East it has been very successful. CT-2 proved very popular in Hong Kong and Singapore. It is now being deactivated in Hong Kong because -- from what I have heard -- of the technical limitations of CT-2. CT-2 will not support hand off between base station, you cannot call the subscriber -- the subscriber must call you. (They get around this problem by putting a pager in the phone. (You page the subscriber and he calls you back). CT-2 is going to be replaced by a more robust Low Tier technology -- PHS, PACS, or maybe DECT (or in Hong Kong maybe all of them!) In addition, PHS in Japan seems to be a roaring success. A report from the Asian Technology Information Program ( ATIP96.043m, 8 May 199) states that there are now 1,500,000 customers on PHS in Japan and a report from Comline Telecommunications Wire states that by year end 80% of the population in Japan will be covered by this service. Here in the US we are seeing an exciting situation unfold. The FCC has (or will grant) 120 MHz of PCS spectrum, allocated to six licenses. This is plenty of spectrum and both High Tier and Low Tier can be deployed. And in some markets both will be deployed. If you, as a consumer, are lucky enough to live in one of those cities, you will have an opportunity to chose either, or both, and find out for yourself which is best for you. Stu Jeffery Internet: stu@best.com 1072 Seena Ave. voice: 415-966-8199 Los Altos, CA. 94024 fax: 415-966-8456 ------------------------------ From: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: 25 Jun 1996 10:10:12 -0700 Organization: Info Connections, San Diego, California In article hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes: > In Japan, one company mounts their PCS antennas on the tops of their > phone booths (which they own). Another has arranged to use Coca-Cola vending machines, which can be found nearly everywhere on the streets of Japan. These machines are labeled with a "Coke and Talk" sticker. Jim Gottlieb | E-Mail: jimmy@denwa.info.com | In Japan: jimmy@denwa.linc.or.jp V-Mail: +1 619 260 6912 | Fax: +1 619 558 1113 Snail: 2405 Juan Street, San Diego CA 92110-2805 USA My Home Page URL: http://www.info.com/~jimmy/ ------------------------------ From: jmcging@access.digex.net (John McGing) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: 24 Jun 1996 22:49:39 -0400 Organization: Digital Express, Maryland Reply-To: jmcging@access.digex.net Geeze, after all this sturm and drang I'm more confused than ever. Sprint Spectrum is up and operating here in Balt/Wash. I can't tell what technology they use, but if it doesn't work in a car then they've certainly spent too much making sure that every major highway along with Skyline Drive is covered. jmcging@access.digex.net JOHN.PF on GEnie Team OS/2 http://www.access.digex.net/~jmcging ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:41:26 -0800 From: Marty Bose Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? > It's a blatent lie perpetrated by the local PCS industry. The towers > are in fact no smaller. I regullarly get to hear the local PCS scum > pleading their case for 100-200' monopoles in front of the county > planning commision. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your reply seems to be completely at > odds with that of Andrew Greene who participated in a PCS experiment > here in Chicago in 1993, as per the earlier message. Can we perhaps > get a resolution on the differences? PAT] Well, as someone working on the installation of a PCS CDMA network, I'd say the truth, as always, is somewhere in between. Although I have heard of big towers being put up in the midwest for some of the other MTA's, the monopoles that I'm responsible for range from a 30 foot "hiding" behind a tree near an airport to avoid FAA/FCC hassles to a max of 100 footers out in the boonies in a couple of places. Most of the ones in cities are in the 40-60 foot range. The base station equipment (we're using Lucent stuff) is a minimum of a pair of 30" x 30" by 6' cabinets on a pad; no huts needed, they're water- and bullet-proof. We usually leave room for a second radio cabinet for future expansion, plus a generator pad for backup. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 96 09:50:58 PDT From: erick@sac.AirTouch.COM (Eric Kammerer at Sac Net) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your reply seems to be completely at > odds with that of Andrew Greene who participated in a PCS experiment > here in Chicago in 1993, as per the earlier message. Can we perhaps > get a resolution on the differences? PAT] A lot of variables come into play with tower size/intrusiveness. The height required can vary significantly. Some sites may need to be about 40 feet high, some may need to be 200 feet high. A 40-foot height can easily be done on a wood pole (typical power poles are 60-feet high). A 200-foot tower is either a monopole, a self-supporting lattice, or a guyed lattice. None of those is very inconspicuous. Second issue: type of antenna. In the best case, an omnidirectional transmit and receive configuration can be used. This means two whip antennas, which could be mounted one above the other. Worst case, a fully sectored site, with a requirement for receive diversity antennas, and multiple transmit antennas. Now you're talking about a triangular platform about 15'feet on a side -- pretty annoying in your backyard. In some cases, the carrier may be able to mount antennas directly on the side of a building, which makes them a lot less intrusive. If you don't look for them, you probably won't see them. Some antennas have been installed to look like trees, others like parking lot lights. At least one has been built into a church steeple. The PCS equipment tends to be pretty small, usually no worse than your local electrical transformer or telephone enclosure for subscriber loop equipment. Some are even installed in underground vaults. So the basic answer is that PCS is no different than any other RF technology. The specific site requirements will determine the necessary site configuration. Eric Kammerer erick@sac.AirTouch.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #307 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jun 25 19:15:26 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id TAA02307; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 19:15:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 19:15:26 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606252315.TAA02307@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #308 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 96 19:15:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 308 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson ICSLP'96 Conference Update (Jim Polikoff) Multi Operators Numbering Plan Questions (Philippe Hanot) Telephones With Intercom For Home Use (Rakesh Mehta) Major CellTalk Update (Eric Litman) Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? (Steven D. Ligett) Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? (Ed Kelinhample) Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? (John Duksta) Re: Two Line Voice/Fax Monitoring (Ed Kleinhample) Re: Two Line Voice/Fax Monitoring (Jeff Brielmaier) Re: Two Line Voice/Fax Monitoring (John B. Rose) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Bill Newkirk) Re: Nationwide PRI Shortage (Barbara Nibling) Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access (Tony Pelliccio) Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (John Cropper) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: polikoff@asel.udel.edu (Jim Polikoff) Subject: ICSLP'96 Conference Update Date: 25 Jun 1996 15:38:59 -0400 Organization: AI duPont Institute ICSLP 96 -- Update and Reminder Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing October 3-6, 1996 Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel Philadelphia, PA, USA We would like to announce the availability of the preliminary program for ICSLP 96 on our WWW site at http://www.asel.udel.edu/icslp. This site will provide up-to-date listings of the full contents of the preliminary program and allow authors and prospective attendees to search the ICSLP 96 abstract database by content. Visitors may use this web site to locate the session assignments of papers and to read abstracts of papers accepted for presentation (if available in machine readable form). If you would like to receive a printed copy of the preliminary program, please email your full surface-mail address to ICSLP96@asel.udel.edu Please note that the deadline for early registration is July 1, 1996. The registration form and hotel accommodation information are available at the ICSLP 96 web site. The registration form (in postscript) can be copied, printed and returned by post with payment enclosed. If fees are to be paid by credit card, the form may also be returned by FAX. _____________Registration Information_____________________ Full registration includes: Admission to technical sessions, Reception, Banquet, Proceedings (printed & CD-ROM) Limited registration includes: Admission to technical sessions, Reception, Proceedings on CD-ROM Early Registration fees: Member* Non-Member Student Full $425 $525 $250 Limited $300 $400 $150 Late registration: After July 1, add $60 After August 9, add $100 Additional Tickets: Banquet $60 Reception $50 Additional Proceedings: Printed $125 CD-ROM $15 * Sponsoring and Cooperating Organizations: The Acoustical Society of America The Acoustical Society of Japan American Speech and Hearing Association Australian Speech Science and Technology Association European Speech Communication Association IEEE Signal Processing Society Incorporated Canadian Acoustical Association International Phonetic Association Linguistic Society of America ICSLP 96 A.I. duPont Institute P.O. Box 269 Wilmington, DE 19899 E-mail: ICSLP96@asel.udel.edu URL: http://www.asel.udel.edu/icslp Phone: +1-302-651-6830 Fax: +1-302-651-6895 ------------------------------ From: Philippe Hanot Subject: Multi Operators Numbering Plan Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 16:37:41 +0200 Organization: ALCATEL TELECOM I try to get a better understanding of numbering plans, in the case of a non monopolistic regulation. I think this is actually the case is the US, and explanations about how it works there could help. Here are some very basic questions: 1) Subscribers are connected to access networks provided by various suppliers (operators). Is there a way to infere the operator from a subscriber's phone number? (In other words is there a pattern in the numbering plan corresponding to the supplying operator?) 2) when two subscribers (say a and b) are connected to two different suppliers (say A and B) : can "a" dial directly "b" or does he/she need to get through some gateway (ie. calling B then dialing b)? 3) when various suppliers offer long distance calls, can a subscriber choose one and if yes how? e.g. let's consider that our "a" and "b" subscribers (see above) are connected through long distance that can be offered by operators D or C, how can "a" dial "b" telling he/she wants be routed via D or C? 4) If one can choose its supplier (Cf. 3) how services are charged and by whom? (one bill per operator or all charges are issued by the access operator?) TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I will try to answer your questions in the order presented. There are basically three types of networks in the USA: local, long distance, and cellular. The local networks are pretty much a monopoly held by one company in each geographic area and so if you have a phone number which consists of area code-exchange-four digit suffix you can infer the carrier where the local network is concerned since the area code and exchange identify a specific geographic area and for all intents and purposes at this time there is but one local carrier for each geographic area. There are exceptions where 'competitors' have started to operate in geographic areas which traditionally had been one telco in the past. Where long distance calls are concerned, there are at present several dozen carriers in the USA, consisting of what we call the Big Three, (i.e. AT&T, Sprint and MCI) and many, many smaller carriers. Each subscriber is free to choose from a number of these carriers for long- distance service, and nothing can be inferred from the phone number as can be done with the local network. In the case of cellular, there are generally two carriers in each area of the USA and the area code and prefix (that is, the first six digits of the phone number) allow one to infer the name of the cellular carrier since certain numbers are assigned to one, and other numbers to the other carrier. Regarding your second question, all connections are established in a transparent way to the subscriber. There are arrangements between carriers as to how they will handle the calls made by subscribers of other carriers, but this is of no concern to the subscriber who simply dials the desired number. In your third question, the answer would be that subscribers may choose whatever *long distance* carrier they desire. The operator of the local network (because all calls must begin with the local network on their way to the long distance network) acts as agent for the long distance carriers for routing/transit purposes and frequently as billing and collection agent for the long distance carriers as well. As a convenience to the subscriber, the one single long distance carrier of his choice -- the one he has indicated he is most likely to use for long distance calls -- is attached to his line on the local network by default. That is, he can make long distance calls and have them routed or handed to his carrier of choice without having to ask for this each time around. When he wants to make an exception to this and place a call over the network of some different carrier (than his usual one) he needs only to indicate this exception to his standing instructions by prefacing his call with the digits of the carrier he wishes to use. For example, MCI uses 10222, Sprint uses 10333, and AT&T uses 10288. You dial one of these sets of digits at the start of your call if you wish to use that carrier instead of the one which is normally (per your earlier request and standing instructions) handed your call by the local network. The answer to your final question is that both methods are common. It has been in the past that generally the local network operator was billing and collection agent for the long distance operators but in recent times many long distance carriers have begun doing their own billing and collection. Likewise in the past, all the long distance carriers would honor the credit arrangements made by the local carriers via calling cards, third-number billing, reverse charge calls, etc. Now this is not necessarily the case. I hope this answers your questions. I assume things are somewhat different in France. Thanks very much for writing me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rakesh Mehta Subject: Telephones With Intercom For Home Use Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 15:54:42 -0400 Organization: Voyager Information Networks, Inc. I'm looking for a telephone system that can be used in my house without having to rewire (existing two pair twisted). I need at least five phones (could use ten). I've heard that Panasonic makes one, but have no details. Any info would help. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Eric Litman Date: Tue, 25 Jun 96 16:19:38 -0400 Subject: Major CellTalk Update Reply-To: Eric_Litman@Viaduct.COM Organization: Viaduct, Inc. We have just finished a major overhaul of CellTalk, including addition of a new PCS carrier (VoiceStream), an overhaul of the FAQs, and regurlarly updated feature stories of various PCS interests. To check out CellTalk, point your browser to: http://www.celltalk.com/ As new PCS carriers offer service throughout the US, we'll add them to the carriers section of the site. Eric A. Litman, CEO, Viaduct, Inc. http://www.viaduct.com/ Internet security and commerce consulting. PCS: (301) 254-0200 ------------------------------ From: Steven.D.Ligett@Dartmouth.EDU (Steven D. Ligett) Subject: Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? Date: 25 Jun 1996 13:26:29 GMT Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH In article Bob Baxter writes: > There are two incoming lines to a Data General computer. On each line > is a Multitech modem. Starting last week, the modem on line one was not > picking up calls. The TD and RD lights would flicker, but the modem > would not pick up. Did you recently download and flash your modems with the new firmware? We've had several Multitech modems fail as you discribed soon after flashing them (not a large percentage -- we have about 200 Multitech modems.) ------------------------------ From: edhample@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 07:59:32 -0700 Subject: Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? Bob Baxter writes: > We placed the second modem on line one, and we were able to dial in > once. Subsequent retries resulted in a ring/no answer. I had NYNEX > in to check the quality of both lines, which passed with flying > colors. The modem from line one was pulled off again, and > reprogrammed to pick up on the third ring. Calls to the first line > were still not being picked up. It sounds to me like the modem is not being set up correctly - i.e. not correctly setting the behavior of the CTS or DCD line to the host computer (this hypothesis based completely on a similar problem that I encountered on a Linux-based system that I have been working on). When you switched modems, did you take the modem connected to PORT 2 and LINE 2 and move it to PORT 1 and LINE 1 -- if so then you are probably looking at a modem setup problem -- check the software on the host that sets up the first modem port -- look at the hayes "AT" commands sent to the modem (if this is a UNIX-like system, these are probably in your /etc/default directory). Try simply flipping the phone line connections (don't change the DTE-DCE cabling to the modems), and then check if modem 2 will answer a call placed to line 1. Ed Kleinhample - edhample@sprynet.com ------------------------------ From: John Duksta Subject: Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:24:37 -0400 Organization: Xyplex Bob Baxter wrote: > At this point, I'm not sure where the problem is. A phone attached to > the modem line rings. A third modem hooked up to line one does not > pick up. Are there any conditions where a telephone line would test > okay, and sound fine, but still be incompatible with the modems? Is the DG asserting DTR to the modem? The modem could be set to Auto-Answer, but if it is not seeing DTR from the DG, it most likely will not pick up the call. You should be able to see DTR on the front panel lights of the modem. If not, invest in an RS-232 breakout box, they're incredibly helpful. John C.C. Duksta | email: jduksta@xyplex.com New Products Introduction Engineer | phone: 508/952-5614 Whittaker Xyplex, Littleton, MA | fax: 508/952-4880 ------------------------------ From: edhample@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1996 07:59:23 -0700 Subject: Re: Two Line Voice/Fax Monitoring sbsmith@megahits.com writes: > I'm struggling with trying to setup two internal modems to monitor two > separate phone lines both with voice/fax incomming. I can't seem to > differentiate the IRQ for COM1 and 3 or COM2 and 4. Someone has > suggested a DIGI board with external modems but I'm looking for the > cheapest functional soultion. I have a Robotics 28.8 voice/fax > internal and a Motorola 14.4 voice/fax internal and I'm running Windows > 95. After I solve the hardware problems, then I have the software > issues. I thought of running two different fax/voice monitoring > packages (Quicklink and WinFAX Pro) -- one for each modem. Your problem is likely the sharing of interrupts between devices. The PC-standard scheme of sharing interrupt levels for two ports worked (relatively) well in the single-tasking world of DOS, but when Windows (which simulates multi-tasking) entered the picture, things got more complex. It is common for COM1 and COM3 to share interrupt level 4 (similarly COM2 and COM4 share interrupt level 3). This will behave most of the time IF you have a slower device on one or both of the ports (i.e. serial printer or a slow (9600bps or less) modem. Try putting two 28.8kpbs modems or a 28.8 modem and a printer feeding at 38.4k, and problems will occur. The simplest solution is don't try to use COM3 for your second modem - put it on COM2. If this isn't practical, you will probably have to change the interrupt level of your COM3 modem -- most internal modems have jumpers that define the port interrupt. If you are running on a 286 or higher PC, you should be able to switch to interrupt level 5 (commonly used for secondary printer ports). You will of course have to adjust your software to account for this change. This shouldn't be a problem with most Windows-based software. I run a Linux-based system with two dial-in lines and two local serial terminals. When I first installed the modems (on COM3 and COM4), the system would run for a few minutes and then shut down the GETTYs for the COM1 and COM2 ports (the terminals) a look at the syslog showed numerous RX overruns on these ports - probably caused by the system trying to receive from two devices on the same interrupt. My solution to the problem was to remap the interrupts of the modems - COM3 went to level 5 and COM4 went to level 7 (note that the printer port interrupts are rarely used unless you have some bidirectional device connected to your parallel printer port -- an external tape drive or hard drive). The system has worked perfectly since this change. Good luck, Ed Kleinhample - edhample@sprynet.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Two Line Voice/Fax Monitoring From: jeff.brielmaier@yob.com (Jeff Brielmaier) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 96 04:32:00 -0600 Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569 Reply-To: jeff.brielmaier@yob.com (Jeff Brielmaier) > I'm struggling with trying to setup two internal modems to monitor two > separate phone lines both with voice/fax incomming. I can't seem to > differentiate the IRQ for COM1 and 3 or COM2 and 4. Someone has > suggested a DIGI board with external modems but I'm looking for the > cheapest functional soultion. I have a Robotics 28.8 voice/fax > internal and a Motorola 14.4 voice/fax internal and I'm running Windows > 95. After I solve the hardware problems, then I have the software > issues. I thought of running two different fax/voice monitoring > packages (Quicklink and WinFAX Pro) -- one for each modem. If you are running unders Windows, Goto Control_Panel/Ports and set the port address/IRQ to what your hardware is using. If addition, you will probably want the verify the "Flow Control" setting for the ports is set to 'Hardware'. Hopefully, one (or both) of your internal modems allow to choose the IRQ to use because Windows does not like to share IRQ between multiple devices. Ye Olde Bailey BBS Zyxel 713-520-1569(V.32bis) USR 713-520-9566(V.34/FC) Houston,Texas yob.com Home of alt.cosuard ------------------------------ From: cables@hamptons.com (John B. Rose) Subject: Re: Two Line Voice/Fax Monitoring Date: 25 Jun 1996 01:12:15 GMT Organization: Rose Business Systems Inc. Reply-To: cables@hamptons.com (John B. Rose) In , sbsmith@megahits.com writes: > I can't seem to differentiate the IRQ for COM1 and 3 or COM2 and 4. COM1 and COM3 come wired to IRQ4. COM2 and COM4 come wired to IRQ3. Windows hates that. You should grab an unassigned IRQ for COM3 or COM4. Try IRQ 5. Or, if you're willing to disable your printer, IRQ 7. Unfortunately, most modems won't let you assign an IRQ number above 7. > I thought of running two different fax/voice monitoring packages > (Quicklink and WinFAX Pro) -- one for each modem. Did you try installing two copies of WinFAX in separate directories? JBR ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 15:37:28 -0400 Organization: General Aviation Publications Osman Rich (sic) wrote: > The fact is that these installations are needed to provide economical > coverage of an area. Many are present that you never notice because > they are very effectively camouflaged when that is possible. They are > necessary to provide service, just like overhead high voltage lines..... I've been telling people that the rules for such structures are: 1) It's got to be safe and sound. 2) It's got to work properly. And after you have an installation design that is safe and works then we can worry about "pretty". There's a lot of houses that weren't very safe or sound during Andrew a couple of years ago ... but before the storm they sure were pretty ... Regards, bill newkirk wnewkirk@iu.net wenewkirk@rodes.cca.rockwell.com ------------------------------ From: Barbara Nibling Subject: Re: Nationwide PRI Shortage Date: 22 Jun 1996 01:48:01 GMT Organization: GTE Intelligent Network Services, GTE INS kph@cisco.com (Kevin Paul Herbert) wrote: > In article , stephen@clark.net > (Stephen Balbach) wrote: >> Is this true? Are PRI's really that hard to get in other parts of the >> country? I look forward to hearing of others experiences, thanks. > My Sprint salesrep told me that there is an industry-wide shortage of > PRI interfaces for the DMS250. I have no information on other switches, > however. For Lucent Technology's 5ESS, the PRI circuit is identical to Eas/Toll circuits. A packet handler is required for the D channel of the PRI, but certainly there is no chortage of packet handlers. The difficulty comes when the telco must either order all new digital trunk units to satisfy the need for PRI, or retrofit existing digital trunk units with packet handlers, which also requires a "loaded" configuration on the switching module because of the application. Telcos are somewhat reluctant to retrofit older switching modules and therefore requests for PRI are frequently given a fairly long due date. Lucent's 1AESS is hopelessly expensive to attempt to retrofit. For Nortel's DMS-100 or 100/200, a complete change-out of circuit is required, an expensive proposition to say the least. Nortel has been accommodating with come telcos in offering to "trade out" new PRI circuits for older circuits, a "trade out" which does involve some capital on the part of the Telco. At the end, the Telco is left with the prospect of providing service to a PRI customer, offering 64 KB clear channel, but potentially few network facilities which are capable of carrying the signal. The majority of routes do not have the correct transmission equipment to pass the 64 KB signal; therefore, routes to major IXCx were planned first, since it was presumed most PRI calls would be traveling inter-LATA toll. It may be more accurate say that there is not only a nationwide PRI shortage but also a network shortage of 64 KB capable routes. Barbara Nibling bnibling@gte.net ------------------------------ From: kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access Date: 25 Jun 1996 14:30:25 -0400 Organization: Ideamation, Inc. In article , Stephen Satchell wrote: > Most of the RBOCs have been screaming for years that modem usage screws up > their message traffic models, and as a consequence the cost of providing > telephone service is increased because of us people who stay connected for > hours or even days at a time. BellSouth has even made a formal statement > that Internet access pricing is going to have to be measured service in > order to reduce the abuses. ISDN data rates are surcharged in many areas > just for this reason. Ahem - the switch can handle it just as well as it can handle voice calls. The only reason the RBOC's have griped is because they couldn't figure out an easy way to make money off it. I for one am so happy that competition is finally coming around to bite companies like Nynex in the hindquarters. > I propose a shared-access leased-line service for Internet access which > does *not* guarantee 100 percent availability, and guarantees 4000 bps > (that's right, four thousand bits per second) transfer rate in the worst > case. The only thing the customer would "own" is the access box (nothing > more than a simple router with 10 base T connector for the user's > computers) and the first link from the house or business to a > concentrator. From the concentrator on, the equipment is shared all the > way to the point of presence for the Internet backbone provider. This is what some cable companies are already doing. For example, here in Rhode Island our local cable company is going gangbusters at upgrading their network to handle high speed shared data and telephone services. That company is Cox Communications and the system they're building belonged to Dimension Cable a few years ago. Dimension anticipated the breakdown of the telecom barriers and started building up a mostly fiber based network. Not to mention improving customer services to the point where they were knowledgeable and available at the most convenient times for the customer. At the rate we're going I see gray skies ahead for Nynex. Yipppeee! Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR As offensive as I wanna be. kd1nr@anomaly.ideamation.com ------------------------------ From: psyber@usa.pipeline.com (John Cropper) Subject: Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship Date: 25 Jun 1996 20:25:56 GMT Organization: Pipeline USA On Jun 24, 1996 23.14.13 in article , 'aardvark@ni.net (David Whiteman)' wrote: > The call still failed, so I called 1 800 MARISAT and got the same > operator. He reconfirmed the seven digit fax number for the ship, and > then asked me whether I was sure that the ship was in the Pacific > Ocean. I told him that it was an Alaskan cruise -- guess what, my > geography lessons to date have been wrong -- Alaska is in the Indian > Ocean. I used the code for the Indian Ocean and the fax went through. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How could the water around Alaska be > considered part of the Indian Ocean? To the south/southwest of the > Alaska coast would surely be the Pacific Ocean; what about the water > off the north/northwest coast, in the Arctic region? How could the > Indian Ocean possibly fit into this? I guess my geography knowledge > must be poor also. PAT] Alaska may border the Pacific, but with the expanse of it (the Pacific) as well as what was already assigned there, it may have been easier to group it with the Indian Ocean with respect to routing. Who knows for sure? Maybe there _is_ something fundamentally wrong with the planet after all... :-) John Cropper, President NiS / NexComm POB 277, Pennington, NJ USA 08534-0277 voice: 800-247-8675 (609-637-9434 inside NJ) psyber@usa.pipeline.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It occurred to me after I wrote the earlier note that perhaps the vessle was *registered* or normally on duty in the Indian Ocean and that this voyage near Alaska was a special situation, with the vessle to be returning soon to its normal place or port. It would be understandable if they did not want to change the phone numbers and radio equipment, for the one special voyage out of its regular territory -- if that is the reason. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #308 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jun 25 20:58:08 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id UAA11413; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:58:08 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606260058.UAA11413@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #309 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 96 20:57:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 309 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Whitewater Report: Coverup and Sprint Phone Records (Steve Hancock) Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers (Phil Stanley) Re: Phone/Internet Service To/From Bosnia (Lars Poulsen) Re: Question Concerning Protocols (Lars Poulsen) Re: 911 Locator for Cellular Users (turmoil@animal.blarg.net) Re: 911 Locator for Cellular Users (David Crowe) Re: 911 Locator for Cellular Users (Thomas Tonino) Re: Phone History Question (73114.3146@compuserve.com) Re: Phone History Question (Wes Leatherock) Re: Routing on ISDN With Windows NT (John N. Dreystadt) Re: Please Explain 'iky pic' (John Dearing) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: steveh@nntp1.best.com (Steve Hancock) Subject: Whitewater Report: Coverup and Sprint Phone Records Date: 25 Jun 1996 01:56:34 GMT Organization: Best Internet Communications [ Article crossposted from alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater ] [ Author was Max Kennedy ] [ Posted on Thu, 20 Jun 1996 05:18:34 GMT ] An example: [...] After additional inquiries, the Special Committee discovered that the White House was mistaken. Sprint indeed retained some records of individual telephone calls placed through the White House switchboard. The Special Committee thus issued a subpoena on November 20, 1995, to obtain such records and was initially advised that the records reflected the destination number to which a telephone call was placed, but not the extension in the White House from which the call originated. Sprint subsequently advised that its records only reflect the first six digits of the destination number, that is, the area code and prefix, and not the last four digits of the destination number. Because the Governor's mansion does not have an exclusive prefix, it is not possible to determine from the records produced by Sprint to the Special Committee when Ms. Dickey placed the phone call. ------------------------- (Note inserted by writer of above message) Are these guys seriously trying to tell me that they did NOT create a list of ALL calls going out of the White House that night, and narrow it down by exhaustion? This is just playing games. Or incompetence. I assume of course they have the phone number that the troopers claim the call came IN to. On the other hand, I don't see it in the report. If I had it, *I*d do the work. PLEASE. -------------------------- (Original text continues) After further inquiry by the Special Committee, however, the White House advised that "[w]e have confirmed that a call to Ms. Dickey's father's telephone number in Georgia was made at 10:06 p.m. on July 20, 1993, from one of the private lines in the Residence." Ms. Dickey testified that she called her father before calling the Arkansas Governor's mansion. Ms. Dickey also denied that she told the troopers that Vincent Foster had gone to his car in the parking lot and shot himself in the head. According to Ms. Dickey: "That's absolutely not true ... I never heard that, I never would have said that because that's not the facts as I knew them at that time. I'm absolutely positive of the timing of this." ----------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Anyone besides me notice the many similarities between Whitewater and Watergate which was now some 22 years ago when Tricky Dick was president? Back then, a third rate burglary which was covered up caused Nixon to resign on the day before Congress planned to impeach him. Although Watergate was in the news all the time, it never did come to a boil until after Tricky got re-elected; the stink finally forced him to resign with the presidency held in trust by Mr. Rockefeller until the next election because the vice-president -- Agnew, that other crook who had been Governor of Maryland and wound up going to prison -- had already been run out of office. The Democrats made such a fuss about getting Tricky put out to pasture at the very least, and sent to prison as the optimal solution. Now notice this time around the Democrats are being very quiet as things become more and more grim for the resident president now in power and her husband. A third rate burglary back then and who cares about a few shady deals in an Arkansas bank and law firm a dozen or more years ago ... pull the old Watergate clippings and look at the similarities in the things Tricky said and the way he tried to worm out of his role in the mess, and compare those statements with things the Clintons have said. Word for word, phrase for phrase, this is almost an exact reply of 1972-74. Those old tape recordings of Nixon's came back to haunt him forever; now watch the telco billing records do the same for the Clintons. Note how an 'accidental erasure' on the tape left several minutes of the most critical part unavailable in Nixon's case; this time around, some incomplete telephone billing records cause some unanswered questions. It is almost unheard of for a seated president not to be offered his party's nomination for re-election, but in my opinion the Democrats would be wise find someone else to run in November so that they don't lose in the event Whitewater boils over completely sometime around the end of October. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Phil Stanley Subject: Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:27:05 GMT Organization: MagicNet, Inc. Reply-To: travlr@magicnet.net Tad Cook wrote: > Long Distance Phone Companies Vie for Customers; It Pays to Review the Plans > By John Finotti, The Florida Times-Union, Jacksonville > Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News > Don't pick up that phone -- not just yet anyway. > Even you dyed-in-the-wool AT&T customers-for-life may be able to save > money by reviewing your phone usage and matching it with the AT&T plan > that best suits your calling needs. If AT&T really wanted to keep their customers, they would insure that they received the best plan. Has an AT&T representative ever called to ask if you would like to review you plan and compare to other plans they may have? Don't think so! You will only hear from them after you switch. > And there is certainly a switching frenzy going on. I know one company that has gained over 300,000 customers a month for the past three months. By the end of the year, they will be the number three carrier. You will then hear Wall Street and everyone else refer to them as the Big Four. > In response to the switching craze that has been sweeping the country > over the past few years, Sprint offered the first "commitment plan." Make sure you read the fine print! You may be signing a long term commitment which is a big mistake. Once they have you, what would keep them from raising your rates! > The first thing you need to know is that a calling plan -- any calling > plan -- will save you money. Yes, check out http://www.comparison.com/ > Customers not currently in a plan are paying basic rates, and wasting > money, said Jill Straus, a spokeswoman for the Telecommunications > Research & Action Center, a non-profit group based in Washington, D.C. > "It's the same as walking into a car dealer and paying the sticker > price for a car," Straus said. > Moreover, basic rates are continuing to rise. Earlier this year, the Big Three all raised their rates. My discount long distance service did not. People should take a look at the discount companies. They have the same quality but usually better rates. > They're up about 17 percent over the past two years, according to > Consumer Reports. > Calling plans offer discounts of 10 percent to 30 percent off a phone > company's basic rates. My company offers up to 54% off AT&T rates. It use to be 50% but, as I said earlier, the Big Three raised there rates therefore, producing a higher discount. > Additionally, the so-called Big Three -- AT&T, MCI and Sprint -- each > offer a programs that provide extra discounts to customers in the form > of reward "points" based on the amount of usage. You also may need to hire an accountant to see if you are getting what you are suppose to be. > The Big Three control about 83 percent of the long-distance market, > according to the FCC. Not for long. As you said, the battle is just beginning! And the company most likely to gain the most market share will not be AT&T, MCI or Sprint! > consumer advocates say you should be sure to ask what incentives the > company is offering. > For example, some companies have been offering as much as $75 to > customers who switch, Straus said. I was offered $100 by AT&T but still said no thanks! The savings was only for six months and then wammo! > Also, make sure that by signing up for any bonuses, you are not > precluded from joining the calling plan of your choice. Also make sure you aren't commiting to a singe or multi-year contract too! > One thing you can count on: your phone probably will be ringing off > the hook as long-distance companies try to get your business. Yes, but you will most likely receive a call from a friend or relative who has joined the fastest growing Long Distance Company in America as one of their Independent Representatives. Yes, thats right! Excel Telecommunications is moving up very fast. From the #11 residential long distance carrier last year to #4 right now! If they visit you, don't turn down the offer to save you money! They have a great service with great rates and its free to switch. They also give you 90 day guarentee plus other incentives! > "The competition in long-distance will heat up within the next year," > Atlantic-ACM's Smith said. Yes indeed! It's going to be smashing!!!! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ummm, with all the glowing things you have to say about Excel, I wonder if you would care to comment on the FCC action taken against them recently due to slamming of customers? Anyone could go from number eleven to number four if they did not bother to get the permission of the people they switched over! I am surprised Excel is not in first or second place! And here are a few more exclamation points to match all of yours!!!!!!!! PAT] ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Phone/Internet Service To/From Bosnia Date: 24 Jun 1996 18:04:17 -0700 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article robert@manta.nosc.mil (Robert M. Anderson) writes: > Is there an Internet provider that service Sarajevo or anywhere else > in Bosnia (if so, they can talk by email). (1) I would be very surprised if the military did not provide Internet service (or at least e-mail) to the troops. Since they need the network hookup for administrative traffic, anyway, it would seem to be fairly easy to provide personal access. (2) At a workshop in Poland last fall, I talked to an American living in Germany who spent most of his time traveling around the former Yoguslavia to set up BBS systems for public access; generally in the public libraries. This allowed those still in the war zone to exchange e-mail with friends and family members on the other side of the front line as well as in refugee camps throughout Germany and Scandinavia. Since telephone traffic between the Balkan republics was severely restricted, the UUCP mailhub was in Germany. He told many great stories about how to deal with rationed electricity: Running the PCs off UPS's built out of truck batteries, recharged whenever electricity was available. While this latter service is clearly of great humanitarian value, I suspect that the military authorities would frown on soldiers making use of it. This service - as well as the workshop in Warzaw -- is heavily subsidized by the Soros Foundation and its Open Society Foundations. For more information on the Soros Foundations, see "www.soros.org". Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@RNS.COM RNS / Meret Communications Phone: +1-805-562-3158 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Internets: designed and built while you wait ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Question Concerning Protocols Date: 24 Jun 1996 18:13:24 -0700 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article Naima Benmansour writes: > I would be very grateful if you could tell me what is the difference > between X.21 and V.35 telecommunication interfaces. Does the V.35 > protocol offer more transmission security than X.21? V.35 and X.21 are both electrical interface specifications. V.35 is intended for use on data ports from 56000 bits per second to 2,048,000 bits per second. The data and clock signals are differential with a voltage swing of +-0.5V peak-to-peak. The ITU has declared V.35 to be obsolete, but it is still widely used in the USA. A rectangular connector, about 25 mm x 40 mm is conventionally used. X.21 is intended for similar applications. Signalling is differential, +-5V pp. In Europe, X.21 has been widely used, both for leased point- to-point circuits, and for circuit switched data networks such as the German Datex-L. In the circuit-switched configuration, a call setup signalling was used, ubnlike anything I have ever seen elsewhere. For a variety of reasons, the circuit switched networks are disappearing. The leased-line version can be described as a subset of RS-422 with a D-15 connector. I fail to see how security enters into this picture. Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@RNS.COM RNS / Meret Communications Phone: +1-805-562-3158 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Internets: designed and built while you wait ------------------------------ From: turmoil@animal.blarg.net (Turmoil) Subject: Re: 911 Locator for Cellular Users Date: 24 Jun 1996 18:34:37 -0700 Organization: A Red Hat Commercial Linux Site There is a website at www.xypoint.com that presents some related information. tim turmoil's seattle music web http://www.blarg.net/~turmoil ------------------------------ From: David Crowe Subject: Re: 911 Locator for Cellular Users Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:24:30 GMT Organization: Cellular Networking Perspectives Ltd. Reply-To: crowed@cadvision.com John, It is hoped that it will be possible to determine the location of a mobile within 125 meters, without modifying phones. In fact, that is a basic assumption of the standardization work. There is quite a bit of work going on in this area. However, even given this, the costs could still be fairly high for updating systems with new equipment that might have to be installed in all cellsites. On the other hand, if something like triangulation were to prove sufficient, minimal new hardware would be required. Regards, David Crowe, Wireless Standards Consultant ------------------------------ From: ttonino@bio.vu.nl (Thomas Tonino) Subject: Re: 911 Locator for Cellular Users Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 18:23:12 +0200 Maybe it is done through the timing of some signal. I believe that for GSM, people talk of 15 meters accuracy of location. This would be relatively easy with the phse-locked nature of a GSM network, by keeping track of the exact timing. An analog network would be harder I guess, but not impossible to derive the exact timing of some signalling tone. Thomas ------------------------------ From: Jim in San Francisco <73114.3146@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Phone History Question Date: 25 Jun 1996 06:05:48 GMT Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736) I don't remember seeing modular telephones until about 1976 or so, and even then, only in Bell System areas. I once had a fully-modular WE 2500 set that had all of its parts marked with a manufacturing date of 11/73, indicating that it may have been brand-new and not reconditioned. The area I lived in during the 1970's was served by GTE. Their equipment was still hard-wired at the time. They did use alot of four-prong, which seemed to be mainly in new apartments and houses. I don't recall seeing any GTE modular telephones until 1978, and even then they were modular only on the line cord. I remember my mother ordering pushbutton sets, but when the installer came out, he brought rotary-dial ones instead. (He explained that the area we were in was not set up for them yet.) We also didn't have DDD until about 1976. I remember dialing "120" until 1976, and then having 1-plus DDD with an operator intercept to complete calls between '76-'79. God, how did we live back then? ------------------------------ From: wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes Leatherock) Subject: Re: Phone History Question Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:22:55 GMT John Shriver wrote: [ ... text deleted ... ] > Of course, back when you rented a phone, you probably also had to pay > extra every month for every non-hardwired phone. The "portable" phone > was a billable feature. (However, a long cord on a phone was a > one-time charge.) Again someone is assuming all the Bell LECs followed the same rules. In Southwestern Bell territory (at least in the states I'm familiar with) a long cord carried a monthly charge. The theory behind that was that they were much more likely to be damaged (as by someone tripping over them) and so would generate many repair visits. > That's why plugs and long cords are unusual to find on old pre-modular > phones. You usually find the short three foot cord with three spade > lugs (red, green, yellow). > By the way, before the one-peice phones (302), the jack went between > the desk set (20, 40, 50, 150, 102, or 202) and bell box (534, 584). > A given home was NOT to be wired with a mix of 302's and the older > type phones on phone jacks, as the wiring of jacks for these different > applications were quite incompatible. And, as has been noted, if all your phones were portable, you were required to have a separate ringer in the house so that the phone line would ring even if the phone was not plugged in anywhere. (That was when the tariff did not permit you to disconnect or disable the ringer on all the telephones on a line.) Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu ------------------------------ From: johnd@mail.ic.net (John N. Dreystadt) Subject: Re: Routing on ISDN With Windows NT Date: 25 Jun 1996 03:11:35 GMT Organization: Software Services In article , Gill.Ruidant@gate71. be says: > I'm searching a solution to replace an access router (CISCO 2511 for > example) by a software solution on Windows NT. It is possible with a > com port card with eight ports, a terminal adapter and a software ... > but wich software? Can somebody give me more informations on this > subject? NT Server can act as a low end router for TCP/IP. I do not recommend it for reasons explained below. But how to do it? 1. Be sure you are using NT Server 3.51. 2. Make sure your card is on the HCL (hardware compatibility list) or that you have checked that the card vendor has an NT driver and you trust them to take the card back when (not if) it doesn't work. 3. In the Network icon in the control panel, go to advanced options and make sure that the IP forwarding option is turned on. If this is not turned on, the Server will listen and send packets but will not forward between interfaces. 4. Configure IP addresses and subnet masks on each interface. Note that on the advanced options window, the interface is selected by using a drop down (my memory suggests near the top of the window). 5. Configure only one default route on only one interface. 6. If you need additional routes, use the "route -p add" option from the command line (a.k.a. msdos in the main menu) to add persistent routes. If you forget the -p, the routes will fade away during the next reboot. What's wrong with NT 3.51 as a router? 1. Routing is static. No support for RIP, BGP, or anything similar. I believe that some support is coming in 4.0 which is in beta. 2. Limited support for hardware options. Few cards are supported and some of the hardware folks are shipping drivers that are less than beta quality (at least some of the async people, I have no personal experience of the ISDN cards). 3. Poor support for administration. Not horrible, but poor. NT is a file and application server, not a router. My personal opinions, your mileage may vary. John Dreystadt ------------------------------ From: jdearing@netaxs.com (John Dearing) Subject: Re: Please Explain 'iky pic' Date: 25 Jun 1996 17:13:10 GMT Organization: Philadelphia's Complete Internet Provider Tom Graham (tgraham@internetmci.com) banged upon his keyboard thusly: > Hi -- I am trying to remember what "iky pic" is cable slang for. > "Pic" is "plastic insulated cable"? And, "iky" is the jelly that > water proofs the cable? Been too long since I worked for WE at the > Hawthorne Works; any of you Pioneers out there give me the real story > here? Yep, that's it. "Icky PIC" is installer-speak for Gel-filled PIC cable. This type of cable is typically used in direct buried applications (like a new housing development with all underground facilities). The "icky" part keeps water and moisture out (up to a limit of course). It **REALLY** is "icky" to work with. The gel gets all over everything and is a hard job to remove. Many splicers have a separate set of hand tools (cutters, pliers, knife, etc...) just for "icky pic" work and will use latex gloves while working on it. Just my $.02 John jdearing@netaxs.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #309 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Tue Jun 25 23:02:22 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA22829; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:02:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:02:22 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606260302.XAA22829@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #310 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Jun 96 23:02:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 310 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson How Do I Get Technical Support From USR? (Jerry Tenenbaum) Re: Arrogant Internet Providers (Fred Atkinson) Re: Arrogant Internet Providers (Robert Casey) PC Modems and Stutter Dial Tone (David Yewell) Re: International 800 Numbers (Judith Oppenheimer) Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers (Robert Casey) Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers (Stan Brown) Re: It Ain't Like it Used to Be (Stan Schwartz) Re: Sending Faxes as Attachment to E-Mail (Richard Shockey) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jetcon@astral.magic.ca (Jerry Tenenbaum) Subject: How do I Get Technical Support From USR? Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 19:56:23 -0400 Organization: JetCon Systems Last October (1995) based on problems with some US Robotics Sportster 14.4 kbit/s modems (more on this later) I "convinced" the Canadian distributor Keating Technology to loan me a pair of Sportster 28.8 kbit/s modems. The application is a "host" end of an AppleTalk Remote Access (ARA) connection supporting a user community of mixed modems (Apple ExpressModem , Global Village PowerPort, Supra and USR, almost all 14.4 kbit/s) After several attempts I was able to access the ARA script for the 28.8 and I found that I had the same problem with the 28.8 that I had with the 14.4 Sportster. The problem can best be described as follows (Sorry no sound clip): - the calling modem (must be a 14.4) acquires dial tone and dials the number (always DTMF). - the remote line rings once and the modem answers the call. - on the speaker of the calling party is heard: * the initial answer back tone (a pure tone with a bit of a bum, bum, bum to it); * the normal rushing tone (shuuuuuh aproximatly two seconds); * then it goes to a pure tone again (with no beat to it). This pure tone goes on forever (well that is a bit of an exaggeration since ARA times out after a while). Well you are probably saying to yourself by now "replace the defective modem and get on with life." Well the first problem with that is that it does not always happen, it occurs approximately 50% of the time. And here are some additional facts: - both 28.8 evaluation modems exhibit the exact same problem; - a third loaner with the new 33.6 code from USR also exhibited the same problem; - The called "host" modem at one point was a 14.4 Sportster which exhibited the same problem. The 14.4 was replaced 3 times, same problem with all; - The calling modems are a mixture of local and long distance calls. All can see the problem, however the worst problems are seen for users calling long distance from about 30 miles away; - the problem appears to be "triggered" by placing a non-modem call (i.e. a wrong number) and then hanging up after listening to the answer back tone for several seconds, but, it can also happen without this trigger (in other words who knows what causes it?); - the problems can be reproduced when the local loop is: * normal telephone lines both standard and data conditioned six different ones at the host; * Basic rate ISDN using both Northern Telecom and Motorola TAs. - The data loops have been tested by the telco for frequency response (they are unloaded) and there is no significant bridge tap. The switches in Canada are all typically DMS-100; - When the host modem is a Supra 14.4 or a Motorola 28.8 absolutely no problems are seen from anywhere; - The host modems and PCs have been both from normal AC and UPS sources; - The host platform has been a Mac IIcx, a Centris 650 and a PowerPC 7500 (no difference); - The problem is seen on all versions of ARA (currently 2.01); - The ARA script has been replaced with virgin copies from different Stuffit archives uploaded from different sources; - All long distance calls were made using PCM facilities with various carriers (but the problem can be seen in and out of the same central office as well); Now even more facts: - The problem can be seen calling into the CompuServe hunt group in Toronto using CIM; - The problem was seen on four consecutive calls to a BBS recommended by Keating Technology as a showcase account; - The problem is also seen intermittently by a network control center calling from a USR PC internal modem to remote devices; - Calling in to the 28.8 with ARA and a no-name 28.8 I see consistently lower connect speeds than with a Motorola Lifestyle (backed up with throughput tests - i.e. file copies using both FirstClass and the Mac Finder). Keating Technology technical support has been no help and their managers keep on repeating words to the effect that technology is not perfect (so why do Motorola and Supra work then??) I have been asking since November (1995) for senior technical support at USR to call me with no success. Note also that most of the people who used these lines did not even ask what my real problem was. With the 14.4 USR modem, technical support just shook their head and gave me RMA numbers. And now my questions: 1. USR and their distributor quote me their sales figures, the lab test results from their ads and attaches the line that "no one else is reporting the problem." Is it REALLY true that none of YOU have seen this? 2. How do I get the attention of a high level technical support person (I have already talked to level 1 and 2 at USR and All possible levels at Keating Technology) or someone who will really look in to my problem rather than quoting me marketing hype? Management at Keating is unable or unwilling to put me in touch with them. 3. Is there a test I missed to isolate the problem? 4. Should I forget the whole thing and just boycott USR for the rest of my life? (I should add that my nickname SHOULD be Don Quixote so that this option pains me deeply.) Please cc: any responses (gee I sure hope you can do that) to my E-mail address (jetcon@astral.magic.ca) as I am more religious about reading my E-mail than I am about reading the newsgroups and my Internet provider seems to only keep about 1 days worth of each group and I cannot always get on every day. ------------------------------ From: Fred_Atkinson/SkyTel_at_SkyTelNotesPO@mtel.com Date: Tue, 25 Jun 96 10:24:00 CST Subject: Re: Arrogant Internet Providers This is a subject that I can empathize with. I'm in agreement that *some* ISPs are very arrogant. I recently terminated service with my *personal* ISP for abusive behavior (on their part). They had been having a lot of problems with disconnects during transmission. Quite frequently, I would get cut off (disconnected) several times in the course of ten to fifteen minutes. This is a problem when one is trying to do graduate research on the Web. Rarely could I complete downloading of Web pages. This problem went on for months. I often had to spend much time at the University doing research when I could have done it from my computer at home. They had sent out a notice months ago saying that their dial up lines were the cause of the problem due to the type of carrier the local exchange carrier was providing them. They were getting copper lines into the building, but this would take time because they had to get a conduit run under the parking lot to their building so telco could get the cabling into their facility. In addition to disconnects, the news server would frequently time out when I was trying to download articles from it. The Web server experienced similar crashes. I begged and pleaded for help in improving the situation repeatedly asking what the best modem string was (for a Hayes Smartmodem Optima 288 V.34) to use with their system. When I did get a reply, all they did was point the finger at the local exchange carrier saying that *everything* was caused by the problems with the dial up lines. They made no attempt to answer my question about the initialization string. I was patient, as the service had been good before these carrier lines were installed. Finally, the day of the big cutover came and went. I signed on and got cut off four times within ten minutes. When I called their customer service to confirm that the cutover was complete, they said it was. I asked to speak to a manager. They said he would call me. When I got email from the manager (in complete disregard for my request for a phone call), he suggested I go to another ISP. He dodged my questions about the problems with the news and web server. I was absolutely shocked at the suggestion to change providers and again requested to speak with him on the phone. He said he would do that 'later'. He also denied what his customer service people had told me about the lines being cut over, telling me that this was not true. When I pointed out that his customer service people were telling me that the lines were cut, he said they were not saying any such thing (it appears that I can't believe my own ears). I was so shocked by his behavior that I (as politely as I could) suggested he sign up for and take a professional customer service course of the same type that everyone from my organization was required to take. I pointed out that my company would discharge any employee who spoke to a customer like that regardless of whether the customer was right or wrong (especially suggesting that a customer go to another company). His reply was that he was 'not an employee' (I later found out that he was one of the owners). Considering that I was paying a rate that is considerably more than other ISPs charge in this area and that this service was sold to me as a 'we provide better service and support than the others' service, a little bit of professional customer service was expected. The owner I spoke to conveniently denied that they promised above average support. When I canceled because of his conduct, he openly called me an 'abusive user'. My reaction to that is that an abusive user does not patiently hang around for months trying to give them every chance to clear up problems of such severity. It only turned into such a disaster because of the way he spoke to me on email and refused to speak with me on the telephone (to this day I've never heard his voice). I had repeatedly pointed out that the news and web servers were experiencing problems that appeared to be unrelated to the dial up lines and asked them to look at the problems. Never did I get an acknowledgement or a reply for this except 'we are waiting for the local exchange company to cut over the lines'. In a later email correspondence with another one of their co-owners, an apology was expressed for this person's behavior saying that he was one of the most 'even tempered' people she knew and that his nerves had just been shattered by all the customer complaints (due to all the problems with the dial up lines). I replied saying that while I didn't believe he was even tempered, her courteous conduct was certainly appreciated and it was too bad the other owner didn't have her manners. I pointed out that I had been patient with them for months and had also gotten them five other accounts. I asked that she see that these other people were properly cared for. She wished me well with my new ISP and I wished her well in return. It turned into a lose-lose situation for everyone. It is a problem when someone who has no real customer handling experience gets into a business like providing Internet service. Customers expect reliable service (especially when they are paying higher rates for 'better service'). An arrogant attitude because 'I am the owner, not an employee and I don't *have* to express any courtesy' is a one-way ticket to disaster because an end user senses this immediately when this person speaks to them. End users don't care *who* the owner is. What they look at is the quality of service they get and quick resolutions when problems occur. My suggestion to all ISPs is to be sure the ones on the phones to your customers (and yourselves) are properly trained in customer service methods. When rumors of behavior such as this spread, your business may go right down the tubes. A customer would not be upset with your service if he had given up on you. Take the fact that he bothered to call you at all as an expression that he believes you *can* get the problems solved. When you react with a positive manner, upset customers often calm down in record time. I am now with a carrier who doesn't have these types of problems. While they do have *some* problems, they are not nearly of the magnitude of that other 'better quality' ISP. Additionally, I've spoken on the phone to a number of their people and I've not had any problems from them. Their rate (for comparable service) is about sixty per cent of what the old ISP charges (who says that more expensive is better?). They are also very easy to work with. The lesson that I have learned is that you shouldn't be so patient with an ISP for that long. If the service is bad, promises towards *future* resolutions don't mean very much. Pull up 'The List' at 'http://www.thelist.com' and select a new one. Where my part of the fault lies is that I believe too much in 'brand loyalty'. Once I had found a good provider, I would have tried to stay with him through the rough times. It appears that this logic doesn't work with ISPs. It's discouraging when this patience doesn't pay off. In the future, continuing bad service will yield a new provider. I won't try to discuss it to avoid cancellation. It will avoid a lot of unpleasantry. Incidentally, my old email address is forwarded to my university address. A few day ago, I got a broadcast message from them saying that the cutover hadn't solved all the problems and that they were *still* working towards a resolution. Fred ------------------------------ From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) Subject: Re: Arrogant Internet Providers Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 21:53:09 GMT I've been using Netcom for about three years now, and have had no real problems. Nothing specific to my account. Maybe I'm not that demanding. There's been the usual busy signals every so often, occasional netnews server being down, and occasional system crashes, and a few mysterious phone-line disconnects. But not too often. I've occasionally called tech support, and never been blown off because I'm a shell account user. I use netcom mostly for reading newsgroups, and occasional ftp and lynx world wide webbing. Hey, they're a lot better than IDT was. ------------------------------ From: David Yewell Subject: PC Modems and Stutter Dial Tone Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:16:29 GMT Organization: Netcom I subscribe to telco provided voicemail (The Message Center), and I also use the same line for my pc modem. My modem will not dial when the stutter dial tone is present. Does anyone know a way to get around this problem (other than clearing all the messages and removing the stutter dial tone?) Is there a modem I can use which will dial anyhow? What do alarm company modems do when they are attached to a line which is also on a voice mail line? How do they seize the line? Thanks, Dave [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think your modem should have a provision for what is known (used to be known?) as 'blind dialing'. That is, instead of waiting for what it recognizes as dial tone, it simply goes off hook and after some preset period of time -- usually four or five seconds -- it just starts dialing. In lots of places there is still what I would call a non-standard dial tone -- behind some PBXs for example -- and this blind dialing is needed to overcome that. PAT] ------------------------------ From: callbrand@aol.com (CallBrand) Subject: Re: International 800 Numbers Date: 25 Jun 1996 14:03:38 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: callbrand@aol.com (CallBrand) Bob Goudreau writes: > The point of country code 800 is to provide a single easy-to-remember > access code that the whole world can use to dial international > toll-free numbers. This is no way replaces or obsoletes any > intra-national free phone numbering spaces that countries may already > have (or choose to introduce in the future). If we've learned anything from 888, it might be that users of toll-free numbers attach a BRAND value to those numbers. Even the FCC recognized this by granting 800 users unprecedented direct access to DSMI for replication requests this past winter. Telecom is a tool for users -- your customers -- not an end unto itself. Judith Oppenheimer, President, Interactive CallBrand A leading source of information on 800 issues. CallBrand@aol.com, 1 800 The Expert, (ph) 212 684-7210, (fx) 212 684-2714 http://www.webcom.com/longdist/icb/ ------------------------------ From: wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) Subject: Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 21:19:46 GMT > Now on the other hand suppose someone was *not* selling the product in > question. Suppose they just wanted to keep the Internet in an uproar > all the time the way it is now so as a 'joke' they found some piece > of totally worthless advertising for some completely junk product -- > something so transparently bogus anyone with an IQ above 80 could see > through it and they fed it to the news stream with bogus mail headers > and bogus phone numbers, etc. Then they sat back and watched the fire- > works as the netters found and examined this junk and clucked their > tongues about it for days on end and on the other end of the line some > legitimate and innocent third party 800 subscriber was caught in the > crossfire as netters everywhere gave him a piece of their mind. ("When > you call my 800 number be sure and mention that you saw my advertisement > on the internet, and what news group you saw it in.") > I don't think though, Clarence, that there is much of this. The header > information can usually be expected to be wrong; the phone number will > very seldom if ever be wrong unless the spammer got a typographical > error in it and did not even both to proofread his masterpiece before > releasing it. PAT] I can imagine one sequence of events that might cause someone to spam with a bogus 800 or 888 number: Imagine you ordered something and you feel you get ripped-off, or some such feeling of total dis-satisfaction. You might decide to "get even" with that vendor by causing his 800 phone bill to be run up from irate users of the internet newsgroups. He might post some annoying spam everywhere and give the above vendor's 800 phone number, as well as using a tempoary account (to avoid e-mail bombs). You might get a law suit though ... Wonder if I could get 1-888-888-8888 for a personal "800" phone number? :-) And don't put tax-free bonds in your IRA account! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: While not a 'joke' -- and certainly not funny, your scenario of someone doing this to 'get even' with some company he was angry with pretty much falls in the category I mentioned I think. That is, somone doing something just to stir up the pot and watch the excitment. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 14:57:29 -0400 From: Stan Brown Organization: Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA Subject: Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers Our Esteemed Editor noted: > To me it is a stretch > of the imagination to think of some person trying to sell his product > on the internet not only providing false mail headers but a deliberatly > wrong phone number as well. What would be the point? PAT, I think you are overlooking this possibility: Mr. A has a grudge against company B (or even Mr. B). A happens to know that B has an 800 number, and says to himself, "Aha! I can cost B some money, and there will be no way to prove I'm the guilty party.) A then writes (or copies) a spam and insert B's phone number in it, depending on lots of folks calling to express their outrage. As you pointed out, B will have to pay for the calls, so this would be a way for A to cost an innocent party some money. Assuming A has forged the message headers, A could not be traced but fortunately most A's don't know how to forge all the necessary headers. Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio USA email: stbrown@nacs.net Web: http://www.nacs.net/~stbrown/ Can't find FAQ lists? See my Web page for instructions, or email me. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well some people *think* that false mail headers cannot be traced but with some patience it can be done. You can put whatever you want in most of the header, but a difficult thing to deal with is the path line. Now everyone knows if you originate something, your site is going to be the first place shown in the path line. Depending on where the item is seen, the path line at that point will be different than if it was seen elsewhere, but at some point, all copies of the message have some site name-in-common listed. People think they can be smart and dummy up the path line to make it look as though there was some earlier originating site but when more than one site name in common appears in the path line (in most cases the further to the right on the line you go, the more likely you will see the same site on two different copies of the message) but what you do in that case is read the line back to the left and look for where the paths start diverging. Reading to the left on the path line what is the last site name in common shown on all copies? I'll bet you that's where it originated. Now if the admin at that site is a friend of the community you can go to him and ask him to check his logs looking to see *what actual user name* invoked a news posting script at the time shown in the time stamp. Or the user thought he was smart and instead of using something like 'Pnews' which is always going to fill in the header the way it wants or overwrite what the user put there in some categories (after presumably validating the user) instead he went right out and telnetted to some site with an open news server and dumped his mess right in the stream there, replete with bogus header information galore there is still going to be a record in the path line when that site deals with it. So if it was not a user posting at his own site but rather telnetting to somewhere else to do it you can still go to that admin if he is cooperative and ask him to check his log and see who connected to his NNTP socket at the time in question. Forget whatever time the user put on the line for the date ... you take the next site in the path line and find out when they got it then go back to the admin where you suspect the offending message started and ask him to check his logs around the same time period. Oh look, here is a connection into this machine from Joe Blow's site thirty seconds or a couple minutes before my site handing the garbage on to the next one. Now we go to Joe Blow and ask him which one of his users invoked telnet or NNTP or whatever at that particular time. It is far from perfect but you would be amazed how many people who forge message headers in order to dump their trash on the net forget to make each little item in the header go in perfect synch with everything else. Is it worth the trouble to trace down every one of those fools? Nah ... usually not. And the worst offenders like Slaton are well known already so why bother? You are essentially correct: not that many non-professional spammers know how to trick the mail, and of those who do, even fewer know how to do it *right* if indeed there is a right way that someone somewhere will not be willing to spend the time to investigate. As for me, I don't ready Usenet anyway, so why do I care as long as they stay out of here. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 12:51:53 EDT From: "Stan.Schwartz@IBMMAIL" Subject: Re: It Ain't Like it Used to Be In TD #299, Mark J. Cuccia discussed his problem reaching a long distance number that was apparently out of order, and wondered why it didn't warrant an intercept message. May I relate my own story (which includes an answer): My parents live in a ranch house in a late-50's era Levitt-style development in NYNEX/NY land. About once a year, some too-tall truck will drive past the house and forcibly disconnect their phones from the rest of the world. I was i n the house (with my cell phone) when this happened last year, and I got on the phone with NYNEX repair. The tech told me that a repair would take a week. I was willing to lend them my cell phone, and I asked if NYNEX could put an intercept on the line so that calls to the house don't get an endless "ring-no-answer". The tech told me that they didn't like to do that, because that took two trouble tickets (one to place the order, and one to remove the intercept), and many times the intercepts don't get removed correctly. The tech then said, "Let me ask you - do you have very young children in the house?". I said, "No." He said, "Let me ask you again, do you have small children in the house?" Seeing where he was going with this, I said, "No, but there are two senior citizens in the house." He said, "OK, that's what I needed to hear." The repair truck was at the house later that afternoon. A postscript to that story is that two months later, another truck tore the drop down. NYNEX says they can't hang it any higher. Stan (stan@vnet.net) ------------------------------ From: rshockey@ix.netcom.com (Richard Shockey) Subject: Re: Sending Faxes as Attachment to E-Mail Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 02:56:43 GMT Organization: Netcom Keith W. Brown wrote: > Marone Giuseppe wrote in article > : >> I wonder if there is any products (hardware /software) to use a >> standard fax machine as a scanner connected to a PC; the application >> would be to get files in proper formats (.TIF, .GIF, .JMP or whatever) >> to be sent as e-mail attachment out of plain paper documents; the fax >> machine, anyway, should also be connected to PSTN to be able to send >> and receive standard faxes. Does anybody know of some trick to do >> that? > The software I prefer is Delrina WinFax PRO. Once the fax has been > received into the computer, you have the option to export it into to > four different formats; tiff, bmp, pcx and winfax's fxs format. > Simply export it into the directory of your choice, log on to the > internet, and e-mail your fax attachment to the destination of your > choice ... what could be simpler? Personally I hate WinFAX especially in its V.7 version ... I deleted it from my drives months ago. But to the question of Internet FAX it is a good idea but how does the E-Mail client at the other end view the file? There are some standards issues here that have not been totally resolved. I have been tracking this Internet Fax concept for some time and it should explode in less than six months. Fax is perfect for the internet. Fax is inherently store and forward not real time. The basic concept from point to point is you mine encode the ITU T.4 TIF file and send the fax the way you would any Internet Mail Binary attachment. But it does require the Client E-Mail system to be able to view the file. Most new scanners have options for saving as T.4 or T.6 files. But ... what some clever folks have been working on is a Intellegent FAX POP or Point of Presence where the fax transmission would be intercepted locally the POP would be instructed on where the fax is to be sent ... and then actually delivered over the Internet to another POP where it would be transmitted as a regular local fax transaction. One out of every ten phone lines installed is fax dedicated. 45 percent of all Trans-Atlantic and Trans-Pacific calls are fax. There is some serious money to be made here. The carriers have petitioned the FCC to stop Internet Voice ... not realizing that the real threat will the the elimination of fax from the PSTN. I know of at least two companies getting ready to do FAX plugins for Netscape Navigator. Richard Shockey Developers of Fax on Demand Solutions President For Business, Media, Industry and Nuntius Corporation Government. 8045 Big Bend Blvd. St. Louis, MO 63119 For a Demonstration Call our Voice 314.968.1009 CommandFax Demonstration Line FAX 314.968.3163 at 314.968.3461 Internet: rshockey@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #310 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jun 26 13:02:04 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA19207; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:02:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:02:04 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606261702.NAA19207@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #311 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 96 13:02:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 311 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Help BellSouth Figure My Problem (Ron Schnell) Power For Telephones (Jean-Francois Mezei) Sprint Shuts Down Foncard For International Calls (Bill Garfield) On Line Reverse Telephone Directory For Austin TX? (Steve Scott) Control of 888 NXXs (rms.globalnet@sandrose.com) Re: New Cellular Phone w/o Service? (Mark Crispin) Re: New Cellular Phone w/o Service? (Steven Lichter) Re: New Cellular Phone w/o Service? (David Whiteman) Re: Informal PRE - RFD comp.dcom.gsm or alt.cellular.gsm (Eric Litman) Re: Getting Spammed to Death (Kevin R. Ray) Re: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn (Dana W. Paxson) Re: Carpet Capital (Wes Leatherock) Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers (Rich Szabo) Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again (Michael Franz) Re: 888 Deployment Not (benlev@aol.com) Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access (John R. Levine) Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (John R. Levine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ronnie@twitch.mit.edu (Ron Schnell) Subject: Help BellSouth Figure My Problem Date: 26 Jun 1996 01:32:39 GMT Organization: MIT I'm having a very strange problem with one of my phone lines, and BellSouth can't seem to figure it out. I'll bet one of you guys can do it before they can. I've had people complain recently that they have called, and there hasn't been an answer, and my machine has not picked up. I can reproduce the problem, about 1 out of 15 times, if I call the line from another line in the house. Let's say the problem line is Line A, and the normal line is Line B. When I call Line A from Line B, the LED for Line A is lit steadily, as it would be if the phone were just off-hook (as opposed to flashing another color while it is ringing). Line B hears normal ringing sounds, but the answering machine, of course, never picks up. None of the gazillions of phones in the house even chirp. Attempting to pick up a phone on Line A gets no voltage at all. Can't hear myself, can't hear any line noise, nothing. I originally assumed that this was a C.O. problem, and connecting a BUTTSET to the line hears absolutely no ringing noise, *BUT* the Caller ID tones come through between what would be the first and second ring! To me that part is totally bizarre, and now I don't know what to think, and neither do the phone guys that BellSouth keeps sending over. In the meantime, when the phone guys aren't here, I've been call-forwarding my Line A to Line B, and there has been no problem, except that I have my business voicemail on Line B. I appreciate any help anyone can offer! Ron ------------------------------ From: Jean-Francois Mezei Subject: Power For Telephones Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:17:20 GMT Organization: Vaxination Informatique Reply-To: jfmezei@istar.ca Since standard conventional home pots telephones rely on basically uninterruptible power supplied by the telco, the telephone is often regarded as an emergency device that works even during power failures. With the advent of fiber to the home and the use of coax cable for telephony, I am wondering how this "emergency use" will be handled when power for the telephone will no longer be supplied by the telco. Will the interface devices have built-in rechargeable batteries ? What sort of stand-alone ability in terms of hours would they be expected to have in order to rival the current telephone system's robustness and availability? ------------------------------ From: bubba@insync.net (Bill Garfield) Subject: Sprint Shuts Down Foncard For International Calls Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:38:20 GMT Organization: Associated Technical Consultants Reply-To: bubba@insync.net I received a postcard today informing me about a change that's going to be made to my SPRINT FONCARD effective July 1st. Quoting now from the back of the postcard ... SOT "If you want to make international calls with your FONCARD, talk to us first. Sprint wants to make sure no unauthorized international calls are made with your FONCARD. So, beginning in July, 1996, your Sprint FONCARD will be limited to calls made to points within the United States and Canada. (If you are outside the United States, you will still be able to make calls to other countries or back to the United States.) This small but important security measure should eliminate the possibility of unauthorized international calls being made with your FONCARD. Of course, should you ever need to place international calls from the United States with your Sprint FONCARD, simply contact a Sprint Customer Service Associate at 1-800-877-4646. We will be happy to provide you with the ability to make these international calls." EOT Appears SPRINT is getting tired of being stung for credit card international toll fraud =originating from= the United States. Actually the plan makes good sense. I travel, but never ever place calls to =international destinations= with my credit card. I think if we took a straw poll, mine would fall in line with the lion's share of responses. Therefore I certainly don't mind if Sprint wants to "restrict" my FONCARD to strictly domestic calling. I support any reasonable plan to reduce exposure to toll fraud. Sprint's plan sounds fine to me. Actually, removing the paystations altogether from the Newark airport would probably make a hell of a dent in toll fraud losses, but that plan isn't reasonable. Enclosing the paystations (fully) and using dark tinted high-reflective glass on the doors might be another step toward encouraging the shoulder-surfers to move on. =================================================== 7-Year-Old Jessica Dubroff would be alive today if her parents had only learned to say, "No." =================================================== ------------------------------ From: sscott@airmail.net (Steve Scott) Subject: On Line Reverse Telephone Directory For Austin TX? Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 02:22:19 GMT Does anybody know if there is an on line reverse telephone directory for Austin, TX? I guess it doesn't have to be on-line, though. Can I call Southwestern Bell and ask for this information? Thanks, sscott@iadfw.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note. SWB would be unlikely to help you with this unless they happen to publish reverse directories like Ameritech does, in which case they would urge you to purchase their books. You might check with the public library in Austin; I am sure they have a local 'criss-cross' directory. Also the phone listings on Compuserve and switchboard.com might be of assistance to you. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rms.globalnet@sandrose.com Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:56:57 EDT Subject: Control of 888 NXXs Pat: Is the NANPA doling out 888 NXX's the same way it doled out 800 NXXs? Specifically, do you know if there is a list anywhere of which IXCs control which 888 NXXs? GLOBALnet(TM) A Division Of The Sandrose Group, Inc. 2870 Peachtree Road, Atlanta GA 30305-2918 USA +1 770 801-1998 Fax: +1 770 434-7569 Hey! We will be on the web in July! Watch this space! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wow are you going back a long time! There has been no geographical distinction on 800-NXX for many, many years. It used to be AT&T assigned 800-NXX based on location and on type of 800 service (i.e. intrastate and interstate, etc) but for a number of years now, it has been wide-open with anyone getting the 800 number they were able to obtain from various sources, etc. Judith Oppenheimer will correct me if I am wrong, but I think since 888 opened up it has been on a first come, first served basis with all numbers available to everyone with a few exceptions. Now you just go to your carrier and ask for the number you want. If it is available, you get it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: New Cellular Phone w/o Service? Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 16:06:43 -0700 Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing On 25 Jun 1996, John Starta wrote: > I recently dropped my Motorola cellular phone and need to replace it. > Obviously I already have service so I only need the phone itself. Are > there companies (i.e., mail order) where I can purchase a new Motorola > cellular phone at a reasonable price? Contact your cellular company first. They may have a free exchange policy where they take in your damaged phone and give you a replacement; they send the damaged phone to Motorola for repair and when it comes back it's someone else's replacement. If you think about it, you can see that they'd rather have you replace your phone that way than get a new one on their dime ... Mark DoD #0105, R90/6 pilot, FAX: (206) 685-4045 ICBM: N 47 39'35" W 122 18'39" Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: New Cellular Phone w/o Service? Date: 25 Jun 1996 16:16:16 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University starta@primenet.com (John Starta) writes: > I recently dropped my Motorola cellular phone and need to replace it. > Obviously I already have service so I only need the phone itself. Are > there companies (i.e., mail order) where I can purchase a new Motorola > cellular phone at a reasonable price? Most carriers would replace the phone with a new one for little or nothing if you agree to their current offering. Last year my phone either was stolen or just plan vanished and I went to Air Touch and was able to get a new and much better one with the cost being very little since I was only charged the tax which my insurance company picked up. All I had to do was agree to another two year contact and since I was happy with the service I saw no problem with that. I'm sure the same would be with a damaged phone. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II and Macintoch computers. slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 19:54:32 -0700 From: aardvark@ni.net (David Whiteman) Subject: Re: New Cellular Phone w/o Service? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing you might consider is that if > you can drop out of your existing service without any penalty at this > point (because you met any agreement you had with the carrier where > the first phone is concerned) it would be perfectly legal to go to a > dealer and get a new phone with a new one year contract or whatever > is required to get the new phone for free or at some reduced price. PAT] Last year my car was broken into and my mom's cellular phone was stolen, three months into a one year contract. My mom called Airtouch directly, and they gave her a new phone free for extending the year contract a second year. They even waived the $49 charge that would have been charged if she were to have started a new contract fresh. ------------------------------ From: elitman@viaduct.com (Eric Litman) Subject: Re: Informal PRE - RFD comp.dcom.gsm or alt.cellular.gsm Date: 25 Jun 1996 19:55:26 GMT Organization: Viaduct, Inc. On Thu, 20 Jun 1996, Vittorio Gorrini (gorrini@ulb.ac.be) wrote: > alt.config I would like to have some feedback about: > 1) The real interest for such group [comp.dcom.gsm], > 2) Should be in alt.* or in comp.* ? > 2) Should be in alt.* or in comp.* ? I think this is the foundation for a good idea, but is limited in its scope. Of increasing interest both within the telecom newsgroups/mailing list and commercial marketplace are the breadth of PCS technologies and services, of which GSM is only one. More appropriately, the newsgroup should encompass each of the PCS technologies and would better serve its readership named *.pcs, not *.gsm. I put in my vote for comp.dcom.pcs. True, it's a break from the comp.dcom.telecom hierarchy, but given the growth potential for this group, it would be prudent to plan for an eventual split. comp.dcom.telecom.pcs.handsets is too long to type on a regular basis. > If someone more competent in the field that me (and with a better > English ...), is interested in being proponent (and helping in > writing RFD) I'll bw glad to cooperate with him. I'll be glad to help put this together, and will even step up to the job of maintaining the FAQ(s) once the groups are active. Eric A. Litman, CEO, Viaduct, Inc. http://www.viaduct.com/ Internet security and commerce consulting. PCS: (301) 254-0200 ------------------------------ From: kevin@eagle.ais.net (Kevin R. Ray) Subject: Re: Getting Spammed to Death Date: 26 Jun 1996 01:23:14 GMT Organization: American Information Systems, Inc. Ken Levitt (levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org) wrote: > In a recent development in spamming, my Internet to Fidonet Gateway is > taking a big hit. Someone is selling Internet mailing lists with > thousands of names. About 100 of them point to my gateway. > If this goes on much longer, I will have to shut down this gateway and > hundreds of people will loose E-Mail access to the Internet. > The address is hardwear@icanect.net and the toll free number is > 888.427.3932. Today (Saturday) I called the toll free number and got a > Here is what they are sending out: > > Authenticated sender is > > From: "Neil" > > To: hardwear@idt.net > > Subject: Jewelry for Computer Lovers > > Reply-To: hardwear@idt.net > > Hello, > > If you like jewelry and computers check out the WEB site > > You will not receive any more messages from us > > Thank you I too have been taking a hit with my site (UUCP fed). Since my site is considered "low volume" and billed as such too many hits of spamming could bump me up a class of service (in which case I will cancel). I will be going to a PPP connection (on demand) or a 56k leased line in the near future (UUCP will be going anyway). At that time I already have my filters setup to block well over 500 nets that are associated with spamming. That is what the net is coming to. Piss me off and your net doesn't exist to me anymore. The beginning of the breakdown is at hand... (and AOL will be the first to go I hope :-) BTW, hardwear has had their account deleted as I conversed with their upstreem feed (ios.com) on this exact email message coming in to my site recently. I have also been getting a LOT of traffic from gnn.com and aol.com. I have verbally talked with the administrative, technical, and zone contacts on overly obvious spams (ie: when they hit MY mailbox) on the affending sites and their feeds. It is worth my dime as a polite phone call goes further than email complaints and knowing that their account has been terminated helps. That or calling collect as Mr. I. Nic helps too (they answer that one :-). And when I get bored I will pick up the phone and inquire about the spammed product at their expense from every pay phone I see until the number is disconnected or someone else owns the number. I'm still calling about the hair re-growth a few times a day now... :-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 10:19:08 EDT From: dwpaxson@servtech.com (Dana W. Paxson) Subject: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn Mike Fox wrote: > Just make use of Ringmaster, or Distinctive Ring, or whatever. Here in > BellSouth territory, they haven't been charging hookup fees for Ringmaster. > So it can be used to get disposable phone numbers. Order a Ringmaster > number for your fax line, give the Ringmaster number to the scammer, > get the fax you want, and drop the service. You will only be out the > $3.50 fee for one month, or even less if you only keep it for a couple of > days and they pro-rate it. Subsequent scam faxes will get the "we're sorry, > the number you have reached is no longer in service" intercept. > It may not be worth doing this just to get one spam fax, and it's > probably terribly wasteful of NANP resources ... A neat idea, and it'll work for you, but there's a possible problem. Depending on how long the phone company takes to recycle the number you used, the subsequent assignee of that number can catch the fallout. Hardly fair. My wife inherited the phone number of a deadbeat, and continued for over a YEAR to receive harrassing calls from Citibank, looking for their money. Her number was unlisted/non-pub, and she didn't want to reissue it to all her family and friends. Rochester Tel was sympathetic but unhelpful. Citibank was, well, incapable of stopping its own representatives from continuing to make calls; apparently their database people (or maybe it was one of the big credit bureau's database people) couldn't find it in their hearts to correct things. Your suggestion is usable by deadbeats too. Dana Paxson [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Depending on the *exact nature* of what the phone was used for detirmines how long the number has to remain out of service before it can be used again. In one notorious case here in Chicago back in the 1950's a house of prostitution had a phone number assigned to it for more than thirty years (the operation had opened back about 1920 as a Speakeasy joint -- a place which sold alcohol in violation of Prohibition -- with male and female prostitutes available). It finally shut down for good when we had a reform mayor in 1952 by the name of Martin Kennelly. He made the police quit taking bribes from the proprietor (in cruder language we would say the 'madam') to stay open all those years. He did it because both the Republican and Democratic conventions were being held here that year on July 7 and July 21, 1952 respectively and Mayor Kennelly wanted things to 'look nice' when the bigshot politicians were here. Now this place got a hundred or more phone calls per day and the number was known around the world. Even some of the convention delegates remembered the place from the summer of 1944 when both political parties had convened here that year and they were looking forward to availing themselves again of the discrete services offered by a gracious staff of young men and ladies to their out of town visitors, offering relief from the tension and boredom of long winded political speeches, etc. But many of the Good Citizens felt that having a house of prostitution right across the street from the conventions (in those days the conventions were at the Chicago Stadium on Madison Street) was not a good thing, so Mayor Kennelly told the police to shut it down at least for the month of July, and the police raided the joint a few days before the Republican conventioneers were due to arrive. The {Chicago Tribune} the next day had pictures of the raid, showing the prostitutes being escorted into waiting police wagons, etc. Their liquor license was revoked and several illegal coin operated gambling devices were smashed up and hauled away. The madam was quoted in the {Tribune} saying "I always made my payments and I was never late a single month; why are they doing this, do the police want more money?" For *years* afterward, that phone number (now going to intercept) got a huge number of calls daily. Not only did the conventioneers that summer wonder what happened to the place, but so did businessmen all over the world. A businessman from Japan in Chicago in 1975 had that phone number in his address book; he said he had gotten it from other businessmen in Europe who had been to Chicago twenty or more years before that. A fellow in New York who published a book about 'places for tourists to visit' included that phone number in a book several years after the place had already been raided and shut down. I don't think Illinois Bell ever did reassign the number, at least not for probably thirty years or more. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Carpet Capital From: wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu (Wes Leatherock) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 96 20:24:00 GMT Organization: The University of Oklahoma scline@usit.net (Stanley Cline) wrote: [ ... much text deleted ... ] > As for COCOT's, there is one sitting right in front of BellSouth > Mobility's new Dalton office, just across the street from the > convenience store mentioned above. The previous lessee of the > building (only BellSouth is housed there now, and they obviously didn't > holler "OUT OUT DAMNED COCOT!") apparently didn't have the COCOT owner > pull the phone! If this had been a *BellSouth* LEC area and not > ALLTEL, I would not be amused -- I don't think BellSouth divisions > should house COCOTs (but with the telecom law deregulating coin service > as it does, who knows what will happen -- a BELLSOUTH payphone in > ALLTEL territory, maybe?!) I have seen Southwestern Bell pay phones in GTE territory in Texas. Wes Leatherock wes.leatherock@origins.bbs.uoknor.edu wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com ORIGINS BBS E-Mail, SysOps (Mike Shipp/Troy Carpenter), (405)325-5883 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 22:30:07 EDT From: Rich Szabo Subject: Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ummm, with all the glowing things you > have to say about Excel, I wonder if you would care to comment on the > FCC action taken against them recently due to slamming of customers? > Anyone could go from number eleven to number four if they did not > bother to get the permission of the people they switched over! I am > surprised Excel is not in first or second place! And here are a few > more exclamation points to match all of yours!!!!!!!! PAT] ROFL ROFL ROFL !! -----------------------------^^^^^^^^ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why, thank you! Seriously, we do have one regular participant here who is an Excel agent and I gather a rather good one. I've been hoping to find in my mail something from him giving either his own or the corporation's response to the action by the FCC. I am interested in Excel's response if any is going to be given. PAT] ------------------------------ From: franz@uci.edu (Michael Franz) Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 00:17:53 -0700 Organization: UC Irvine In article , Nancy Gold wrote: > My Caller-ID box sits in wait, as it has since May 20th. Even better: my caller-ID box sits in wait, but last Friday I received this very nice letter from PacBell stating that due to old exchange equipment, CID would not be offered in my area. Michael Franz (714 856 xxxx) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what *are* they doing about Caller-ID in California now. What is the latest word as of today, June 26? PAT] ------------------------------ From: benlev@aol.com (BenLev) Subject: Re: 888 Deployment Not Date: 25 Jun 1996 09:59:23 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: benlev@aol.com (BenLev) Sounds like an old PBX to me. There is no legal requirement to support 888, and some of the old PBXs can't support it. The work around is to go outside, or to call the operator and ask her to dial for you. Otherwise you can get an outside line with MCI and then dial from there. This is an old story. Many PBX's couldn't handle the new area code that don't have a 0 or 1 as the middle digit. They required "forklift" upgrades. ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 01:00:00 GMT > Most of the RBOCs have been screaming for years that modem usage screws up > their message traffic models, and as a consequence the cost of providing > telephone service is increased because of us people who stay connected for > hours or even days at a time. BellSouth has even made a formal statement > that Internet access pricing is going to have to be measured service in > order to reduce the abuses. ISDN data rates are surcharged in many areas > just for this reason. This serves to remind us that the RBOCs are dinosaurs with their heads stuck in the sand. (An appealing if mixed metaphor.) Do data users really need to be hooked to their network providers 24 hours per day? Of course not. They need bursts of bandwidth, typically separated by long periods of quiet. For example, my wife's Mac has a permanent connection, but uses only a few seconds of network traffic every 20 minutes to check for e-mail. Recall that an ISDN BRI line provides two 64Kb bearer "B" channels and a 16Kb packet switched "D" channel. Connections on the B channels are set up by exchanging messages on the D channel, and setup is supposed to be quite fast, like a second or less. ISDN PRI is the same except there are 23 B channels and the D channel is 64Kb. So for your typical Internet user, you could sit there with both B channels idle until there are some packets to send, at which point you connect a B channel and start sending data. If the first B channel gets saturated, you could turn on the other B channel as well. After a period of quiescence, say 30 seconds, you turn off a B channel. For low packet rates (pings or keep-alives, for example) you don't even need a B channel, since the D channel has considerable spare capacity beyond that needed for the setup messages. This brings the hold time for the B channels down from the length of an entire on-line session (hours) to the length of a network transaction (seconds for most WWW and e-mail, minutes for FTP). Note that this works equally well for server systems as for client systems, since the ISP can open a B channel when a request comes in as easily as the client can open one when a request goes out. This is technically very straightforward. But nobody does it. Why? Because the bozos at the RBOCs have provided and priced ISDN to make it maximally unattractive. Call setup is slow, D channel traffic is unavailable or grossly overpriced, and B channel traffic is often charged per call and per minute unless you turn all of your ISDN users into a Centrex group, in which case the per-call and per-minute charges magically go away. A sensible RBOC would price B channel traffic at, say, $0.0001/minute with six second charging, and D channel packets at a comparably low price. Then they'd colocate a router with a bunch of PRIs next to the phone switch and offer all the local ISPs demand ISDN dial-up service. The ISPs could get out of the thankless job of maintaining modem banks, customers would see better service than they have now (since they could stay virtually connected all the time), and the telco could make some money. Once you have this in place, the upgrade from ISDN to xDSL is relatively straightforward since you have the router to handle the xDSL traffic. But nooooo ... they'd rather treat ISDN as overpriced POTS, and whine when people don't want that. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - Stanford econ prof ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 96 23:51:00 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > The call still failed, so I called 1 800 MARISAT and got the same > operator. He reconfirmed the seven digit fax number for the ship, and > then asked me whether I was sure that the ship was in the Pacific > Ocean. I told him that it was an Alaskan cruise -- guess what, my > geography lessons to date have been wrong -- Alaska is in the Indian > Ocean. I used the code for the Indian Ocean and the fax went through. I don't think there's anything wrong with your geography. My understanding is that INMARSAT uses three satellites, and the "ocean code" tells it which satellite to route the call to. Sounds like Alaska (or at least that part of Alaska) is in the footprint of the Indian Ocean satellite. This makes some sense since the south Indian ocean is pretty much empty, while the south Pacific is full of Australia, New Zealand, and a bunch of islands, so the Indian ocean satellite is probably aimed to cover a more northerly range than the Pacific one. Why they told you to route the call via MCI is a mystery to me; AT&T has offered INMARSAT service (for a low, low $10/minute) for many years. Perhaps they wanted to save you some money, since MCI charges only $9.99. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American jobs." - Stanford econ prof ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #311 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jun 26 13:48:07 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id NAA23436; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:48:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:48:07 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606261748.NAA23436@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #312 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 96 13:48:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 312 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers (Mark Propp) Re: Phone History Question (Ed Kleinhample) Re: Technical Support From USR (Ed Kleinhample) Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (Jeff Hersh) Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (Gary Morris) Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (Markus Aberg) Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (Steve Bagdon) Re: International 800 Numbers (Steve Hagar) Re: International Dialing 1960's Style (turner7@pacsibm.org) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mpropp@advtech.uswest.com (Mark Propp) Subject: Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers Date: 26 Jun 1996 10:41:12 -0600 Organization: U S West Technologies, Inc. Reply-To: mpropp@cris.com Stuff about Excel deleted ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ummm, with all the glowing things you > have to say about Excel, I wonder if you would care to comment on the > FCC action taken against them recently due to slamming of customers? > Anyone could go from number eleven to number four if they did not > bother to get the permission of the people they switched over! I am > surprised Excel is not in first or second place! And here are a few > more exclamation points to match all of yours!!!!!!!! PAT] Pat, From what I read this slamming involved two customers in California. Given 100,000+ Excel Independent Reps, and three million some customers, the slamming of two customers is unfortunate, but hardly a real big deal or surprising. It is hard to control the actions of every independent rep. It is not like Excel itself was doing or encouraging the slamming. I have seen other FCC actions for slamming against other phone companies more than once this year already (including at least two of the so-called "big three"), and some of it sounded more "systematic" rather than the actions of independent reps. Mark Propp mpropp@cris.com US West Advanced Technologies; Boulder, CO email: mpropp@uswest.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ummm, I think a few more than two were involved. The FCC does not take action when two customers are involved. They usually require a very large number of subscribers. And if there were only two, don't you think $80,000 is a bit steep for a fine? PAT] ------------------------------ From: edhample@sprynet.com Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:46:15 -0700 Subject: Re: Phone History Question The first modular installations that I remember seeing where in the house that my parents had built in Brandon, Florida (GTE land) in 1975. The phones (leased from GTE) where of the Automatic Electric "styleline" (or something like that) series - two-piece compact units with the dial (touch-tone) in the handset and a base containing some electronics and the ringer. The phones where completely modular - base to wall, and base to handset. One of the three units even had a modular socket in the base for the connection to the wall. The other units were hard-wired to the wall cord (which was terminated with a modular plug). Even though the installed phones where of the touch-tone variety, and actually did produce DTMF, the local switch converted these tones to pulses to actually dial the number. My parents didn't have true touch-tone dialing until several years later - about 1982 if memory serves. This quite a shock to us in 1975, as we had moved from the boondocks of western Pennsylvania (Laurelville, PA), where the local cooperative telco (Laurel Highlands Telephone Cooperative) had provided full touch-tone service for several years. It was also surprising to me that our telephone service in PA had survived year after year of wicked snow storms in the winter and torential rains in the summer with very few outages - The GTE service in Brandon went out everytime it rained. Thank God GTE has improved (?) its quality of service in 20 years. Ed Kleinhample - edhample@sprynet.com ------------------------------ From: edhample@sprynet.com Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:46:28 -0700 Subject: Re: Technical Support From USR jetcon@astral.magic.ca (Jerry Tenenbaum) writes: >- the calling modem (must be a 14.4) acquires dial tone and dials the > number (always DTMF). > >- the remote line rings once and the modem answers the call. > >- on the speaker of the calling party is heard: > > * the initial answer back tone (a pure tone with a bit of a bum, bum, > bum to it); > * the normal rushing tone (shuuuuuh aproximatly two seconds); > * then it goes to a pure tone again (with no beat to it). The signalling sequence that you describe does not sound like the typical V.32/V.32bis handshake - there are typically several blips, bleeps, and chirps during the various handshakes to establish a high-speed connection. The pure tone followed by the "rushing" tone is more typical of a 2400 or 1200 bps handshake. Based on this, I would start by resetting the modem to factory default settings (send an ATZ3) and verifying the DTE-DCE baud rates (host to modem) - for a 14.4kbps modem, your DTE-DCE rate should be at least 19,200 baud (38,400 if your hardware will support it). The remote end should be set similarly. Although it is the default setting, I would issue an "AT&B1" to both modems to lock the DTE-DCE rate (as opposed to adjusting to match the DCE-DCE rate negotiated with the remote modem). I have used numerous USR Sportster modems of the 14.4 and 28.8 variety. While the 28.8 Sportsters have been a little flackey - earlier ones required a ROM or flash upgrade to operate reliably at v.34 rates, the 14.4s have given good service. One thing to keep in mind is that the answer timeout value (S7) should be set to at least 90 seconds when dealing with USR modems. This is because most USR 14.4s still try the old USR Courier proprietary handshake sequences before trying the standard handshakes. Good Luck, Ed Kleinhample - edhample@sprynet.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 11:38am From: Hersh Jeff Subject: Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship On June 24, David Whiteman wrote: > This evening I was trying to send a fax to my parents who are on a cruise > in the Alaska sea area. Believing that the Alaska sea was in the Pacific > Ocean, and wanting to use AT&T I dialed 10288 (for AT&T) 011 (for > international) 872 (for Pacific Ocean) and then the seven digit number for > the ship's fax number. Could the phone number/area code assigned to the ship depend on where the ship is registered, home-ported, or where the cruise line's home office is? ------------------------------ From: garym@cts.com (Gary Morris) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 09:12:14 -0700 Subject: Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship In comp.dcom.telecom is write: > This evening I was trying to send a fax to my parents who are on a cruise > in the Alaska sea area. Believing that the Alaska sea was in the Pacific > Ocean, and wanting to use AT&T I dialed 10288 (for AT&T) 011 (for > international) 872 (for Pacific Ocean) and then the seven digit number for > the ship's fax number. > I told him that it was an Alaskan cruise -- guess what, my > geography lessons to date have been wrong -- Alaska is in the Indian > Ocean. I used the code for the Indian Ocean and the fax went through. > [TELECM Digest Editor's Note: How could the water around Alaska be > considered part of the Indian Ocean? The "country codes", 872 (Pacific Ocean) and 873 (Indian Ocean) select a particular geosynchronous satellite, not a land (or sea) political boundry (as with other country codes). What matters is the coverage areas of the satellites, not the name of the body of water they were in. The satellites are over the equator, with two over the Atlantic Ocean, one over the Pacific Ocean and one of the Indian Ocean. The coverage area of adjacent satellites overlap. Gary Morris RACES DRO/Digital Comm Internet: garym@races.sandiego.ca.gov Emergency Planning Detail Packet: KK6YB @ K6JCC.#SOCA.CA.USA.NA San Diego Sheriff's Department WWW URL: http://www.cts.com/browse/garym ------------------------------ From: Markus.Aberg@iki.fi (Markus Aberg) Subject: Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship Date: 26 Jun 1996 06:42:21 GMT Organization: Putadas S.A. Reply-To: Markus.Aberg@iki.fi > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It occurred to me after I wrote the > earlier note that perhaps the vessle was *registered* or normally > on duty in the Indian Ocean and that this voyage near Alaska was > a special situation, with the vessle to be returning soon to its > normal place or port. It would be understandable if they did not want > to change the phone numbers and radio equipment, for the one special > voyage out of its regular territory -- if that is the reason. PAT] This would certainly contradict the information printed in the Helsinki phone company phonebook under "Satellite phonecalls": "The caller has to know in which satellite area the inmarsat-phone is". There is also a small picture showing the different areas and their numbers: 874 Western Atlantic (approx between USA west coast and Italy) 871 Eastern Atlantic (approx between Texas, USA and Pakistan) 873 Indian Ocean (approx between Portugal and Japan) 872 Pacific Ocean (approx between Indonesia and Mexico) The areas overlap and I remeber seeing a recommendation somewhere to just dial the different zone numbers until the call gets through. If the more-or-less official limit for the 873 zone is Japan, then a ship cruising from Alaska could be quite near this zone. Markus.Aberg@iki.fi ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:42:12 -0500 From: bagdon@rust.net (S and K Bagdon) Subject: Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship > This evening I was trying to send a fax to my parents who are on a cruise > in the Alaska sea area. Believing that the Alaska sea was in the Pacific > Ocean, and wanting to use AT&T I dialed 10288 (for AT&T) 011 (for > international) 872 (for Pacific Ocean) and then the seven digit number for > the ship's fax number. This connection failed, so I called the AT&T > operator for help (10288 0). I was transferred to another operator who > told me to use 10222 (MCI) instead of 10288, and to call 1 800 MARISAT if > I have any more trouble. I never heard of AT&T refering business to MCI > before. > The call still failed, so I called 1 800 MARISAT and got the same > operator. He reconfirmed the seven digit fax number for the ship, and > then asked me whether I was sure that the ship was in the Pacific > Ocean. I told him that it was an Alaskan cruise -- guess what, my > geography lessons to date have been wrong -- Alaska is in the Indian > Ocean. I used the code for the Indian Ocean and the fax went through. > Third surpising thing: Out of curiosity I called the MARISAT operator > (the same one answered) again to get the rates; he told me to dial > 10222-0. The MCI operator told me to dial 10288-0. The AT&T operator > subsequently transferred me back to that same MARISAT operator who > quoted the rate. > Fourth surprise: the total cost of sending the fax (about $35) is > cheaper than sending the documents to the next scheduled stop for the > cruise ship by courier, mainly because none of the US courier service > ship there directly and a second Alaskan courier would be need. > Furthermore, faxing to the next port, even though it is still a > landline direct call, would be more expensive because the port agent > charges a fee for receiving faxes which my parents would be charged -- > the ship itself charges no direct fee. > [TELECM Digest Editor's Note: How could the water around Alaska be > considered part of the Indian Ocean? To the south/southwest of the > Alaska coast would surely be the Pacific Ocean; what about the water > of the north/northwest coast, in the Arctic region? How could the > Indian Ocean possibly fit into this? I guess my geography knowledge > must be poor also. PAT] I went through InMarSat heck about two or three years ago trying to learn about this to explain to management what the problem was, and am finally glad I can share my misery! There are four InMarSat Satellites - AOER (Atlantic Ocean East Region), AOWR (Atlantic Ocean West Region), POR (Pacific Ocean Region) and IOR (Indian Ocean Reagion). The name of the satellite 'generally' refers to the location of where the satellite is, in geosynchronous orbit. I used to have maps, but it's pretty accurate. For reference, AOER and AOWR are both serviced just outside of New York City, POR is serviced somewhere around San Deigo, CA, and IOR is serviced by a facility in Turkey. AOER, AOWR and POR are 'directly' linked to the US phone system -- since they are physically in the US. IOR (in Turkey) is linked via fiber optic to New York(?). I don't believe it goes through the Turkey phone system, except for whatever Turkey is involved in the fiber optic run. BTW, one thing you didn't mention is that each of the four satellites has it's own code - 871, 872, 873, and 874, I believe, but forget which code goes with which satellite. Please note -- break out your globe, hold a golf ball a few feet from the globe, and you'll realize that a boat in the Alaska sea has a 'line of sight' to two or three of the four satellites. Last I checked, most earth station terminals have either 'best signal' or 'preferred signal' capability -- you can take the strongest signal, or the preferred signal. If the IOR satellite was the preferred and *not* the best, that was a big mistake for faxing -- a few times the fiber optic line from Turkey to the US has dropped, and the call took two (!) satellite hops to get to the US (boat, satellite, Turkey, satellite, New York) -- death for faxes, caused by the time delay from the two satellite hops. Last time this happened, I had to tell Marisat they had a problem. I would hold out for POR until the signal degraded badly enough, even if the IOR signal was better, to make sure that the signal was going to a relay earth station *physically* in the US. OK, every country has it's own service provider and is welcome to use the satellite, but not every country does and might route their calls through the service provider of another country. There is both a 'preferred' landline service provider (to get the call from a landline to the relay earth station), and a 'monopolized' relay service provider (to get the call from the relay earth station to the satellite. There is only one service provider from the satellite to the earth station on the boat, drilling rig, portable or other earth station equipment - itself. For countries with government monopolized telecommunications organizations, the landline and relay earth stations bodies might be the same. In the US, the 'preferred' landline service provider is (was?) AT&T, but might have been open to competition in the last two years. Previously, you *could* use MCI to make an InMarSat call, but it would go from your landline to MCI, from MCI to AT&T, from AT&T to Marisat, then to the satellite and then to the earth station on the boat. No matter who you used, you ended up going through AT&T -- some carriers might have struck a good deal, to charge 80% of what AT&T would have to the customer, then pocketed the other 20%. So what happens if you are in another country, trying to call the boat in Alaska, such as Canada? People making calls while 'physically' in Canada will use a 'preferred' landline providoe (probably Bell Canada), and a 'monopolized' relay service providor (probably Marisat, or it's Canada subsidiary). But there are smaller countries in other continents (Europe, Africa, South America) that don't have relay earth station capability. I believe that Belgium was one of these countries, but they might have finally gotten their InMarSat realy earth station up -- you would place a call in Belgium, it would be forwarded to another country (England or France, last time I checked), and the realy earth station in *that* country would link it up to the InMarSat satellite. If you are on land, it's relatively easy. All calls from land to the boat go through the 'customer preferred' land-line carrier (eg: MCI), then to the 'InMarSat perferred' land line carrier (eg: AT&T), then to that country's InMarSat-M relay earth station (eg: Marisat in the US), then to the satellite, then to the earth station on the boat. BUT, if you are on the boat, you can *really* screw yourself up. You can force any call going *out* (from the boat to land) to go through a particular country (and hence a particular relay providor). For instance, you probably wouldn't care about incoming calls -- the person placing the calls gets charged, not you. But calls going *out* you get charged for -- so if you can pinch some pennies, you can pass the charge along to the customer on the boat and pass the savings along to the agent (on the boat). So all calls going *out* can have the 'country of relay' specified either from the earth station terminal, or from the DTMF dialing strings when dialing. I believe one particular example was that Marisat (using AT&T) in the USA would charge $10/minute, but the InMarSat-M providor in Australia (using an unknown land-line providor) would only charge $7/min. So you would be using the same satellite (AEOR, for instance), but would specify the 'country of relay' (which could be on the other side of the world), and save yourself $3/min. To answer your questions, it is entirely possible that the ship in the Alaska sea would be using the IOR (Indian Ocean Region) satellite. I'd have to break out my old maps of the InMarSat system, and cross-reference them to the world land map. It might not have been the best signal, but it *might* have been the best signal, and the earth station on the boat might have gone 'best signal', not 'preferred signal'. You should have been able to contact the cruise company, and they should have an up to the minute location (longitude and lattitude) of the boat, as well as which InMarSat satellite they are using at the time (POR or IOR). As per carriers, the last time I checked, *everything* goes through AT&T, so you can use any provider you want. You might actually have saved some money using MCI over AT&T, if the MCI negotiated rate is good enough (in bulk purchases by MCI from AT&T). The office I was at wasn't using AT&T, and they had to tell the bargain carrier specifically to permit InMarSat calls. They basically didn't sound like they knew what they were talking about. The first question they should have asked was 'which satellite ocean region is the boat in'. *Not* what water ocean region the boat is in, but which satellite ocean region the boat is in. InMarSat must have come down in the last few years, if you were charged 'only' $35 for the fax. Last time I used it, it was $10/minute, with no per-minute billing. A good sized fax would cost $100 (10 minutes). Steve B. bagdon@rust.net (h) USFMDDKT@ibmmail.com (w) http://www.rust.net/~bagdon Katharine aNd Steve (KNS) ------------------------------ From: sdhagar@aol.com (SDHagar) Subject: Re: International 800 Numbers Date: 26 Jun 1996 12:07:52 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: sdhagar@aol.com (SDHagar) The international service that is being discussed (IAC+800-XXX-XXXX) is known as UIFN: Universal International Freephone Number, and is described in detail in ITU-T Recommendation E.169. Introduction of the UIFN service also includes a reservation process for those people who may now have a toll-free number that they wish to expand to international locations. The initial plan was for the ITU registrar to begin accepting requests on 2-Jan-97; this date may be changing. If you have a number that you want to register, contact your 800 service provider to get all the details of the reservation process, and have your service provider prepare the appropriate submission to the national ROA, and on to the ITU. Steve Hagar shagar@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: turner7@pacsibm.org (TUrner-7) Subject: Re: International Dialing 1960's Style Date: 26 Jun 1996 16:19:06 GMT Organization: PACS IBM SIG BBS It was typical in the old Bell System to phase in technological improvements by a trial run in one location before rolling it out nationwide. Changes could be made based on the results of the experiment. For instance, around 1960 Bell wanted to try electronic ringers, as they'd use less ringing power than mechanical ones, and would be helpful in the new ESS they were developing. They converted a part of town in Illinois (ironically served by a manual exchange), giving the subscribers phones with electronic ringers. The experiment showed problems with the ringers of that time. For long distance dialing, operators got the ability first, then customers. For example, after WW II, local operators got the ability to dial long distance instead of forwarding the call to a special long distance operator who would "build" the call using trunk circuits. The experienced gained was important to customer dialed long distance Likewise, as Mark notes, local operators got the ability to dial directly overseas calls rather than using a special overseas operator. Interestingly, a look at Bell Labs RECORD of the early 1970s shows a lot of small developing nations being added to the overseas service -- before then, such places couldn't be reached apparently. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #312 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jun 26 15:32:12 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id PAA04988; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:32:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:32:12 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606261932.PAA04988@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #313 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 96 15:32:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 313 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (James Madsen) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Bob Goudreau) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (David Breneman) Telego Correction (Gary Navitsky) Re: Phone History Question (Marc Haber) Re: PC Modems and Stutter Dial Tone (Kevin R. Ray) Re: Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today (Christopher Ambler) Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access (Stephen Satchell) Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers (John Higdon) Information Wanted on French Telecom Organization (msal765@aol.com) Train Telephones (turner7@picsibm.org) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:21:25 -0700 From: jmadsen@nextwavetel.com (James Madsen) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? stu@best.com (Stu Jeffery) wrote: > In TELECOM Digest V16 #301, Andrew Green writes: >> but the wording of this question still >> seems to imply that it would require three trucks and a bulldozer to >> install, whereas in actual fact I think they would simply hang it on >> the nearest telephone pole and no one would be the wiser ... > while Sir Topham Hatt writes: >> It's a blatent lie perpetrated by the local PCS industry. The towers >> are in fact no smaller. I regullarly get to hear the local PCS scum >> pleading their case for 100-200' monopoles in front of the county >> planning commision. > thus our Esteemed Editor writes: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your reply seems to be completely at >> odds with that of Andrew Greene who participated in a PCS experiment >> here in Chicago in 1993, as per the earlier message. Can we perhaps >> get a resolution on the differences? PAT] > I think I can help, but it won't be short! There is a lot of confusion as > to what PCS means. The original term was Personnel Communications Service > and it was meant to mean an advanced cordless telephone. This advanced > cordless phone had the following key features: > 1. It was cheap (the instrument cost about $100 > 2. It had very long battery life (couple of days between charges) > 3. It was small and light. > 4. It had toll quality voice (as good as your wired phone) > 5. It could be use away from your home, on the streets, etc. > Several radio technologies have been developed that meet these > requirements. The more well know include: > a. CT-2 (Cellular Telephone Rev 2) This is the system that Andrew > Green trialed in Chicago. (Hi Andrew!) > This is also called Bibop in France, Green in Holland, and > was a roaring success in Hong Kong. > b. DECT (Digital European Cordless Telephone) growing in Europe. > c. PHS (Personnel Handiphone System) growing rapidly in Japan > d. PACS (Personnel Access Communication System) a technology developed > by Bellcore; now being aggressively pushed by Hughes, Siemens > but so far without wide deployment. If you flip though current > wireless trade journals you will see ads for the PACS EDGE. > Now here comes the problem. If you carefully look at the list of features, > (1 to 5) you will notice it does not include a requirement to operate in > your car. That omission is not an oversight. The requirement for vehicular > speed operation was specifically dropped from the wish list, because this > one factor causes tremendous additional complications that in turn > translate into increased costs. If the radio technology is going to work > with cars, then coverage range has to be increase from several hundred feet > to at least several thousand feet and most likely a few miles. In a long reply comment to Stu Jeffery's e-mail of the roaring success of CT-2, I would offer that CT-2 has been a roaring *failure* in both Canada, UK, Germany and Hong Kong. Specifically, England had four but they are not operational anymore. Several operators in Canada were licensed in Canada but gave CT-2 up. Germany had plans to start one but gave it up. For Hong Kong ... Back in the November 1994 Teleresources Newsletter there was an interesting article titled: "The Shine Comes off TELEPOINT in Hong Kong". Teleresources, a Sydney based newsletter discusses an interview with Mike Pilgrim, the CEO of Pacific Telelink, the operator of a Hong Kong TELEPOINT system, one of three 'low-tier' based services operating in Hong Kong. In this article Pilgrim is very critical of Hong Kong CT2 deployments (including his own system!). Some key comments: Teleresources: "Despite having reached 175,000 users, the largest group of CT2 users in the world, the Hong Kong market has almost stalled...". "The problem is that this [high rate of] churn is not between the telepoint operators but rather from CT2 to Cellular". Teleresources, on subscriber equipment subsidies: "This has lead to the ridiculous situation [in Hong Kong] where a numeric pager now costs more than a CT2 handset. To achieve this level Pilgrim claimed that the operators were subsidizing CT2 handsets by between 50 and 80 percent". Pilgrim/Pacific Telelink describes what he perceives as the basis for the problem: "Customers want more coverage and they want it everywhere. Yet the high cost of providing blanket coverage using microcell technology is prohibitive at least in Hong Kong. Renting base station sites is expensive, so are line rental charges, depreciation costs and so on ..." Teleresources: "The other and more fundamental problem has been the failure of Pacific Telelink's positioning of their telepoint system as the 'personal phone booth' ..." The article also points out the serious limitiations of CT2 in the area of ubiquitious coverage: Pilgrim/Pacific Telelink: "A paged message can be received anywhere in Hong Kong inside and outside. If a customer receives a paged message, they instinctively try to respond with their CT2 handset. There are bound to be times therefore that they can't respond to a paging call because there's no telepoint base station. Telepoint then loses its value and customer resentment sets in". Pilgrim then states, that despite agressive marketing by Japanese vendors, he views the same problems as besetting the Japanese PHS systems. Then, in what seems like a final nail in the CT2 coffin, Pilgrim discusses the costs of providing full coverage, as well as the costs of relocating base stations. This is significant as Hong Kong has a tremendous telephony infrastructure. Backhaul lines for CT2, even though costly, at least exist in HK. Contrast the comments below with the infrastructure issues inherent in an Indian or Brazilian deployment: Pilgrim: "Because of the volatile property market and a booming construction industry, we're having to relocate something like 10 percent of our base stations every year - and that's without the problems of overlap between cell sites and frequency planning. On average, it takes three months to relocate a site during which time a hole exists in coverage. Whilst this is undesirable from a CT2 perspective, it could prove a major disadvantage to future telepoint operators that promise blanket coverage with handoff and an incoming call facility". At the moment, [Hong Kong] telepoint operators support anything between three and five thousand base stations each and that is not enough. For a service to provide more extensive coverage and overlap between cell sites for handoff, a far greater number of base station sites will be required, probably between 10,000 and 15,000". If a low-mobility, microcellular solution is not viable in a Hong Kong, with extremely high population densities, as well as developed infrastructure, it seems even less likely to be successful in the United States. Further, on February 9, 1996, Reuters reported ... Hutchison Whampoa Ltd is considering options for its CT2 mobile phone unit including shutting the unit down, a spokeswoman said on Friday. utchison unit Hutchison Telecom has around 60,000 subscribers to CT2, a mobile phone that only makes outgoing calls in limited zones. It has recently lost about 20,000 CT2 subscribers who have migrated to other companies or to Hutchison's other mobile technology, the spokeswoman told Reuters. "They (management) are considering the future of CT2," she said. "We have no exact plans on when to shut down CT2," she said. Hutchison has around 70,000 subscribers to its Global System for Mobile (GSM) cellular system and around 11,000 CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) mobile phone system. ------------------ In regard to PHS, it has grown to 2% penetration (certainly not dramatic by US standards of 14%), and already the spectral inefficiencies of PHS are showing, so that Wireless Business & Finance reported on May 8, 1996, that Japan may adopt CDMA for its future wireless services: Japanese telecom authorities have decided to take a look at whether to adopt code division multiple access (CDMA) as an air interface standard -- a surprising move for a country that has prided itself on developing its own standard for wireless voice communications. The action reflects renewed concerns that the fast-growing cellular market will hit capacity constraints within a few years. The popularity of Japan's personal handyphone system services (WB&F, March 13) may put a further strain on capacity. Against this backdrop, an arm of the government's Telecommunications Council last week recommended that the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications consider adopting CDMA because of the capacity gains it is said to afford over other technologies, including Japan's own 1.5 GHz personal digital cellular standard. ----------------- That leaves PACS as the sole standard bearer of low-tier PCS. Unfortunately for PACS, the A, B, & C block PCS winners in the USA have collectrively bid over $17 billion for the equivalent of 750 million POPs. Only GCI which won 0.2 million of the 750 million total has indicated any likelihood of using PACS. If this 0.026% penetration of PACS holds, then it may by a bit difficult for vendors supporting PACS to obtain meaningful manufacturing economies of scale. Stu Jeffery goes on to write: > So when the dust settles, if you want a system that will work at vehicular > speeds, you end up with the technology that is used in cellular today. > The main cellular type technologies being deployed in PCS today are: > a. PCS-1900 (This is GSM shifted to 1900 MHz) > b. Upbanded IS-136 (North American TDMA) This is what you get today > if you have a digit cellular phone. > c. Upbanded IS-95 CDMA. This is the spread spectrum technology that's > been experiencing a slow and often delayed birth. It is supposed > to be commercial late this year. > d. IS-661 - This is Omnipoints technology that won them a pioneer > preference. Omnipoint considers their technology also a cordless > type as described at the beginning of this memo. > So who is deploying what technology today? > In PCS bands A, B and C High Tier has been selected by about 90 percent of > the winners. The specific High Tier technology choices are: > CDMA - the big winner as to selection, but no one > has commerical PCS operation > PCS-1900 (North American GSM) and IS-136 (North American TDMA) > are close to being tied for second place. New digital technologies have seen slow initial roll-outs. Specifically, IS-136 is *not* what one has gotten in the US with a digital cellular phone. The TDMA flavor available has been IS-54 which suffers from notorious weak voice quality, so much so that it has been frequently marketed at a discount to analog in order that subscribers will use it. IS-136 promises to bring a digital control channel to TDMA and improve its voice quality. Time will tell. Unfortunately for those who've invested in a IS-54 TDMA handset, they are not forward compatible to IS-136. It's notable among A, B, & C license winners, only AT&T Wireless and SBC have announced any intention to deploy IS-136. BellSouth, who has significant IS-54 TDMA experience, chose not to deploy IS-54/IS-136 TDMA for its PCS licenses. CDMA was not commercially available in 1995 as many predicted, but as of June, 1996, CDMA *is* commercial in several markets. Hutchison's Hong Kong network will have 60,000 CDMA subs by 7/96; Korea Mobile Telecom and Shinsegi have both launched commercial CDMA networks in Korea, each with 10K+ subs. BANM announced its initial CDMA service in Trenton NJ/Bucks County PA in 4/96. AirTouch launched its CDMA service on the PowerBand name in Los Angeles 5/96. Unlike TDMA launches, AirTouch sees CDMA digital as a premium service to analog. As noted above, high tier PCS appears to be the choice of 99.98% of the PCS POPs won to date. Best Regards, Jim Madsen NextWave Telecom, Inc jmadsen@nextwavetel.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:59:17 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? > Ed Kleinhample (edhample@sprynet.com) writes: > In the Tampa area, the GTE "telego" PCS system has been available > for bout a year. A friend who lives in Pasco County invested in one of > the "TeleGo" phones and was rather disappointed. This phones is the > combination "cordless"-like unit that behaves much like a cordless > when it can contact it's basestation, or like a cellular when it is > beyond the range of it's base. I think that you have fallen victim to GTE's propagandistic attempt to confuse people about what "PCS" means. The local GTE Cellular One franchise here also talks a lot about "PCS" in its advertisements, but when you read the smaller print, you see that all they mean is "Personal Communications Solutions", which is just an empty-headed feel-good marketing weasel phrase that encompasses all their cellular offerings, including TeleGo (which some friends of mine tried and hated). The mobile technology used in TeleGo is nothing more than the usual [N]AMPS standard used in ordinary bread & butter cellular phones. The "PCS" under discussion in the Digest stands for (I think) "Personal Communications System", and refers to a number of completely new digital wireless technologies. Not the same thing at all as GTE's misuse of the abbreviation. Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ From: david.breneman@attws.com (David Breneman) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: 26 Jun 1996 17:44:20 GMT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. In article hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes: Deletions ... > 'Intrusive' is a matter of taste. Do you want a few major eyesores, or > a whole bunch of minor eyesores? In Japan, one company mounts their PCS > antennas on the tops of their phone booths (which they own). > In the Middle Ages, people built very pretty pager antennas -- they were > called church bell towers, and operated on sound instead of radio. So > there's some precedent for building prettier antennas! This isn't a snide remark, I'm genuinely curious: Why is a church steeple inherently "prettier" than an antenna tower? Why is it more or less desirable in your neighborhood? I don't think an antenna tower would be any more attractive if it were decorated with a bunch of added-on filligree, which is how the otherise plain masonry towers of old cathedrals were "prettied-up." Would a Roman Revival, Tudor, Rococo or Art Noveau antenna tower be more attractive than a functional steel mast? David Breneman Unix System Administrator AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. david.breneman@attws.com Ph: +1-206-803-7362 Fx: +1-206-803-7410 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 96 12:36:48 -0400 From: Gary Navitsky Subject: Telego Correction I just wanted to make a correction to a statement one of the readers made in an earlier Digest concerning Telego. It is NOT a PCS system. It simply works as a regular analog cellular phone when out of range from the base unit in the home. I think the problems he mentioned are because of the phone, and not necessarily the Mobilnet system. *** My views here do not represent those of my employer *** Thanks, Gary Navitsky CS-CBSS DBA/DMM x3127 ------------------------------ From: s_haber@ira.uka.de (Marc Haber) Subject: Re: Phone History Question Date: 26 Jun 1996 10:57:51 GMT Organization: University of Karlsruhe, Germany In article , Jon Parro wrote: > Does anyone know when they stopped hardwiring phones and started > installing phone jacks (in Southern California, particularly)? I hope this will be a matter of interest for you, but in Germany they started installing phone jacks in the mid 80s. There was legislation before that stated that if you had a telephone, you had to be reachable at all times, so you had to have one telephone hardwired. Other telephones could be movable. They used ADO phone jacks that were rather clumsy to handle and converted to the current TAE jack in about 1986. Modular jacks aren't used by German Telekom. Phone manufacturers use modular jacks to connect the phone cable to the phone and to connect the receiver to the phone as it is done in the U.S. BTW, up until the early 90s, you couldn't buy phones -- you had to rent them from the telco (which was and still is one company in a monopoly situation). We _have_ modular jacks for ISDN :-) Greetings from Germany, Marc Haber s_haber@ira.uka.de Karlsruhe, Germany Fon: *49 721 966 32 15 Nordisch by Nature Fax: *49 721 966 31 29 ------------------------------ From: kevin@eagle.ais.net (Kevin R. Ray) Subject: Re: PC Modems and Stutter Dial Tone Date: 26 Jun 1996 15:28:55 GMT Organization: Bob Ray & Associates, Inc. Reply-To: kevin@bobray.kray.com David Yewell (yewell@ix.netcom.com) wrote: > I subscribe to telco provided voicemail (The Message Center), and I > also use the same line for my pc modem. My modem will not dial when > the stutter dial tone is present. Does anyone know a way to get around > this problem (other than clearing all the messages and removing the > stutter dial tone?) > Is there a modem I can use which will dial anyhow? > What do alarm company modems do when they are attached to a line which > is also on a voice mail line? How do they seize the line? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think your modem should have a provision > for what is known (used to be known?) as 'blind dialing'. That is, > instead of waiting for what it recognizes as dial tone, it simply goes > off hook and after some preset period of time -- usually four or five > seconds -- it just starts dialing. In lots of places there is still > what I would call a non-standard dial tone -- behind some PBXs for > example -- and this blind dialing is needed to overcome that. PAT] You can blind dial with the modem but in cases this will also limit the modem in seeing "NO ANSWER", "NO CARRIER", and "BUSY". You didn't specify if it was a Hayes Compatible modem (I'm assuming it is :-) Being a Hayes type modem you can modify register S06 which by default is set to '2' (ie: wait 2 seconds for dial tone before dial). Bump this up to 8 or 10 (ie: ATS6=8) and if you do not have messages waiting it will dial as normal (it saw the dialtone quicker). If you do have messages waiting it will wait 8 seconds for a solid dialtone before dialing. I've used just about every brand of modem (Hayes, Practical Peripherals, Zoom, Microcom, USR, etc) with the stuttered dialtone with no problems after changed S6. You will want to change the init string for what ever program you are using to dial to include S6=8 -or- issue ats6=8&w to save the profile as the default (which could depend on your Y register). Read the manual for more information or email me if needed. ------------------------------ From: chris@kosh.punk.net (Christopher Ambler) Subject: Re: Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today Date: 26 Jun 1996 05:32:01 GMT Organization: Punknet Secret Headquarters and Day Care Centre ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) wrote: > The InterNIC organization says it has gotten tired of asking people > to pay the bill for their domain name, and in some cases has asked > several times without getting a response or payment. I'll tell you what, PAT, the Internic has received over $4,000 from my firm for domain registrations (I own a web design firm). I anticipate that they will receive over $30,000 from us before the end of the year, asssuming that they don't change their fees. They still insist upon payment for two or three that I've never received a bill for. They send email now and again, but have yet to send a paper bill. They've threatened to shut them off if we don't pay, and I've told them I'd be happy to pay if I would just get a bill. The IRS won't take email as a business expense receipt -- I need documentation. I've told them that if they shut off domain service to any of the names we've not yet paid for, there would be legal action. I still await either action or a bill. I hope it's a bill. I said it before, and I'll say it again: if there were competition, they'd have my business. The InterNIC is a de-facto monopoly and I'm personally disgusted with how they do business. I inquired as to what it would take to start my own NIC, even going as far as to find an investor with a seven-figure willingness. The answer from "those in the know" was that it just wouldn't be allowed. I find myself frustrated and disgusted, but with no apparent remedy. (C) Copyright, 1996 Christopher Ambler, Director, Punknet Internet Cooperative chris@punk.net <- Preferred Email Address http://www.punk.net/~chris <- Home Page (everyone's got one) http://www.rhps.org <- Zen Room Presents the RHPS.ORG web site! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 22:21:35 -0700 From: satchell@accutek.com (Stephen Satchell) Subject: Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access John, At the Nevada Public Service hearing on Nevada Bell's rather large rate case, I managed to get the attention of some Nevada Bell people to the idea of setting up a shared leased-line service that extends the Internet model to the neighborhood. I'll be posting the proposal I submitted to everyone later in the week. First, some comments. ISDN call setup is slow because ISDN calls go through the same least-cost routing that analog calls use. This takes time because of complex traffic-balancing algorithms used in a number of the networks. Also, remember that you have PPP establishment time, which frankly is slow as the hills in the current implementations. ISDN-on-demand also means you have to have some way to determine when the link is no longer needed, at least for a significant length of time. This is not simple, and has driven more than one remote-link-product engineer batty. My proposal tries to solve two problems: lowering the cost of Internet access and removing over-long calls from the PSTN switches. While I agree that data users don't need to be hooked to the network 24 hours a day, it's much cheaper in the long run to require the subscriber to "own" only the local terminal adapter, short local loop, and a line card in a concentrator. Everything else from the concentrator back to the internet point of presence would be shared. Because the loop would be dedicated AND short, you could use ADSL or HDSL for the up to 3000 feet between house and concentrator. Indeed, there would be no problem having a single T1 backhaul handle a 12-block neighborhood -- a T1 can handle roughly 480 Web servers comfortably, even if they are on-line at the same time. ISPs have served 3000 users with a pair of T1 circuits, and that includes keeping news servers up to date. By the way, using very pessimestic cost estimates for the equipment, the telco could provide the service for about $30/month flat rate and make money on the deal. Users would see up to 384 kilobits/s transport during shoulder hours, and perhaps 30-100 kilobits/s during peak demand times given a reasonable digital backhaul to the Internet backbone. With ISPs out of the modem-bank business, they could provide DNS, news, and Web storage for far less, so in my case I would pay the same $45/month for all Internet services, and get much better service to boot. I agree that ISDN *could* have been a solution. But it isn't. Stephen Satchell, Satchell Evaluations http://www.accutek.com/~satchell for contact info ------------------------------ Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 10:09:42 -0700 From: John Higdon Subject: Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers Phil Stanley writes: > If AT&T really wanted to keep their customers, they would insure that > they received the best plan. Has an AT&T representative ever called > to ask if you would like to review you plan and compare to other plans > they may have? Don't think so! You will only hear from them after > you switch. Most people reading this would agree that I am no great fan of AT&T (I use another company for my own major business long distance), but fair is fair. AT&T is PIC'ed on my residence lines, and I have had a number of calls from AT&T suggesting that I drop or add various plans. In checking with some of my clients who are still using AT&T for business, I find that AT&T is in constant touch with them, adjusting rates and services. Granted, I have sixteen residence lines and my clients are connected to AT&T via PRI, but to make the blanket statement that AT&T NEVER calls customers until after they "switch" is simply not true. John Higdon | P.O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | +1 500 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 | http://www.ati.com/ati/ | ------------------------------ From: msal765@aol.com (MSal765) Subject: Information Wanted on French Telecom Organization Date: 26 Jun 1996 12:04:48 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: msal765@aol.com (MSal765) Does anyone in this group have any information they could impart to me on the following French Telecom Organization. It is called L'OBSERVATOIRE MONDIAL DES SYSTEMES DE COMMUNICATION (also known as Omsyc). I have not been able to find them on the Internet so an address or phone/fax number would be very helpful. I appreciate any assistance any of you could render. Thank you in advance for your reply. Sincerely, MSal ------------------------------ From: turner7@pacsibm.org (TUrner-7) Subject: Train Telephones Date: 26 Jun 1996 16:19:08 GMT Organization: PACS IBM SIG BBS Speaking of portable telephones ... Starting in the 1930's, luxury trains provided a telephone connected to the city system while the train was berthed in a major station. It was connected simply through a plug from the train. Some interurban trains had a phone for the motorman where he plugged in to a jack on an adjacent pole. In 1969, when the Penn Central introduced the Metroliner high speed train service, dialed direct touch tone phones were placed on the train. While we take it for granted today, back then touch tone and dialed direct coin service was a new innovation. Calls could also be made TO a Metroliner -- the bar car attendant would page the passenger. I believe the Pennsylvania Railroad's postwar Congressional trains offered radiotelephone service between NYC and Washington. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #313 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jun 26 17:49:01 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id RAA19041; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:49:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:49:01 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606262149.RAA19041@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #314 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 96 17:48:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 314 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Issues Order: Right of First Refusal (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Eric Tholome) Re: Control of 888 NXXs (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Power For Telephones (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Sprint Shuts Down Foncard For International Calls (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Please Explain 'iky pic' (Louis Boyd) Re: On Line Reverse Telephone Directory For Austin TX? (Glen L. Roberts) Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again (Steven Lichter) Re: Recommendations Wanted on Network Monitoring Software (Dan Halverson) Book Review: "Local and Metropolitan Area Networks" (Rob Slade) Re: Full Text of Story on Peter Piper (David K. Bryant) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: FCC Issues Order: Right of First Refusal Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:00:00 EDT This bulletin was just received via fax from Judith Oppenheimer: On June 24, 1996, Regina M. Keeney, Chief of the FCC's Common Carrier Bureau directed Database Services Managment Inc. (DSMI) to ... "release into the general pool of toll free numbers, any 888 number currently in the unavailable pool created by the Commissions's action in which an 800 subscriber no longer wishes to assert an interest in that number." The letter goes on, "We also require that DSMI not release any 888 number until it has received a letter from the Responsible Organization (Resp Org) authorizing DSMI to release that particular 888 number along with a copy of the letter the current 800 subscriber sent to its Resp Org or Toll Free Service Provider declining the private interest in the corresponding 888 number. "Finally, we emphasize that the Bureau is not addressing, at this time, the issue of whether any toll free numbers ultimately should be accorded any special protection or the customers afforded any special right." -------------------------------- Ms. Oppenheimer adds a footnote: The FCC does not instruct how Resp Orgs and Toll Free Service Providers are to contact 800 subscribers to ascertain their wishes in this matter. PAT ------------------------------ From: tholome@francenet.fr (Eric Tholome) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:43:22 +0200 Stu Jeffery has given a very interesting (and long) answer to this question, which was about various PCS systems. I can give you another answer (my knowledge is in PCS1900 but I bet it would be applicable to other standards): - first of all, there is the size of the equipment. This is shrinking as technology improves, but there is still some correlation between the size of the equipment and the cell capacity. It ranges from a few big cabinets to the size of a shoe box. - second of all, there is the size of the tower, which will be big if you want a big cell (rural environment), but small to non existent if you want a small cell (urban environment). So the bottom line is: it depends on the type of cell. Eric Tholome private account 23, avenue du Centre tholome@francenet.fr 78180 Montigny le Bretonneux phone: +33 1 30 48 06 47 France fax: same number, call first! (if calling, remember that France is 6 to 10 hours ahead of the U.S.A.!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:35:53 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Control of 888 NXXs rms.globalnet@sandrose.com asks: > Is the NANPA doling out 888 NXX's the same way it doled out 800 NXXs? > Specifically, do you know if there is a list anywhere of which IXCs > control which 888 NXXs? to which PAT responds: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wow are you going back a long time! > There has been no geographical distinction on 800-NXX for many, many > years. It used to be AT&T assigned 800-NXX based on location and on > type of 800 service (i.e. intrastate and interstate, etc) but for a > number of years now, it has been wide-open with anyone getting the 800 > number they were able to obtain from various sources, etc. Judith > Oppenheimer will correct me if I am wrong, but I think since 888 > opened up it has been on a first come, first served basis with all > numbers available to everyone with a few exceptions. Now you just go > to your carrier and ask for the number you want. If it is available, > you get it. PAT] It *has* been about fifteen years since "The Bell System" (AT&T) had a geographic and service distinction of Inward WATS Toll-Free based on the 800-NNX code. Sometime around 1981/82, AT&T introduced CCIS#6 signalling and a network of databases which among other things (such as automated calling card service and automated coin toll service) allowed a 'limited' form of portability with an 800 number. AT&T (and the monopoly LEC's) was the only game in town (as far as 800) at that time, so the portability was strictly geographic. AT&T (and the Canadian LEC telcos of Telecom-Canada, now Stentor) had something like 200 individual NNX codes in use in Toll-Free 800. They did *not* 'expand' the remaining available NNX (or NXX) codes to the 'max' of 792 possible codes. In the mid 1980's, after divestiture, the FCC/DOJ/Greene/Courts/etc. authorized Bellcore to *temporarily* assign remaining 800-NXX codes to the competing LD carriers and even the LEC's for 'intra-LATA-only' 800 service. When SS#7 signalling and LIDB's were more-or-less in place in the LEC's networks, the 800-NXX code assignment scheme would be discontinued in favor of 'full' portability'. This occurred around the Spring of 1993, in the US. Canada joined in the 'general' US portability pool in early 1994. When Bellcore began 800-NXX assignments to carriers in the mid-80's, they reserved the following: 800-N02, 800-N12 (sixteen codes total) for state-by-state assignments to the RCC's, Radio Common Carriers (paging, cellular, mobile, etc). These codes are *still* assigned/reserved as such, but the line-number portion is included in various parts of the databases. 800-555 was reserved for specific line-number assignments by Bellcore to special functions. We are all familiar with 800-555-1212 for Toll-Free Directory Assistance. And then there was 800-555-5000, which for several years just prior to and just after divestiture was the "Bell Answer Line". AT&T has had 800-555-8111 for CPE customer service for many years. There probably have been several other special assignments in 800-555, and *all* of them routed over AT&T (or the LEC) in the US, and the Stentor companies and networks in Canada. In late 1994 (after portability came into use), 800-555 went into the general portability pool, for not yet assigned line numbers. We are now seeing *many* 800-555-xxxx numbers in advertisements these days for general use. 800-855 was reserved for specific line-number assignments by Bellcore to services for the hearing impaired using TTY/TDD modems. There is 800-855-1155 for operator assisted calls, using a TTY/TDD modem. I know that there have been some additional line-number assignments for TTY/TDD as well. 800-855 calls were always routed over AT&T and Stentor. I think that 800-855 is still reserved for TTY/TDD functions, but I don't know if there is any form of carrier portability yet. The eight 800-N11 codes were *not* going to be assigned by Bellcore NANPA back in the mid-80's. Last year, all of the 800-N11 codes *except* 800-911 were assigned as 'general portable' codes. With the inclusion of seven of the eight N11 codes, there are 799 possible NXX codes being used in 800. There are also about a dozen 800-NXX codes which are assigned to *specific* (NANP) Caribbean countries/islands. I think this is for intra-island or intra-Caribbean toll free only. The line-number assignments are *not* included in the regular US/Canada number portability LIDB-databases, although Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands' LIDB's might have them, as these are both US *and* Caribbean. Now along comes 888. I've been told that there are no more new 'Caribbean specific' NXX codes, so there won't be any in 888. And 888 is to be *just* as portable as 800. The N02 and N12 codes are also to be used in 888 for RCC's just as they were used in 800. All of the N11 codes (except 911) are to be used in 888 for 'general portability', as well as 555. I think that 855 is going to be reserved for TTY/TDD services in 888 as well, but I don't know the 'portability' status of 888-855 as to the carrier. At the present time, there aren't any written plans to eventually introduce 800-0XX/1XX or 888-0XX/1XX codes, although the matter has been discussed in the industry forums over the past few years. Many switches would need a major reprogramming or even replacement to handle 0XX/1XX format customer dialable central office codes, even in 800/888/etc. I would assume that the above descriptions for 800's and 888's NXX codes will also apply to the NXX codes within 877, 866, 855, 844, 833 and 822, when those toll free special area codes are going to be needed. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:28:34 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Power For Telephones Jean-Francois Mezei aska: > Since standard conventional home pots telephones rely on basically > uninterruptible power supplied by the telco, the telephone is often > regarded as an emergency device that works even during power failures. > With the advent of fiber to the home and the use of coax cable for > telephony, I am wondering how this "emergency use" will be handled when > power for the telephone will no longer be supplied by the telco. Many telcos are already providing fiber and co-ax in the local loop distribtution. Many rural areas began using microwave as part of the local loop for about fifteen years ago. From what I understand, where alternatives to copper in the local loop have been used, telco has 'interface boxes' in a neighberhood which probably draw power from the commercial electric power company as well as backup batteries in the 'remote interface boxes'. > Will the interface devices have built-in rechargeable batteries ? What > sort of stand-alone ability in terms of hours would they be expected to > have in order to rival the current telephone system's robustness and > availability? If you have an answering machine or cordless phone, *you* as the customer are responsible for the 'extra' electrical power for those devices. These days, many of the newer answering machines and cordless base units have battery backup in addition to a standard AC electric cord. The same goes for Caller-ID boxes. In the case of answering machines, many do not use the batteries for powering the device for 'normal' use in the event of a commercial power outage, but rather to keep the 'controls' in sync, such as how many new messages have been recorded, etc. Some of the new digital storage answering machines, which have no moving tape but rather store the outgoing announcement and incoming messages in electronic circuits use the battery back-up *only* for 'saving' the user's info into its 'RAM-like' chips. My parents' answering machine is an AT&T digital storage model, uses AC power to operate, and has batteries for backup, but will *NOT* operate during an AC power failure. I checked with BellSouth sometime last year about residential ISDN, and among other things, was told that the *customer* is responsible for providing power. They also recommend *battery backup* power in the ISDN customer side equipment, as well as keeping at least *one* traditional analog POTS voice line, since if the commercial AC power goes out and there are not batteries, your *entire* ISDN line goes dead. It also will have to be 'reconfigured' by telco when the power is restored before being fully functional again. I don't know how other Bell or LEC telcos tariffs handle ISDN power in their operating territories. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:39:41 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Sprint Shuts Down Foncard For International Calls bubba@insync.net (Bill Garfield) writes: > I received a postcard today informing me about a change that's going > to be made to my SPRINT FONCARD effective July 1st. (snip) Well, isn't *THAT* a 'great' security measure (sarcasm intended) -- Sprint telling you about new special security matters on a *POSTCARD*! If there is a concern about FON-card fraud, you'd think that they would mail the info in a *SEALED envelope*! And if the receipient doesn't get around to opening it, and then tries to place an international call and can't get through, well that's *their* problem. I haven't had a Sprint account for quite some time, so I don't know how much detail would be included in their mailings. I would hope that your *telephone* number or *Sprint account* number isn't indicated on that postcard! Not too long ago, when I was calling some NANP Caribbean locations from the PBX here at work, using my AT&T Calling Card (as 800-321-0288 access), I was 'intercepted' when calling Jamaica and *certain* other 809 (some soon-to-be former 809) NANP islands. I got an AT&T "interna- tional" operator (the usual current AT&T style recordings came on first) who asked me some additional personal info before allowing my card-call to go through, as there was a lot of fraud associated with those countries. For each country which needed additional verification, I was told that further calls to those countries would go through without any more 'intercepts'. But additional countries dialed for the first time would get me one of these 'intercepts'. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: Louis Boyd Subject: Re: Please Explain 'iky pic' Date: 26 Jun 1996 18:03:38 GMT Organization: Fairborn Observatory Tom Graham wrote: > Hi -- I am trying to remember what "iky pic" is cable slang for. > "Pic" is "plastic insulated cable"? And, "iky" is the jelly that > water proofs the cable? Been too long since I worked for WE at the > Hawthorne Works; any of you Pioneers out there give me the real story > here? The P is for polyethylene. IKY does not simply mean messy. The "jelly" resembles a thicker and stickier version of Vaseline. When PIC cable was originally introduced in the air core version it was called "waterproof" and it even had some water in it from the manufacturing process used to cool the plastic. Unfortunately poly cable develops hairline cracks and then the moisture produces high resistance shorts and crosses. Woodpeckers and gophers help to let more water in. So jelly filled cable was invented. FIlling the low dielectric space (air) with jelly lowered the capacitance so thicker plastic had to be used. Most new direct buried cable is filled PIC. The stuff is difficult for the splicers as the insulation is stiffer in 19 gauge used for long rural runs. There are solvents to clean the jelly off but in cramped closures and vaults it's impossible to work without ruining your clothes. Hence Ickey. That by the way is the NICE name. I won't go into other names. ------------------------------ From: glr@ripco.com (Glen L. Roberts) Subject: Re: On Line Reverse Telephone Directory For Austin TX? Reply-To: glr@ripco.com Organization: Full Disclosure Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 18:33:16 GMT sscott@airmail.net (Steve Scott) wrote: > Does anybody know if there is an on line reverse telephone directory > for Austin, TX? I guess it doesn't have to be on-line, though. Can I > call Southwestern Bell and ask for this information? There are a number of online phone books for the USA. A number of them have reverse look-up. I have a number compiled at: http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/stalk.html Purity of Opinion through force of Intimidation: http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/rogue The Stalker's Home Page! What the hell? Are you listed? http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/stalk.html ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again Date: 26 Jun 1996 10:59:46 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University franz@uci.edu (Michael Franz) writes: > Even better: my caller-ID box sits in wait, but last Friday I received > this very nice letter from PacBell stating that due to old exchange > equipment, CID would not be offered in my area. > Michael Franz (714 856 xxxx) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what *are* they doing about > Caller-ID in California now. What is the latest word as of today, > June 26? PAT] They are now saying by 7/1, but I wonder what year. To make things faster at least for me I told them to just install it without calling me back since their lists are so long. I guess when my box works I'll know it is up. As to your exchange not having CID, what are you in a Step or Crossbar, those are the only ones that it might not work in and even if you were, there are computer supported systems that work to provide that service even in those. GTE years ago had a electronic director system before upgrading to digital switches in some of thir offices, it gave true tone dialing and electronic translation, which made the conversion a lot easier since the trunking was in place. I don't think PacBell has any step left, at least I have not heard of any and crossbar if is still around must be in some small areas or in a CO that is to be replaced. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II and Macintoch computers. slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: danh@tbc1.tbcnet.com (Daniel W. Halverson) Subject: Re: Recommendations Wanted on Network Monitoring Software Date: 26 Jun 1996 18:03:14 GMT Organization: TBC On-Line Data-Net We have been using SNMPc by Castlerock Software for most of our network monitoring. We are also looking into another package I saw at comdex that would monitor all the major Internet functions (sendmail, www, gopher, ftp, etc.) that we are looking at right now. I don't remember the name, will re-post when I find it again. SNMPc costs ~$800. The enterprise version of the other software (multiple severs, etc) was ~$1200. I know there are some Unix utilities that can work also, but I haven't done much with them. Dan tbcnet.com - The 815 area's best Commercial Internet Provider. - 28.8K V.34 all the way. For info call 815-758-5040. danh@tbcnet.com -Check out http://www.tbcnet.com/linkusage to see a example of SNMP to HTTP.- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:48:42 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Local and Metropolitan Area Networks" by Stallings BKLANMAN.RVW 960524 "Local & Metropolitan Area Networks", William Stallings, 1997, 0-13-190737-9 %A William Stallings %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1997 (!) %G 0-13-190737-9 %I Prentice Hall %O +1-201-236-7139 fax: +1-201-236-7131 800-576-3800 416-293-3621 %P 605 %T "Local & Metropolitan Area Networks" Stallings work is the definitive textbook on data communications concepts and technologies for networks within a local calling area. This is a "ground up" treatment of the subject, starting with the basic requirements for data communications over distance, and working up to performance issues on the latest high speed networks. The material is suitable for courses which mix theory with the practical. Topics covered include media, protocol architecture, traditional technologies, high speed LANs, wireless communications, performance, bridges, internetworking, and management. Current topics such as fibre and ATM are well covered. (The next generation of the Internet Protocol is not, but is not as important at the level the book covers.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKLANMAN.RVW 960524. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. ====================== DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca BCVAXLUG Envoy http://www.decus.ca/www/lugs/bcvaxlug.html ------------------------------ From: dbryant@netcom.com (David K. Bryant) Subject: Last Laugh! How Stupid People Can Be Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:10:08 GMT Pat: This falls into the category of "manufactured news". The "I'm so stupid and I want the world to know it" type. In the SF BAy Area a couple of years ago some woman was on TV complaining about the $2000 cell phone bill she got. She was a sales-type and had come to the Bay Area but forgot her cell phone. So, rather than have HER phone FedEx'd to her, she rented one. She proceeded to moan and whine about all the charges she was getting stuck with ... roaming, rental, etc. Then she made the mistake of showing the bill ... the camera focused in on the $2222 in charges. Also in focus was the 1111 minutes of airtime she had. Get a dime lady. Pull over and use a pay phone and quit complaining that you hogged the airwaves. Thank you for letting me rant. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Rant: You are quite welcome. So thatr comes out to about two dollars per minute, *including the rental fee, the roaming charges, etc.* That's still not a very good deal, but you'd think she would have known to be frugual in her use of the phone at least until her own got sent to her. Speaking of dumb people, I see this lady around from time to time who is convinced the only reason 'the telephone company' adds new area codes is to increase 'what they make on long distance calls'. She tells that to anyone who will listen, and sadly, quite a few people do believe her. She insists that calls to another area code are always long distance, with a toll charge. So the more of them there are, the more toll charges there will be. Then -- and this one surely ranks up there with the all time classics along with the "I cannot find a key marked 'ANY' on the keyboard" story -- there is the one about the man who had fax software in his computer but could not get it to operate correctly. He finally decided that to send a fax what you do is take the sheet of paper to be faxed and press it against the front of the computer screen for a couple minutes. (You don't see any smile on my face when I say this do you?) The great comedian from early in this century, W.C. Fields had a cute remark about people. He said, "the dumber they are, the better I like them ...". Fields was talking about and describing the kind of women he wanted for girl friends. I do not think many customer service reps in these technically complex times would agree with him however where their customer base is concerned. One reason the Internet and computers will never really saturate America and become part of every home the way telephones and televisions are now is because is because of their relative complexity compared to these earlier forms of entertainment. And lot's of Americans are very dumb, and in my opinion it seems to be getting worse, with the chasm widening all the time between what is needed to survive and what people actually possess of that. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #314 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jun 26 18:07:51 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id SAA21081; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 18:07:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 18:07:51 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606262207.SAA21081@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #314 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 96 18:07:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 314 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Issues Order: Right of First Refusal (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Eric Tholome) Re: Control of 888 NXXs (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Power For Telephones (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Sprint Shuts Down Foncard For International Calls (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Please Explain 'iky pic' (Louis Boyd) Re: On Line Reverse Telephone Directory For Austin TX? (Glen L. Roberts) Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again (Steven Lichter) Re: Recommendations Wanted on Network Monitoring Software (Dan Halverson) Book Review: "Local and Metropolitan Area Networks" (Rob Slade) Last Laugh! How Stupid People Can Be (David K. Bryant) ** SPECIAL NOTE: Due to a mailing list error some users will recieve two copies of this issue. The mailing aborted about one-third of the way through and it was impossible to tell who did and who did not get this issue, thus it is resent to all. This mailing is the 'official' version of the issue, since a couple other minor changes were made as well before it was remailed to the entire list a second time. ** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: FCC Issues Order: Right of First Refusal Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:00:00 EDT This bulletin was just received via fax from Judith Oppenheimer: On June 24, 1996, Regina M. Keeney, Chief of the FCC's Common Carrier Bureau directed Database Services Managment Inc. (DSMI) to ... "release into the general pool of toll free numbers, any 888 number currently in the unavailable pool created by the Commissions's action in which an 800 subscriber no longer wishes to assert an interest in that number." The letter goes on, "We also require that DSMI not release any 888 number until it has received a letter from the Responsible Organization (Resp Org) authorizing DSMI to release that particular 888 number along with a copy of the letter the current 800 subscriber sent to its Resp Org or Toll Free Service Provider declining the private interest in the corresponding 888 number. "Finally, we emphasize that the Bureau is not addressing, at this time, the issue of whether any toll free numbers ultimately should be accorded any special protection or the customers afforded any special right." -------------------------------- Ms. Oppenheimer adds a footnote: The FCC does not instruct how Resp Orgs and Toll Free Service Providers are to contact 800 subscribers to ascertain their wishes in this matter. PAT ------------------------------ From: tholome@francenet.fr (Eric Tholome) Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:43:22 +0200 Stu Jeffery has given a very interesting (and long) answer to this question, which was about various PCS systems. I can give you another answer (my knowledge is in PCS1900 but I bet it would be applicable to other standards): - first of all, there is the size of the equipment. This is shrinking as technology improves, but there is still some correlation between the size of the equipment and the cell capacity. It ranges from a few big cabinets to the size of a shoe box. - second of all, there is the size of the tower, which will be big if you want a big cell (rural environment), but small to non existent if you want a small cell (urban environment). So the bottom line is: it depends on the type of cell. Eric Tholome private account 23, avenue du Centre tholome@francenet.fr 78180 Montigny le Bretonneux phone: +33 1 30 48 06 47 France fax: same number, call first! (if calling, remember that France is 6 to 10 hours ahead of the U.S.A.!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:35:53 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Control of 888 NXXs rms.globalnet@sandrose.com asks: > Is the NANPA doling out 888 NXX's the same way it doled out 800 NXXs? > Specifically, do you know if there is a list anywhere of which IXCs > control which 888 NXXs? to which PAT responds: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wow are you going back a long time! > There has been no geographical distinction on 800-NXX for many, many > years. It used to be AT&T assigned 800-NXX based on location and on > type of 800 service (i.e. intrastate and interstate, etc) but for a > number of years now, it has been wide-open with anyone getting the 800 > number they were able to obtain from various sources, etc. Judith > Oppenheimer will correct me if I am wrong, but I think since 888 > opened up it has been on a first come, first served basis with all > numbers available to everyone with a few exceptions. Now you just go > to your carrier and ask for the number you want. If it is available, > you get it. PAT] It *has* been about fifteen years since "The Bell System" (AT&T) had a geographic and service distinction of Inward WATS Toll-Free based on the 800-NNX code. Sometime around 1981/82, AT&T introduced CCIS#6 signalling and a network of databases which among other things (such as automated calling card service and automated coin toll service) allowed a 'limited' form of portability with an 800 number. AT&T (and the monopoly LEC's) was the only game in town (as far as 800) at that time, so the portability was strictly geographic. AT&T (and the Canadian LEC telcos of Telecom-Canada, now Stentor) had something like 200 individual NNX codes in use in Toll-Free 800. They did *not* 'expand' the remaining available NNX (or NXX) codes to the 'max' of 792 possible codes. In the mid 1980's, after divestiture, the FCC/DOJ/Greene/Courts/etc. authorized Bellcore to *temporarily* assign remaining 800-NXX codes to the competing LD carriers and even the LEC's for 'intra-LATA-only' 800 service. When SS#7 signalling and LIDB's were more-or-less in place in the LEC's networks, the 800-NXX code assignment scheme would be discontinued in favor of 'full' portability'. This occurred around the Spring of 1993, in the US. Canada joined in the 'general' US portability pool in early 1994. When Bellcore began 800-NXX assignments to carriers in the mid-80's, they reserved the following: 800-N02, 800-N12 (sixteen codes total) for state-by-state assignments to the RCC's, Radio Common Carriers (paging, cellular, mobile, etc). These codes are *still* assigned/reserved as such, but the line-number portion is included in various parts of the databases. 800-555 was reserved for specific line-number assignments by Bellcore to special functions. We are all familiar with 800-555-1212 for Toll-Free Directory Assistance. And then there was 800-555-5000, which for several years just prior to and just after divestiture was the "Bell Answer Line". AT&T has had 800-555-8111 for CPE customer service for many years. There probably have been several other special assignments in 800-555, and *all* of them routed over AT&T (or the LEC) in the US, and the Stentor companies and networks in Canada. In late 1994 (after portability came into use), 800-555 went into the general portability pool, for not yet assigned line numbers. We are now seeing *many* 800-555-xxxx numbers in advertisements these days for general use. 800-855 was reserved for specific line-number assignments by Bellcore to services for the hearing impaired using TTY/TDD modems. There is 800-855-1155 for operator assisted calls, using a TTY/TDD modem. I know that there have been some additional line-number assignments for TTY/TDD as well. 800-855 calls were always routed over AT&T and Stentor. I think that 800-855 is still reserved for TTY/TDD functions, but I don't know if there is any form of carrier portability yet. The eight 800-N11 codes were *not* going to be assigned by Bellcore NANPA back in the mid-80's. Last year, all of the 800-N11 codes *except* 800-911 were assigned as 'general portable' codes. With the inclusion of seven of the eight N11 codes, there are 799 possible NXX codes being used in 800. There are also about a dozen 800-NXX codes which are assigned to *specific* (NANP) Caribbean countries/islands. I think this is for intra-island or intra-Caribbean toll free only. The line-number assignments are *not* included in the regular US/Canada number portability LIDB-databases, although Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands' LIDB's might have them, as these are both US *and* Caribbean. Now along comes 888. I've been told that there are no more new 'Caribbean specific' NXX codes, so there won't be any in 888. And 888 is to be *just* as portable as 800. The N02 and N12 codes are also to be used in 888 for RCC's just as they were used in 800. All of the N11 codes (except 911) are to be used in 888 for 'general portability', as well as 555. I think that 855 is going to be reserved for TTY/TDD services in 888 as well, but I don't know the 'portability' status of 888-855 as to the carrier. At the present time, there aren't any written plans to eventually introduce 800-0XX/1XX or 888-0XX/1XX codes, although the matter has been discussed in the industry forums over the past few years. Many switches would need a major reprogramming or even replacement to handle 0XX/1XX format customer dialable central office codes, even in 800/888/etc. I would assume that the above descriptions for 800's and 888's NXX codes will also apply to the NXX codes within 877, 866, 855, 844, 833 and 822, when those toll free special area codes are going to be needed. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:28:34 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Power For Telephones Jean-Francois Mezei aska: > Since standard conventional home pots telephones rely on basically > uninterruptible power supplied by the telco, the telephone is often > regarded as an emergency device that works even during power failures. > With the advent of fiber to the home and the use of coax cable for > telephony, I am wondering how this "emergency use" will be handled when > power for the telephone will no longer be supplied by the telco. Many telcos are already providing fiber and co-ax in the local loop distribtution. Many rural areas began using microwave as part of the local loop for about fifteen years ago. From what I understand, where alternatives to copper in the local loop have been used, telco has 'interface boxes' in a neighberhood which probably draw power from the commercial electric power company as well as backup batteries in the 'remote interface boxes'. > Will the interface devices have built-in rechargeable batteries ? What > sort of stand-alone ability in terms of hours would they be expected to > have in order to rival the current telephone system's robustness and > availability? If you have an answering machine or cordless phone, *you* as the customer are responsible for the 'extra' electrical power for those devices. These days, many of the newer answering machines and cordless base units have battery backup in addition to a standard AC electric cord. The same goes for Caller-ID boxes. In the case of answering machines, many do not use the batteries for powering the device for 'normal' use in the event of a commercial power outage, but rather to keep the 'controls' in sync, such as how many new messages have been recorded, etc. Some of the new digital storage answering machines, which have no moving tape but rather store the outgoing announcement and incoming messages in electronic circuits use the battery back-up *only* for 'saving' the user's info into its 'RAM-like' chips. My parents' answering machine is an AT&T digital storage model, uses AC power to operate, and has batteries for backup, but will *NOT* operate during an AC power failure. I checked with BellSouth sometime last year about residential ISDN, and among other things, was told that the *customer* is responsible for providing power. They also recommend *battery backup* power in the ISDN customer side equipment, as well as keeping at least *one* traditional analog POTS voice line, since if the commercial AC power goes out and there are not batteries, your *entire* ISDN line goes dead. It also will have to be 'reconfigured' by telco when the power is restored before being fully functional again. I don't know how other Bell or LEC telcos tariffs handle ISDN power in their operating territories. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:39:41 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Sprint Shuts Down Foncard For International Calls bubba@insync.net (Bill Garfield) writes: > I received a postcard today informing me about a change that's going > to be made to my SPRINT FONCARD effective July 1st. (snip) Well, isn't *THAT* a 'great' security measure (sarcasm intended) -- Sprint telling you about new special security matters on a *POSTCARD*! If there is a concern about FON-card fraud, you'd think that they would mail the info in a *SEALED envelope*! And if the receipient doesn't get around to opening it, and then tries to place an international call and can't get through, well that's *their* problem. I haven't had a Sprint account for quite some time, so I don't know how much detail would be included in their mailings. I would hope that your *telephone* number or *Sprint account* number isn't indicated on that postcard! Not too long ago, when I was calling some NANP Caribbean locations from the PBX here at work, using my AT&T Calling Card (as 800-321-0288 access), I was 'intercepted' when calling Jamaica and *certain* other 809 (some soon-to-be former 809) NANP islands. I got an AT&T "interna- tional" operator (the usual current AT&T style recordings came on first) who asked me some additional personal info before allowing my card-call to go through, as there was a lot of fraud associated with those countries. For each country which needed additional verification, I was told that further calls to those countries would go through without any more 'intercepts'. But additional countries dialed for the first time would get me one of these 'intercepts'. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: Louis Boyd Subject: Re: Please Explain 'iky pic' Date: 26 Jun 1996 18:03:38 GMT Organization: Fairborn Observatory Tom Graham wrote: > Hi -- I am trying to remember what "iky pic" is cable slang for. > "Pic" is "plastic insulated cable"? And, "iky" is the jelly that > water proofs the cable? Been too long since I worked for WE at the > Hawthorne Works; any of you Pioneers out there give me the real story > here? The P is for polyethylene. IKY does not simply mean messy. The "jelly" resembles a thicker and stickier version of Vaseline. When PIC cable was originally introduced in the air core version it was called "waterproof" and it even had some water in it from the manufacturing process used to cool the plastic. Unfortunately poly cable develops hairline cracks and then the moisture produces high resistance shorts and crosses. Woodpeckers and gophers help to let more water in. So jelly filled cable was invented. FIlling the low dielectric space (air) with jelly lowered the capacitance so thicker plastic had to be used. Most new direct buried cable is filled PIC. The stuff is difficult for the splicers as the insulation is stiffer in 19 gauge used for long rural runs. There are solvents to clean the jelly off but in cramped closures and vaults it's impossible to work without ruining your clothes. Hence Ickey. That by the way is the NICE name. I won't go into other names. ------------------------------ From: glr@ripco.com (Glen L. Roberts) Subject: Re: On Line Reverse Telephone Directory For Austin TX? Reply-To: glr@ripco.com Organization: Full Disclosure Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 18:33:16 GMT sscott@airmail.net (Steve Scott) wrote: > Does anybody know if there is an on line reverse telephone directory > for Austin, TX? I guess it doesn't have to be on-line, though. Can I > call Southwestern Bell and ask for this information? There are a number of online phone books for the USA. A number of them have reverse look-up. I have a number compiled at: http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/stalk.html Purity of Opinion through force of Intimidation: http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/rogue The Stalker's Home Page! What the hell? Are you listed? http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~glr/stalk.html ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again Date: 26 Jun 1996 10:59:46 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University franz@uci.edu (Michael Franz) writes: > Even better: my caller-ID box sits in wait, but last Friday I received > this very nice letter from PacBell stating that due to old exchange > equipment, CID would not be offered in my area. > Michael Franz (714 856 xxxx) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what *are* they doing about > Caller-ID in California now. What is the latest word as of today, > June 26? PAT] They are now saying by 7/1, but I wonder what year. To make things faster at least for me I told them to just install it without calling me back since their lists are so long. I guess when my box works I'll know it is up. As to your exchange not having CID, what are you in a Step or Crossbar, those are the only ones that it might not work in and even if you were, there are computer supported systems that work to provide that service even in those. GTE years ago had a electronic director system before upgrading to digital switches in some of thir offices, it gave true tone dialing and electronic translation, which made the conversion a lot easier since the trunking was in place. I don't think PacBell has any step left, at least I have not heard of any and crossbar if is still around must be in some small areas or in a CO that is to be replaced. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II and Macintoch computers. slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: danh@tbc1.tbcnet.com (Daniel W. Halverson) Subject: Re: Recommendations Wanted on Network Monitoring Software Date: 26 Jun 1996 18:03:14 GMT Organization: TBC On-Line Data-Net We have been using SNMPc by Castlerock Software for most of our network monitoring. We are also looking into another package I saw at comdex that would monitor all the major Internet functions (sendmail, www, gopher, ftp, etc.) that we are looking at right now. I don't remember the name, will re-post when I find it again. SNMPc costs ~$800. The enterprise version of the other software (multiple severs, etc) was ~$1200. I know there are some Unix utilities that can work also, but I haven't done much with them. Dan tbcnet.com - The 815 area's best Commercial Internet Provider. - 28.8K V.34 all the way. For info call 815-758-5040. danh@tbcnet.com -Check out http://www.tbcnet.com/linkusage to see a example of SNMP to HTTP.- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:48:42 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Local and Metropolitan Area Networks" by Stallings BKLANMAN.RVW 960524 "Local & Metropolitan Area Networks", William Stallings, 1997, 0-13-190737-9 %A William Stallings %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1997 (!) %G 0-13-190737-9 %I Prentice Hall %O +1-201-236-7139 fax: +1-201-236-7131 800-576-3800 416-293-3621 %P 605 %T "Local & Metropolitan Area Networks" Stallings work is the definitive textbook on data communications concepts and technologies for networks within a local calling area. This is a "ground up" treatment of the subject, starting with the basic requirements for data communications over distance, and working up to performance issues on the latest high speed networks. The material is suitable for courses which mix theory with the practical. Topics covered include media, protocol architecture, traditional technologies, high speed LANs, wireless communications, performance, bridges, internetworking, and management. Current topics such as fibre and ATM are well covered. (The next generation of the Internet Protocol is not, but is not as important at the level the book covers.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKLANMAN.RVW 960524. Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. ====================== DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca BCVAXLUG Envoy http://www.decus.ca/www/lugs/bcvaxlug.html ------------------------------ From: dbryant@netcom.com (David K. Bryant) Subject: Last Laugh! How Stupid People Can Be Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 06:10:08 GMT Pat: This falls into the category of "manufactured news". The "I'm so stupid and I want the world to know it" type. In the SF BAy Area a couple of years ago some woman was on TV complaining about the $2000 cell phone bill she got. She was a sales-type and had come to the Bay Area but forgot her cell phone. So, rather than have HER phone FedEx'd to her, she rented one. She proceeded to moan and whine about all the charges she was getting stuck with ... roaming, rental, etc. Then she made the mistake of showing the bill ... the camera focused in on the $2222 in charges. Also in focus was the 1111 minutes of airtime she had. Get a dime lady. Pull over and use a pay phone and quit complaining that you hogged the airwaves. Thank you for letting me rant. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Rant: You are quite welcome. So thatr comes out to about two dollars per minute, *including the rental fee, the roaming charges, etc.* That's still not a very good deal, but you'd think she would have known to be frugual in her use of the phone at least until her own got sent to her. Speaking of dumb people, I see this lady around from time to time who is convinced the only reason 'the telephone company' adds new area codes is to increase 'what they make on long distance calls'. She tells that to anyone who will listen, and sadly, quite a few people do believe her. She insists that calls to another area code are always long distance, with a toll charge. So the more of them there are, the more toll charges there will be. Then -- and this one surely ranks up there with the all time classics along with the "I cannot find a key marked 'ANY' on the keyboard" story -- there is the one about the man who had fax software in his computer but could not get it to operate correctly. He finally decided that to send a fax what you do is take the sheet of paper to be faxed and press it against the front of the computer screen for a couple minutes. (You don't see any smile on my face when I say this do you?) The great comedian from early in this century, W.C. Fields had a cute remark about people. He said, "the dumber they are, the better I like them ...". Fields was talking about and describing the kind of women he wanted for girl friends. I do not think many customer service reps in these technically complex times would agree with him however where their customer base is concerned. One reason the Internet and computers will never really saturate America and become part of every home the way telephones and televisions are now is because is because of their relative complexity compared to these earlier forms of entertainment. And lot's of Americans are very dumb, and in my opinion it seems to be getting worse, with the chasm widening all the time between what is needed to survive and what people actually possess of that. PAT] ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #314 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jun 26 20:00:10 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id UAA00900; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:00:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:00:10 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606270000.UAA00900@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #315 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 96 20:00:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 315 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Archives CD-ROM Ordering Details (TELECOM Digest Editor) Rupert Murdoch Gives Indians a Fright (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) I Saw an International Calling Number ID (Jeffrey Rhodes) How to Convert a 64Kbit PCM to 2048Mbit PCM-30? (Tore Nestenius) Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access (Bill Sohl) Re: Power For Telephones (Bill Sohl) Re: Information Wanted on French Telecom Organization (Steve Bunning) Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again (Raymond Hazel) Re: International Dialing 1960's Style (Jock Mackirdy) Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers (Mark Propp) Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers (Jim Cooper) Last Laugh! Amusing Sound File (Pointer to Binary) (Linc Madison) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 18:21:38 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: Telecom Archives CDROM Ordering Details People have been asking how to order the Telecom Archives CDROM by mail order. Not everyone has been able to find it in a store as of yet. If you can find it in a store, you will save on the shipping charges, however it might simply be easier for you to order it direct from the publisher, so details are given below. The Telecom Archives is a fifteen year collection of the stuff which has appeared in TELECOM Digest since 1981 along with a few hundred other files of telecom related material. There are a lot of technical files, historical files, etc. Everything that was there through the end of 1995 is included. The cost is $39.95. Please buy a copy, as the royalties will help me a lot. Also, if sales are good, there will be an update with the 1996 material on it at some future point. ============================================================================ shipping information: ============================================================================ Shipping is $5 in the USA, Canada, and Mexico for First Class. Overseas is $9 PER ORDER. There is an additional $3 COD charge (USA Only). UPS Blue Label (2nd day) [USA Only] is $10 PER ORDER, UPS Red Label (next day) [USA Only] is $15 PER ORDER. Federal Express (next day) [USA Only] is $20 PER ORDER. For overseas courier rates, please email us. Ordering Information: You can order by sending a check or money order to Walnut Creek CDROM Suite E 4041 Pike Lane Concord CA 94520 USA 1 800 786-9907 (Toll Free Sales) [open 24HRS] +1 510 674-0783 (Sales-International) +1 510 603-1234 (tech support) [M-F 9AM - 5PM, PST] +1 510 674-0821 (FAX) orders@cdrom.com (For placing an order) info@cdrom.com (For requesting more information or for customer service questions) support@cdrom.com (For technical questions and technical support) majordomo@cdrom.com (Info Robot-automated product information and support) We accept Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover, and Diner's Club. ALL credit card orders MUST include a phone or fax number. COD shipping is available for $8.00 in the US only, NO COD shipping to P O Boxes. Checks and Money Orders payable in US funds, can be sent along with ordering information to our normal business address. California residents please add sales tax. Shipping and handling is $5 (per ORDER, not per disc) for US, Canada, and Mexico, and $9 for overseas (AIRMAIL) shipping. Please allow 14 working days ( 3 weeks ) for overseas orders to arrive. Most orders arrive in 1-2 weeks. -------------------- Therefore, unless you want next day delivery by FedEx which would make it quite expensive you would send $39.95 plus $5 to Walnut Creek at thier address above, or authorize them to charge your credit card, etc. As noted also, customers outside the USA need to pay additional shipping costs. Write to Walnut Creek at the addresses above. If you can find it in a retail outlet then you save shipping and handling charges. In any event, please buy one today! PAT -------------------- The Telecom Archives remains a free resource for the Internet and is available using anonymous ftp massis.lcs.mit.edu. ------------------------------ Subject: Rupert Murdoch Gives Indians a Fright Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:34:55 PDT From: rishab@dxm.org (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Reply-To: rishab@dxm.org The Indian Techonomist: bulletin, June 26, 1996 Copyright (C) 1996 Rishab Aiyer Ghosh. All rights reserved Rupert Murdoch gives Indians a fright June 26, 1996: Last week, Rupert Murdoch visited India's new Prime Minister, H D Deve Gowda, and left a swarm of rumours in his wake. He reportedly told Mr Gowda that he would like to invest $1 billion in Karnataka - Mr Gowda's home state - and hinted that he would appreciate uplinking facilities for News Corp's STAR television network in India. Opposition parties made angry noises, demanding why the government was considering allowing a foreigner to do what Indian companies cannot - break the state monopoly over the airwaves. The government denied everything, and pointed out that the same week had seen discussion of relaxing government control over electronic media: the effectuation of decades-old promises to make state- owned Doordarshan TV "autonomous"; and the implementation of a year-old Supreme Court verdict. The rumours would not stop, and finally, in a front-page report today, the Times of India all but asked the Communists to save the country from foreign devils. In India's media battles though, nothing is what it seems. The Communists are quiet because they support the confused government, a coalition of parties just right of centre to well on the left. Besides, they know that the government is bound to implement the Supreme Court's verdict in favour of privatisation (about which nobody talks, hoping that it will be forgotten); and also, though this is less obligatory, an ancient proposal for a state-owned broadcaster free of governmental interference (the so-called Prasar Bharati bill, a topic of animated discussion at every change of government). As for the foreign devils and their much predicted invasion from the skies, it has been a damp squib. The "invasion" is mostly Indian language programming, competing with Doordarshan's entertainment channels for the lowest common denominator in the country's vast and diverse audience. "Baywatch" is available - on Murdoch's STAR network, in fact - but not very profitable in comparison with Hindi film songs and game shows. According to the Times of India, "within 24 hours, all bureaucratic hurdles were reportedly cleared" for a vast $1.3 billion studio, post-production centre and uplinking facility for STAR TV in Tumkur, Karnataka, where - again according to this, the country's largest- selling newspaper - Rupert Murdoch plans to shift the network's headquarters after Hong Kong joins China next year. The newspaper goes on to flatter Mr Murdoch's political prowess - he has acquired a dominant role in American, Australian and British politics, it writes; and, quoting various (unnamed) officials, sources and reports argues that Mr Murdoch would seriously hurt India's national interest if permitted to invest in the country. Behind the more obvious fallacies in these reports - Mr Murdoch after having negotiated a joint venture with Chinese state-owned media is unlikely to worry about the future of STAR TV in Hong Kong - is the Times' real worry. Mr Murdoch likes newspapers. India's policy towards foreign media is strange. Foreign investment is not allowed in Indian (non- academic, periodic) publishers or broadcasters. Yet the import and distribution of print publications proceeds more-or-less unhampered, newspapers rely heavily on foreign wire service reports, and satellite and cable channels are received everywhere. As telecom companies will eventually be able to run television over their networks, their permitted 49% foreign-ownership effectively applies to the cable TV business. Foreign broadcasters already source much of their programming for India from India, and could easily have local partners invest in uplinking facilities as an when they are allowed. The real losers are the Indian readers of foreign publications, who would save a lot if they were printed locally. Worries about "national sovereignty" have banned foreign investment in the press for decades (not soon enough to stop Reader's Digest, though, which happily prints and sells large quantities of its Indian edition). Moves by the reform-minded Congress government - and the present one, for Mr Gowda is known for favouring foreign investment in general - have been blocked by jingoistic politicians, it is true, but also by a cartel of large publishers among which Bennett Coleman & Co - Times of India - is the biggest. The Times of India's paranoid reaction to foreign investment in the Indian press led it to effectively squash a joint venture between a smaller media group and the Financial Times, London, by swiftly registering a Financial Times of its own - protecting group publication Economic Times, whch leads the market. Bennett Coleman shouldn't be so frightened. It has been celebrating the Sunday Times of India's ABC-certified crossing of 1 million circulation. Surely quality, not simply a lack of sufficient competition, had something to do with it? On why television and radio is officially a state monopoly in India, and how this will change thanks to a Supreme Court verdict see http://dxm.org/techonomist/regu.html#IBA See also "Indian Parliament wants private broadcasters", April 1, at http://dxm.org/techonomist/news/01apr96.html The Indian Techonomist: weekly summary. http://dxm.org/techonomist/news/ Copyright (C) 1996 Rishab Aiyer Ghosh (rishab@techonomist.dxm.org) A4/204 Ekta Vihar 9 Indraprastha Extension New Delhi 110092 INDIA May be distributed electronically provided that this notice is attached ------------------------------ From: jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com Subject: I Saw an International Calling Number ID Date: Wed, 26 Jun 96 13:59:09 PDT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. I saw my first international calling number id display "44+9digits INTL" on an AT&T 7406 digital terminal from an AT&T Definity PBX with ISDN PRIs. The call was from a GSM cellphone in Munich, so I guess the country code did not come thru unless the UK got involved with the call somehow and GSM uses 9 digit MINs. This is quite an achievement considering the number of versions of SS7 ISUP signaling needed to make it happen. First there is the caller's national version of ISUP, then there's the international version of ISUP and finally there's the US version of ISUP. The Calling Party Number (CPN) parameter that delivers the privacy indication and number is first marked as a national CPN, then converted to an international CPN (you'd think that the originating country's country code would be prepended during this process), for delivery within another country's network as an international CPN. I'm quite excited. I worked on international SS7 ten years ago and this is the first evidence first-hand I've had to confirm that SS7 signaling for voice trunks is being used between 24-channel and 30-channel countries. Please feel free to E-mail any anecdotal confirmations of other country combinations of Calling Number ID delivery and display to me directly (especially using wireless cellphones). Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com ------------------------------ From: dt93tn@pt.hk-r.se (Tore Nestenius) Subject: How to Convert a 64Kbit PCM to 2048Mbit PCM-30? Date: 26 Jun 1996 17:30:10 GMT Organization: X-Philes Corp Can anyone tell me what's needed if i want to build a converter from a standard 64 Kbit PCM channel to a standard 2Mbit (HDB3 or AMI or NRZ) coded 32 slots (PCM-30) that are compatible the G.7xx standards? Are there any application notes/ Schematics available? What parts do I need? Is a E1 framer and transciever all I need? Tore ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 19:56:49 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote: >> Most of the RBOCs have been screaming for years that modem usage screws up >> their message traffic models, and as a consequence the cost of providing >> telephone service is increased because of us people who stay connected for >> hours or even days at a time. BellSouth has even made a formal statement >> that Internet access pricing is going to have to be measured service in >> order to reduce the abuses. ISDN data rates are surcharged in many areas >> just for this reason. > This serves to remind us that the RBOCs are dinosaurs with their heads > stuck in the sand. (An appealing if mixed metaphor.) > Do data users really need to be hooked to their network providers 24 > hours per day? Of course not. > Recall that an ISDN BRI line provides two 64Kb bearer "B" channels and > a 16Kb packet switched "D" channel. Connections on the B channels are > set up by exchanging messages on the D channel, and setup is supposed > to be quite fast, like a second or less. ISDN PRI is the same except > there are 23 B channels and the D channel is 64Kb. All the above is totally correct. > So for your typical Internet user, you could sit there with both B > channels idle until there are some packets to send, at which point you > connect a B channel and start sending data. If the first B channel > gets saturated, you could turn on the other B channel as well. After > a period of quiescence, say 30 seconds, you turn off a B channel. For > low packet rates (pings or keep-alives, for example) you don't even > need a B channel, since the D channel has considerable spare capacity > beyond that needed for the setup messages. Using only the D channel could easily handle most email also in that email is typically relatively short messages. You could have a software defined choice set up that redirected email that was over a certain length (in bytes) to a B channel connection while having most of the email take the D channel path. I suggested that to people several years ago, but there was no interest in the propect at the time. Frankly, the D channel is still looking for a decent application to make good use of the D channel capability that is built in with all ISDN lines. For most applications today, the D channel is an idle bystander. The D channel could also probably handle most newsgroup data flow for most people as that is largy ascii text files also of relatively short length. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ From: billsohl@planet.net (Bill Sohl) Subject: Re: Power For Telephones Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:06:13 GMT Organization: BL Enterprises Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: > Since standard conventional home pots telephones rely on basically > uninterruptible power supplied by the telco, the telephone is often > regarded as an emergency device that works even during power failures. > With the advent of fiber to the home and the use of coax cable for > telephony, I am wondering how this "emergency use" will be handled when > power for the telephone will no longer be supplied by the telco. > Will the interface devices have built-in rechargeable batteries ? What > sort of stand-alone ability in terms of hours would they be expected to > have in order to rival the current telephone system's robustness and > availability? The deployment of ISDN has already departed from the Central Office powering of home telephones. Today, there's no requirement for any back-up battery in an ISDN set. The choice is left up to the customer. Remember too, any interface device is not owned or provided by the telco as part of the basic line charge. The customer is always provided the choice (at least in the USA) of using whatever interface devices they want from those available on the market. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) billsohl@planet.net Internet & Telecommunications Consultant/Instructor Budd Lake, New Jersey ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:54:37 -0300 From: Steve Bunning Subject: Re: Information Wanted on French Telecom Organization > Does anyone in this group have any information they could impart to me > on the following French Telecom Organization. It is called > L'OBSERVATOIRE MONDIAL DES SYSTEMES DE COMMUNICATION (also known as > Omsyc). I have not been able to find them on the Internet so an > address or phone/fax number would be very helpful. I appreciate any > assistance any of you could render. Thank you in advance for your > reply. Using the electronic edition of the French Phone directory, http://www.epita.fr:5000/11, which was mentioned a few days ago in the TELECOM Digest, entering Omsyc or Observatoire Mondial as the last name and Paris as the city yields the following number +33 1 40 62 6857. Steve Bunning | ACE*COMM | 301 258-9850 (voice) Product Manager | 209 Perry Parkway | 301 921-0434 (fax) TEL*COMM Division| Gaithersburg, MD USA 20877 | bunning@acec.com ------------------------------ From: razel@net.com (Raymond Hazel) Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:42:40 -0800 Organization: N.E.T. In article , franz@uci.edu (Michael Franz) wrote: > In article , Nancy Gold > wrote: >> My Caller-ID box sits in wait, as it has since May 20th. > Even better: my caller-ID box sits in wait, but last Friday I received > this very nice letter from PacBell stating that due to old exchange > equipment, CID would not be offered in my area. > Michael Franz (714 856 xxxx) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what *are* they doing about > Caller-ID in California now. What is the latest word as of today, > June 26? PAT] I called to have the service turned on (6/26 2:30PM PDT). Spoke with a service rep, (name not disclosed to protect the innocent) and she informed me that the service was not available and there was no date set when it would be available. However, if I was willing, I could be set up to be notified by Pac Bell when service was available and have the service activated for $6.50 per month and $5.00 activation charge. I agreed to all of this, she told me that I would need to purchase a readout device, which I have, and thanked me for choosing Pacific Bell. Now I'll wait for the phone call as well as keeping an eye on the newsgroup. Wonder where I'll get the information of availablity first? (No bets...) Ray ------------------------------ From: Jock Mackirdy Subject: Re: International Dialing 1960's Style Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 22:23:00 GMT turner7@pacsibm.org (TUrner-7) wrote: > Likewise, as Mark notes, local operators got the ability to dial > directly overseas calls rather than using a special overseas operator. I was working for the UK PO in the late 60's when international dialing was in its infancy. I found it fascinating that the UK end of TAT-1 used a two-wire cord board with four-wire auto switches whereas the US end at White Plains used manual four-wire switching using double plugs and cords on the manual board. Jock Mackirdy Business Advisory Services, Luton (UK) E-mail: jockm@basluton.demon.co.uk Tel/fax: +44 (0)1582 597878 Independent telecomms. and business advice ------------------------------ From: mpropp@advtech.uswest.com (Mark Propp) Subject: Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers Date: 26 Jun 1996 14:12:51 -0600 Organization: U S West Technologies, Inc. Reply-To: mpropp@uswest.com Pat, My source of information for my claim that only two customers were slammed is none other than the FCC press release of 6-24, found on the DLD Digest web issue 69. I quote: "The Bureau determined that Excel violated the Commission's rules by substituting itself as the primary long distance carrier for two consumers without the consumer's authorizations. The consumers both stated that they did not authorize the changes, and that the authorization forms that Excel produced bore forged signatures ..." Unlike the Heartline reference, I see no mention of "willful or repeated volations ..." etc. Other places I have read that the two customers were slammed by a single representative, who has since been terminated from Excel. Again, hard to hold Excel responsible for the actions of 100,000+ independent reps -- they only thing they can do is train reps properly, and terminate offenders, which apparently they have done in this case. I thought the $80,000 fine was a bit steep for two customer slams also. But I've seen bigger fines levied against the other LD companies in the past. If you think about it, $80K is probably chicken feed for any successful LD company. Mark Propp mpropp@cris.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:59:21 PDT From: Jim Cooper Subject: Re: LD Companies Vie for Customers Pat, Any company can have it's bad apples, as far as spamming goes. I seem to remember that AT&T was fined some months back for the same offense. And, of course, no LD company is immune from this either. However it seems that when you're a company that's making a name for itself, then people pay more attention to you than to the rest of the pack. As long as there are people who don't play by the rules, we'll all continue to suffer the consequences of their incompetent actions. Regards, Jim Cooper (cooper@edsug.com) | No matter what happens, no matter how rough Independent Representative | it gets, no matter how impossible it Excel Telecommunications, Inc | becomes -- always keep the dream alive!! (714) 952-5568 (V) (5758 Fax) | Deke Slayton, Are U walking past a fortune? | Author & Mercury Seven Astronaut ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:50:02 -0700 From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Last Laugh! Amusing Sound File (Pointer to Binary) I just found this sound file on alt.binaries.sounds.tv, and thought it would be of interest to TELECOM Digest readers. I've included the Message-ID header so that you can search for it. The file is a clip from the NBC TV show "Third Rock from the Sun." The character Sally is saying: "Aw, sshh! Don't cry sweetheart. This part's easy. Just wait 'til you have to choose a long distance carrier." > From: bonnielynne@earthlink.net (Bonnie Lynne) > Newsgroups: alt.binaries.sounds.tv > Subject: Re: REQEUST--more 3rd Rock Clips! - 3longd~1.wav (1/1) > Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 11:01:47 GMT > Message-ID: <4qr5op$qei@guyana.it.earthlink.net> > > begin 644 3longd~1.wav We return you now to your regularly scheduled programming. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #315 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Wed Jun 26 22:54:14 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA16518; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 22:54:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 22:54:14 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606270254.WAA16518@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #316 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Jun 96 22:54:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 316 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson TCI Cable Service is Terrible (TELECOM Digest Edtior) Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? (Craig Morton) Re: It Ain't Like it Used to Be (Louis Boyd) Re: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn (Bill Walker) Re: International 800 Numbers (Steve Hagar) Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers (Matthew B. Landry) Re: Train Telephones (Hudson Leighton) Telecommunications Regulation in Latin America (Mario Castano) E-Mail Addresses in the White Pages (Rick Broadhead) True Story From a Novell NetWare SysOp (David R. Quist) Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access (Lars Poulsen) GSM Cellular From Satellites? (Jean-Francois Mezei) Re: Splitting Area Codes Causes Consternation (Stephen Satchell) Wait and See? What to Buy? (K.S. Gorenz) NPA/Prefix changes in North Carolina (Stan Schwartz) Telephone Call Restrictor Question (Donald Kunz) Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? (John Agosta) Questions About GSM Handoff (Matthew Cheng) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:38:30 EDT From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: TCI Cable Service is Terrible The cable service where I live has been out for two weeks and no one at TCI has ever come out to fix it. I have two broken promises on commitment times, and now they claim the earliest they can come out is next Tuesday (after promising to come yesterday and missing the appointment then promising again today and missing this one). The wires are hanging down along the side of building from where they were before. It appears there is a break in the wire. The television is totally dead unless I remove the cable and attach an old rabbit ear antenna I have. Starting two weeks ago, TCI took trouble reports and simply ignored them, claiming finally they had no record of the account or the service at this address. Finally they found the record under the name of someone who lived here several years ago. Once they found that much they started making bogus comittments to come out always with a warning that 'someone had better be there to meet us or you will get charged for a visit anyway.' On Tuesday at 3:45 pm they told me the man has just finished his previous job and will be at your place in ten to fifteen minutes. He never showed. When I called back at 5:15 pm I was told somehow the order had gotten cancelled in error. I was promised it would be rescheduled for Wednesday between 4 and 6 pm ... and be sure to be there to meet him. When I called at 5:45 pm Wednesday I was advised the order had gotten lost in the system and now the earliest they can commit to is next Tuesday 'sometime in the afternoon'. I told them flatly that was not good enough and that I would go to the Village Hall and talk to the Cable Committee and have them place the order for me. Can you believe I live *three blocks* from their office in Skokie and yet they cannot take five minutes to come over and splice what appears to be a broken wire where it all fell down from where it had been mounted on the side near the roof. The way the wires are dangling on the side of the building I would not surprised if some vandal went out there later tonight and yanked the whole thing down and cut the wire in a dozen or so different places. Maybe a vandal would even go back by the telephone pole and completely destroy the box that has all the filters and traps in it. This is the same TCI which has started offering local phone service in the area in 'competition' with Ameritech ... god help us all. One department that works correctly of course is their billing department. The bills still come out on time and as inaccurate as always. I have heard the Village is going to attempt to cancel their franchise, although that will involve litigation I am sure. PAT ------------------------------ From: Craig Morton Subject: Re: How "Mini" Are PCS Sites? Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 22:29:17 -0700 Organization: Communications Engineer / Consultant Reply-To: cmorton@ozemail.com.au Eric Tholome wrote: > Stu Jeffery has given a very interesting (and long) answer to this > question, which was about various PCS systems. > I can give you another answer (my knowledge is in PCS1900 but I bet it > would be applicable to other standards): > - first of all, there is the size of the equipment. This is shrinking as > technology improves, but there is still some correlation between the size > of the equipment and the cell capacity. It ranges from a few big cabinets > to the size of a shoe box. > - second of all, there is the size of the tower, which will be big if you > want a big cell (rural environment), but small to non existent if you want > a small cell (urban environment). > So the bottom line is: it depends on the type of cell. Actually in a TDM environment a limitation is the propogation delay and associated tranmitter burst time. In a GSM 900MHz system, I believe the maximum cell size is about 35Kms? but this has recently been doubled by some Ericcson Engineers in Australia by the use of some form of antenna diversity (I need to look for the details / tradeoffs). The GSM1900 systems would have the same sort restrictions on cell size. I would be interested in knowing the answer. My first guess would be half. Craig Morton Communications Engineer Sydney Australia ------------------------------ From: Louis Boyd Subject: Re: It Ain't Like it Used to Be Date: 26 Jun 1996 18:26:30 GMT Organization: Fairborn Observatory "Stan.Schwartz@IBMMAIL" wrote: > A postscript to that story is that two months later, another truck > tore the drop down. NYNEX says they can't hang it any higher. BURIED drops work well in that situation. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone send me a note asking a question about running a bit of buried cable and I don't know the best answer to give them. They have a main house where the phones are installed. About three hundred yards away through sort of a wooded area they have a smaller cabin and they want to put two lines back there from the main house. They asked how deep the trench needed to be and what sort of 'tubing' to put the wires through. I guess they want to just run two-pair, four-wire phone back there, running the phone wire through the 'tubing' underground from the one end to the other. Anyone see any problems or have any comments? PAT] ------------------------------ From: wwalker@qualcomm.com (Bill Walker) Subject: Re: Spam Takes a Nasty Turn Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 11:39:02 -0700 Organization: QUALCOMM, Inc. In article , dwpaxson@servtech.com (Dana W. Paxson) wrote: > Depending on how long the phone company takes to recycle the number > you used, the subsequent assignee of that number can catch the > fallout. I've had this problem. I recently had a second line installed for my computer. We kept get calls on this line at 1:00 AM or so, and on the occasions I answered (the only phone on the line is downstairs), got some guy looking for a woman. Tried explaining the problem once or twice, but the calls persisted. I finally turned off the ringer on the phone and set my modem to answer (with the computer off). I believe the callers finally got the picture. Bill Walker, QUALCOMM, Inc., San Diego, CA USA WWalker@qualcomm.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I dunno. I had a lady latch onto my modem line one time and carry things to an extreme. This was about 15 years ago, when modems were still relatively a new thing, and an unfmailiar sound to the human ear hearing them on the phone. She was at a pay phone somewhere and dialed my modem line. It answered and squealed in her ear then disconnected. So far so good. This lady decides 'something is wrong' and invests another 25 cents to dial it a second time, then a third, and finally a fourth time. Finally at that point she decided to turn me in to repair service. A little later I got a phone call from a repair tech on my other (voice) line and he asked if I had a modem on the other line. When I told him I did, he related this story to me and how the woman even went so far as to demand a refund of the dollar she had spent on the phone calling 'an out of order line'. Let's hope in your case the caller catches on without involving other people in the process. PAT] ------------------------------ From: sdhagar@aol.com (SDHagar) Subject: Re: International 800 Numbers Date: 26 Jun 1996 15:03:39 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: sdhagar@aol.com (SDHagar) > The international service that is being discussed (IAC+800-XXX-XXXX) > is known as UIFN: Universal International Freephone Number, and is > described in detail in ITU-T Recommendation E.169. My apologies for missing a typo in my previous post, which may have inadvertently continued the confusion regarding UIFN The UIFN number format is IAC+800-XXXX-XXXX (i.e 8 digits, not 7 digits for the Global Subscriber Number (GSN)). Steve Hagar shagar@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: mbl@conch.aa.msen.com (Matthew B Landry) Subject: Re: New Twist For 800 Number and Spammers Date: 26 Jun 1996 21:47:03 GMT Organization: Flunkies for the Mike Conspiracy Our Esteemed Moderator wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well some people *think* that false > mail headers cannot be traced but with some patience it can be done. [good description of spam dissection deleted for brevity] > of those who do, even fewer know how to do it *right* if indeed > there is a right way that someone somewhere will not be willing The point is that, assuming the motive is to make the phone number/email address owner's life a living hell, forging a spam containing that information will accomplish the task quite efficiently. No one ever said spam was untraceable. But the very difficulty you take such pains to point out is why people who post "revenge spam" don't need to worry too much. No one is going to check on whether they're retaliating against the real spammer, they'll just do it. And the spammer's enemy will get all the headaches. Is this more effort than any sane person would ever put into making someone else's life difficult? Of course. But you're the last person I'd expect to find implying that the majority of usenet is sane. Matthew Landry Well, yeah. Actually I do sometimes speak for Msen. But not from THIS account. O- ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Train Telephones Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:09:16 -0500 Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. In article , turner7@pacsibm.org (TUrner-7) wrote: > Speaking of portable telephones ... > Starting in the 1930's, luxury trains provided a telephone connected to > the city system while the train was berthed in a major station. It > was connected simply through a plug from the train. I have worked on some private railroad passenger cars, the old style connector was a two inch diameter Pyle National shell with two 1/4 inch diameter pins. I think the connector was rated for 50 amps @ 240 volts. Nowdays everybody uses RJ-11s. Pat: If you ever get to Chicago Union Station check out the car bumper post on Track 4. Last time I was there, there were about six RJ-11 jacks mounted on the bumper. I never got to test them. Where do you want the pizza delivered? Union Station, Track 4, Private car Skagit River. WHERE? ------------------------------ From: hbeltran@itecs5.telecom-co.net Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 17:58:56 -0500 Subject: Telecommunications Regulation in Latin America Hello all: I am triying to write an executive summary about the general policies and the state of regulation for the telecommmunications sector (including basic services, aggregated services, cellular and PCS, Cable TV, etc) in some Latin American countries. I am specially interested in knowing the situation in Chile, Mexico and Brazil. Any comments about this subject in those countries, and pointers to on-line and written references would be appreciated. Please answer to the following email address (I am not subscribed to the Digest): cintel@uniandes.edu.co Best regards, Mario A. Castano Director, Planning Office CINTEL-Centro de Investigacion de Telecomunicaciones Av 9 118-85 Bogota Colombia Tel/fax: +57 1 6208397/620 8178 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:46:39 -0400 From: Rick Broadhead Subject: E-Mail Addresses in the White Pages Sweden was apparently the first country in the world to allow its residents to include an Internet address alongside their telephone number in the phone book. I understand that a number of Canadian and U.S. telephone directory publishers will be following suit shortly (one Canadian telephone company tells me that e-mail addresses will be listed for free for their residential customers). I would be interested in hearing from telephone directory publishers and/or telephone companies about their future plans to include e-mail addresses in their print telephone directories (I am referring to the white pages). How widespread is this practice already? I am compiling this information for the 1997 edition of the Canadian Internet Handbook, which will be released this fall by Prentice Hall/Simon and Schuster. Thanks, Rick Broadhead, MBA Co-Author, Canadian Internet Handbook - National #1 Bestseller! Co-Host, "NetTalk" - Syndicated on the Sound Source Radio Network (416) 487-5220 Fax: (416) 440-0175 Web Site: www.intervex.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 19:33:45 -0400 From: ben3b01!bns!Quist_David_R@ben3b01.attmail.com (bns!Quist_David_R) Subject: True Story From a Novell NetWare SysOp: True story from a Novell NetWare SysOp: Caller: "Hello, is this Tech Support?" Tech Rep: "Yes, it is. How may I help you?" Caller: "The cup holder on my PC is broken and I am within my warranty period. How do I go about getting that fixed?" Tech Rep: "I'm sorry, but did you say a cup holder?" Caller: "Yes, it's attached to the front of my computer." Tech Rep: "Please excuse me if I seem a bit stumped, it's because I am. Did you receive this as part of a promotional, at a trade show? How did you get this cup holder? Does it have any trademark on it?" Caller: "It came with my computer, I don't know anything about a promotional. It just has '4X' on it." At this point the Tech Rep had to mute the caller, because he could not stand it. The caller had been using the load drawer of the CD-ROM drive as a cup holder, and snapped it off the drive. ------------------------------ From: lars@anchor.RNS.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Proposal For LEC Internet Access Date: 26 Jun 1996 17:39:46 -0700 Organization: RNS / Meret Communications In article satchell@accutek.com (Stephen Satchell) writes: > I propose a shared-access leased-line service for Internet access which > does *not* guarantee 100 percent availability, and guarantees 4000 bps > ... > The access box would have an Ethernet 10 base T connection. > ... The communication between the computer and the > access box would be PPP over Ethernet. The communication between the computer and the access box should be IP over Ethernet. PPP over Ethernet is a non-standard encapsulation that is not supported by anyone. Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@RNS.COM RNS / Meret Communications Phone: +1-805-562-3158 7402 Hollister Avenue Telefax: +1-805-968-8256 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 Internets: designed and built while you wait ------------------------------ From: Jean-Francois Mezei Subject: GSM Cellular From Satellites? Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 23:23:50 +0000 Organization: Vaxination Informatique Reply-To: jfmezei@istar.ca While travelling in Australia recently, I heard a few people mention that once low orbit satellites are in position, Australia will have GSM coverate throughout its territory with antennas doing the job in more populated areas. Can anyone comment on this? Will this actually happen with off-the-shelf GSM phones working from either land-based antennas or satellite based ones? Or will special phones be needed to access these low orbit satellites? ------------------------------ From: satchell@accutek.com (Stephen Satchell) Subject: Re: Splitting Area Codes Causes Consternation Organization: Satchell Evaluations Date: 26 Jun 96 07:04:50 GMT I might suggest that in this era of competition, that the competing LECs be the ones to offer numbers in new area codes. That would mean that if you were on one company and the person you wanted to call was with another company, you would have to dial ten digits to get to them. I think this makes far more sense, though, than the willy-nilly overlay of one area code on top of another. Shades of Bell/Home phones, with the exception that this time you could call across company boundries. Remember, there *used* to be competition for local phone service. Stephen Satchell, Satchell Evaluations http://www.accutek.com/~satchell ------------------------------ From: K.S. Gorenz Subject: Wait and See? What to Buy? Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:23:42 -0500 Organization: IVCC - Pictures 'N' All Hi! i want to buy the caller id unit or phone to see who is calling when my call waiting clicks when I'm on the phone already. What have people been saying ... is it better to buy unit from mail order or through Ameritech? I got info on disply unit only: 65.99 plus 6.95 shipping = 72.94; plain phone 130.80; cordless 215.75. Screen phone (Can I pay Ameritech phone bill with this and what does it do when I connect it to my computer?!) 239.75. I'm anxious to buy ... and have been off the newsgroups lately so I really apologize if this has been all rehashed ... I just got the info in the mail yesterday, although I had seen units in mailorder before. The guy told me that the phone company has to activate it to work (even though he knew I already have Caller ID). Is that true? Does that mean I have to buy unit from the phone company? Thanks for any input or experiences. Kathy Gorenz gorenz@ivcc.edu ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: NPA/Prefix Changes in North Carolina Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:35:55 GMT I got this insert in my BellSouth bill this month: On August 1, 1996, all telephone numbers in Davidson County currently in the 704 area code will move to the 910 area code. The change involves the cities of Lexington, Churchland, Reeds, Southmont, Welcome, and Denton. Thomasville is currently in the 910 area code and will not be affected. The change was requested by Davidson County customers and approved by federal regulators. In addition to the area code change, some telephone prefixes will change: Lexington: 246 will change to 248 352 will change to 357 858 will change to 853 Churchland: 762 will change to 752 Denton: 869 will change to 859 The last four digits of telephone numbers with these prefixes will not be affected. Remember to reprogram ... (etc.) -------------------------------- REQUESTED by the residents? Why would the residents request this, and when does a phone company ever listen? Stan ------------------------------ From: dkunz@ix.netcom.com (Donald Kunz) Subject: Telephone Call Restrictor Question Date: 26 Jun 1996 14:01:38 GMT Organization: Netcom A few years ago I purchased a telephone call restrictor, but had never installed it. Now that I would like to use it, I don't have the instructions. I cannot find any information about the company that made it -- perhaps they are out of business. Does anyone know how to program this device. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Manufacturer: Telephone Technologies, Inc. made in USA Model: Foneguard, Model 1, Telephone Call Restrictor CSA Listing: LR87450 Date Code: 9109 Serial #: 91-09 A 006897 ------------------------------ From: jagosta@interaccess.com (John Agosta) Subject: Re: Ring No Answer - What's to Blame? Date: 26 Jun 1996 14:53:14 GMT Organization: Agosta and Associates In article , Bob Baxter says: > At this point, I'm not sure where the problem is. A phone attached to > the modem line rings. A third modem hooked up to line one does not > pick up. Maybe the problem isn't the telco line. Maybe you should try looking at the serial port (digital) side of the connection between your DTE and modem. Use a break out box and confirm that when the "ring indicator" lead toggles with ringing on the phone line, your computer port's DTR signal transits to the "on" condition. Or, you can force DTR on with a BOB ... if your modem doesn't anwer, it may be bad. We used to follow this cheat sheet at a PDN with thousands of dial-in modems that sometimes would behave in a similar fashion. Line RI DTR Possible problem ringing stays off dont care modem ringing toggles stays off CPU port / cable ringing toggles goes on cable / modem Hope you get it fixed. ja ------------------------------ From: mcheng@mookie.bellcore.com (Matthew Cheng) Subject: Questions About GSM Handoff Date: 26 Jun 1996 19:44:55 GMT Organization: Bell Communications Research Hi everybody, I have a question about handoff in GSM. Assume that the ongoing session is a TCH/F + SACCH/F. Also assume that it is either a full synchronized or pre-synchronized case. To my understanding the call flow over the air is like this: MS <- (HANDOVER_COMMAND) Network MS (HANDOVER_ACCESS) -> Network MS (HANDOVER_ACCESS) -> Network MS (HANDOVER_ACCESS) -> Network MS (HANDOVER_ACCESS) -> Network MS (SABM) -> new BTS MS <- (UA) new BTS MS (HANDOVER_COMPLETE) -> Network Except the first message, all the other messages are sent on the new channel. 1. After receiving the HANDOVER_COMMAND, the MS will tune to the new channel and send the HANDOVER_ACCESS immediately in the next 4 TDMA frames; or the HANDOVER_ACCESS can only be sent when the frame number (FN) on the new channel is the start of FACCH, i.e., FN mod 13 is 0, 4 or 8? 2. If the HANDOVER_ACCESS is sent according to the first scenerio in question 1, then on which FN will the SABM be sent, immediately after HANDOVER_ACCESS or FN mod 13 is 0,4 or 8? 3. When HANDOVER_COMMAND is sent out, is the speech communication suspended or interleaved with the HANDOVER_COMMAND? 4. The speech must be suspended when the MS tunes to the new channel and before HANDOVER_COMPLETE, right? And SABM, UA and HANDOVER_COMPLETE all need 8 TDMA frames to tx. So, other information/data are interleaved with them during their TX? And when is speech communication resumed? Hope some GSM experts out there can answer my questions. Thanks very much, Matthew Cheng ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #316 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Jun 27 11:32:22 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id LAA04082; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 11:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 11:32:22 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606271532.LAA04082@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #317 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Jun 96 11:31:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 317 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell Atlantic ISDN Pricing Alert (James Love) GTE Mobilnet and New NPA (Tad Cook) San Jose To Get Cable TV Competition From Pacific Bell (Mike King) Pacific Bell Mobile Services to Debut New Wireless Phone Service (M. King) Information Wanted on Norstar Centrex (fedtelco@myna.com) Help Needed Installing Baltimore-Bombay Dedicated Line? (A.N. Ananth) Modem Link on Columbia Space Shuttle (Tina Rathbone) Re: The Virtual Institute of Information (jared2654@aol.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:55:21 EDT From: James Love Subject: Bell Atlantic ISDN Pricing Alert INFO-POLICY-NOTES/subscriptions from listproc@essential.org June 26, 1996 ISDN pricing in Bell Atlantic States - CPT sets up Web page for Bell Atlantic Consumers at: http://www.essential.org/cpt/isdn/bellnews.html - Maryland Accepts comments on ISDN rates by electronic mail (ISDN@psc.state.md.us) and sets public hearing for July 3. Additional details about battles in other Bell Atlantic States. Bell Atlantic consumers in Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia have an opportunity to fight for lower residential ISDN tariffs, if you act swiftly. [Virginia already has an open docket on residential ISDN pricing, and filings in West Virginia are expected soon]. In Maryland, the Public Service Commission (PSC) has agreed to accept comments on the issue by electronic mail, at: ISDN@psc.state.md.us. Maryland is also giving the public an opportunity to be heard at a public hearing on July 3. Commissions in NJ, PA and DC have declined to provide a public hearing on the tariffs, or to accept comments by electronic mail, but they will accept written comments. CPT has set up a Bell Atlantic ISDN Action page on the Web with information about the proceedings at: http://www.essential.org/cpt/isdn/bellnews.html BACKGROUND Briefly, Bell Atlantic (BA) is asking for tariffs which are based upon the amount of time that you use the ISDN connection, and this can add up. A "BRI" ISDN line gives you two 64 Kbps "B" channels, which can be "bonded" into a fast 128 Kbps connection (referred to as 2B). You can also use BRI ISDN as two separate voice or fax lines, with multiple telephone numbers, or the line can be dynamically configured on the fly. BA is asking for 2 cents per minute (per B channel)from 7 am to 7 pm, or 1 cent per minute from 7 pm to 7 am. If you use the faster 128 Kbps connection (isn't' the point of ISDN to have a faster connection?), it would cost from $2.40 to $1.20 per hour to make a local call to your Internet service provider (ISP). BA also offers "callpack" options, where the consumer can pre-purchase blocks of time at large discounts. For example, one could buy the 140 hours callpack for $60 per month. This would allow a user to have 70 hours at 128 Kbps (or 140 hours at 64 Kpbs). But you have to pay for the time even if you don't use it, and if you go over, you are stuck with the hefty per-minute fees. The BA flat rate option is a whopping $249 per month, the most expensive in the United States. The BA tariffs are not inevitable. Quite a few states have adopted much lower residential ISDN tariffs. Highly relevant is the recent decision by the Delaware PSC approving a flat rate residential ISDN tariff of $28.02, about $221 less than the rate requested by Bell Atlantic. In Arkansas, the Northern Arkansas Telephone Company charges only $17.90 per month, flat rate, for residential ISDN service. In California, the Roseville Telephone Company charges $29.50 for residential ISDN. Four of the five Midwest states served by Ameritech offer ISDN at a little more than twice the POTS rate with no per minute charges (Illinois $28.05 to $34.50, Ohio $32.20, Michigan $33.51, and Wisconsin $30.90). In Tennessee, BellSouth charges $25 to $29 for flat rate ISDN. In New Mexico, the Commission recently approved a $40 flat rate. You can get a better Bell Atlantic ISDN tariff if you fight now! The most important immediate thing is to get comments into the record in opposition to the BA filing, and to ask for lower rates. It is also helpful to call up the Commission in your state and talk to the staff person who is assigned to the issue. In addition to the Bell Atlantic ISDN Action page (http://www.essential.org/cpt/isdn/bellnews.html), you might find these links helpful. CPT's ISDN pricing talking points: http://www.essential.org/cpt/isdn/isdntalk.html Fred Goldstein's ISDN pricing talking points. http://www.essential.org/cpt/isdn/fred.txt James Love (love@tap.org/202-387-8030 Consumer Project on Technology http://www.essential.org/cpt INFO-POLICY-NOTES is a free Internet newsletter. Subscriptions from listproc@essential.org. Archives at http://www.essential.org/listproc/info-policy-notes/ Materials may be redisseminated widely on the Internet. ------------------------------ From: Tad Cook Subject: GTE Mobilnet and New NPA Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 00:33:41 PDT GTE-Mobilnet Alerts Hampton Roads, Va., to Changing Area Code By Dave Mayfield, The Virginian-Pilot, Norfolk, Va. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Jun. 26--The transition period for Hampton Roads' new area code -- 757 -- starts Monday. And the cellular-phone company GTE-Mobilnet is not about to give its customers any excuse for not knowing that fact. It has taken out ads in newspapers, and on radio and TV. It is mailing notices. It is scheduling special fairs. And its message to local customers is this: ditch 804 as soon as possible and make 757 part of your telephone routine. Technically, starting on Monday long-distance calls to either code will get through to the more than 1.5 million people who will be part of the 757 area. This "grace period" will expire Jan. 31. After that, only 757 will work in front of phone numbers for Hampton Roads, as well as the Eastern Shore and portions of several western Tidewater counties. Richmond, Lynchburg, Charlottesville and other central Virginia cities and counties will keep 804. The grace period was established to ease the transition to the new code. A similar grace period was used in western Virginia, where 540 was carved out of the 703 code last July. Dialing 540 became mandatory in January. Businesses especially appreciate such transition periods because they can use up stationery, business cards and brochures and give their clients time to adjust to dialing a new code. But for phone companies, the sooner their local customers start telling their out-of-state friends and relatives about 757, the better. It will save a lot of headaches and confusion come February, when there will be no room for dialing errors. For local cellular companies, the transition from 804 to 757 is particularly critical. Unlike traditional "landline" phones, every one of the more than 150,000 cell phones in use by Hampton Roads customers of GTE-Mobilnet and 360 Communications must be reprogrammed to work in the new code. An unconverted customer is a lost customer -- something that the cell-phone companies can't bear to contemplate. "We're planning a very extensive education process," says Carla Ussery, Hampton Roads general manager for GTE Mobilnet. The most overt gesture planned by her company is turning the "Roam" light on all of the phones of GTE Mobilnet's local customers and leaving it on until they bring in their phones for reprogramming. GTE Mobilnet plans 14 "update fairs" between late July and early November throughout the new 757 territory to encourage people to drop by. It plans food and prize giveaways and will provide two months of free emergency roadside assistance coverage for each customer who converts his or her phone. Ussery said GTE Mobilnet will even send vans to the sites of large commercial customers to reprogram their employees' phones. 360 Communications is taking a lower-key approach. It, too, plans to send mobile vans out to large commercial customers' sites, and it will add extra tables at booths it sets up at local music and arts festivals. But Bob Sage, 360's local general manager, said his company will try to encourage customers to get their phones reprogrammed while they're dropping in for some other transaction. He said 360 plans to offer a number of new services, like Caller ID, that will encourage customers to visit the phone company anyway. 360 also plans to set up a help number to walk customers through the process of reprogramming their phones themselves. Sage said the process should take no longer than about five minutes. GTE Mobilnet's Ussery said her company would prefer customers not try to reprogram their phones, but will help them do so "if they insist." ON THE INTERNET: Visit Pilot Online, the World Wide Web site of the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot. Point your browser to http://www.infi.net/pilot ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: San Jose to Get Cable TV Competition From Pacific Bell Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:22:38 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:19:42 -0700 From: sqlgate@list.pactel.com Subject: San Jose First California City To Get Cable TV Competition From Pacific Bell Video Services FOR MORE INFORMATION: Susan Petoletti (415) 542-4541 Craig Watts (415) 542-6864 San Jose First California City To Get Cable TV Competition From Pacific Bell Video Services San Jose City Council Awards Cable TV Franchise Commercial Launch Scheduled for Late Summer SAN JOSE -- The San Jose City Council voted unanimously to award a cable television franchise to Pacific Bell Video Services (PBVS) at its meeting today. San Jose residents will be the first to benefit from cable TV competition between Pacific Bell Video Services and an incumbent cable service provider in California. Pacific Bell Video Services plans to launch commercial service over its advanced communication network in San Jose later this summer. "San Jose residents have been demanding an alternative to their existing provider and Pacific Bell Video Services will offer San Jose top-notch service," said Steve Harris, vice president of external affairs for PBVS. "We would like to bring the same high-quality service to other California cities through our wireline and wireless networks." Pacific Bell is currently building an advanced communications network in San Diego and has plans to launch wireless cable television in Los Angeles, Orange County and the San Francisco Bay Area in 1997. Laura Murdock, vice president and general manager, Northern California operations, Pacific Bell Video Services added, "Our network will deliver more choice, better value, and superior picture quality. Most important, residents will finally be able to rely on the high standards of customer service for which Pacific Bell is known." Pacific Bell Video Services has been running a successful test of the cable services since late 1995 that now includes over 1,300 San Jose area residents. In a recent Pacific Bell Video Services survey, a vast majority of test customers ranked Pacific Bell Video Service superior in the areas of installation service, picture quality, channel lineup and customer service. This is the first time cable television programming will be commercially offered over Pacific Bell's new advanced communications network -- a state-of-the-art hybrid fiber optic-coaxial cable network that is capable of bringing high quality voice, video and data into the home over one line. When video is activated this summer, telephone service will be provided over the same network. Interactive video and personal computer service is being tested now. In addition to advanced communications services, Pacific Bell Video Services competitively challenged the incumbent cable TV provider, TCI, by meeting and/or exceeding all of the franchise provisions in TCI's current agreement, including PEG (public education and government) channels. The term of the agreement is 4.5 years at which time both TCI and Pacific Bell Video Services franchises can be reviewed for renewal. ----------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Mike King Subject: Pacific Bell Mobile Services to Debut New Wireless Phone Service Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:23:16 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 07:23:57 -0700 From: sqlgate@list.pactel.com Subject: Pacific Bell Mobile Services to Debut New Wireless Phone Service at Republican Convention FOR MORE INFORMATION: Linda Bonniksen (213) 975-5061 John Britton (619) 237-2430 Pacific Bell Mobile Services to Debut New Wireless Phone Service at Republican Convention Personal Communications Services Offers GOP a More Secure Alternative to Cellular SAN DIEGO - The 1996 Republican National Convention will use a new wireless telecommunications technology that offers a secure and private alternative to cellular. The new technology is Personal Communications Services (PCS). It will be provided by Pacific Bell Mobile Services as the Republican National Convention's official provider of wireless Personal Communications Services. The convention will be in San Diego Aug. 12 through 15. Unlike cellular, PCS technology is 100 percent digital. Being digital, PCS offers superior sound quality and reliability, as well as built-in complex encryption for maximum privacy and protection from "cloning," a form of cellular theft that costs consumers $650 million a year. "Pacific Bell's PCS is the only secure wireless telecommunications technology available to the GOP," said Terry Valeski, Pacific Bell Mobile Services vice president. Valeski explained that every PCS call passes through three levels of encryption - first at the phone, next through the phone's "subscriber identification module," and finally at the network. At each level, encrypted information must be exchanged and verified before a call is completed. "With Pacific Bell's PCS, candidates, delegates and security personnel can discuss confidential matters without worrying about electronic eavesdroppers - a freedom they didn't enjoy in Houston four years ago," Valeski said. Pacific Bell Mobile Services will activate PCS service for the convention next month. The coverage area will include the San Diego Convention Center, downtown hotels, tourist attractions, the airport, major transportation corridors and the coastline. Convention attendees will use their PCS phones to send and receive calls and short-text messages. The phones can also be plugged into laptop computers for wireless faxing and Internet access. "Our groundbreaking use of PCS will make the 1996 Republican National Convention the most technically sophisticated event of its kind," said William Greener, III, convention manager for the Republican National Convention. "PCS will give us unprecedented freedom to move about the convention and still stay connected." "PCS is wireless in full bloom. With one pocket-sized phone, PCS gives us voice, data and online access in every convention venue," said Jack Ford, executive director of the San Diego Host Committee. 500 Phones Sport GOP Style Manufacturers Nokia, Motorola and Ericsson have provided more than 500 phones to the convention. The Nokia and Motorola phones sport a stars-and-stripes design, while the Ericsson model displays the convention logo featuring the GOP's trumpeting elephant. The phones integrate the features of a phone, pager and personal digital assistant. With recent innovations in battery design, the phones have more "talk" and "standby" time than available over today's cellular phones. An additional phone feature includes the "subscriber identification module" - or SIM. A SIM contains network information about a particular subscriber, including their telephone number, calling plan, custom calling features and speed dialing list. In some phone models, the SIM rests in a smart card that can be removed from the phone to disable its calling capabilities. The SIM is one of many PCS attributes exclusive to a network standard called Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM). Pacific Bell Mobile Services selected GSM because it makes possible an array of advanced PCS features, customer services and billing options not available through other network standards. These include "over-the-air" service activation and the ability to bill voice and data calls differently. GSM has a long track record of proven performance and reliability among nearly 15 million PCS users in 92 countries. Consumer Launch in Early 1997 After the convention closes, Pacific Bell Mobile Services will prepare for a consumer product launch in California and Nevada in early 1997. The company plans to broadly distribute PCS phones through drug stores, consumer electronics stores and warehouse retailers. Industry analysts expect PCS to cost less than existing cellular service, particularly in California where cellular subscribers pay among the highest rates in the nation. Pacific Bell Mobile Services is the wireless communications subsidiary of Pacific Bell. Pacific Telesis Group, the parent company of Pacific Bell and Pacific Bell Mobile Services, is a diversified telecommunications company headquartered in San Francisco. ----------------------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ From: Brent Subject: Information Wanted on Norstar Centrex Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:48:24 -0700 Organization: Federal Telco Supply If we have centrex service and use M5209 sets will we have to change our type of centrex lines to use a Norstar 8x24? Also, would we have to use the centrex software in the ksu or would the DR5 software be sufficient? ------------------------------ From: ananth@access.digex.net (A N Ananth) Subject: Help Needed Installing Baltimore-Bombay Dedicated Line Date: 26 Jun 1996 22:11:58 -0400 Organization: Prism Communications Inc, Gaithersburg MD We are considering installation of a dedicated line (T-1 or lower) from Baltimore to Bombay, India but are fuzzy on MTNL and VSNL rules in the matter. Also there is the looming quesion of local loop charges. The objective is US-India telephone traffic and so termination to the local exchange is necessary. We are aware of "favoured" connections to the SEEPZ in Andheri and the questions are: a. Is this even possible? b. Is it possible to have it terminated to the local exchange? c. Will connection to STD trunks to other cities be permitted? d. Any idea as to the local loop charges? e. Is this possible to Bangalore? Any and all war stories are welcome. Thanks in advance. A. Ananth Phone: (410) 765-9281 Prism Communications Inc Fax: (410) 531-9516 Which Prism is for you? http://www.universe.digex.net/~prism ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Jun 96 22:38:43 From: Tina Rathbone Subject: Modem Link on Columbia Space Shuttle Members of the crew of space shuttle Columbia are reportedly using a modem link to communicate with their families. That's one mondo phone cord! Seriously, does anyone want to speculate on the setup? "A thumb-sized video camera hooked up to a notebook computer was to be used to relay audio and video between the shuttle and the ground via a special high-speed modem. Because the families of shuttle commander Tom Henricks, pilot Kevin Kregel and mission specialists Rick Linnehan and Chuck Brady were to make their private calls from mission control, they would be able to see images on a small computer display." ... Reuters, 6/25/96 Tina Rathbone, Modems & Online Stuff ------------------------------ From: jared2654@aol.com (Jared2654) Subject: Re: The Virtual Institute of Information (Shameless Self Promotion) Date: 27 Jun 1996 09:17:07 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: jared2654@aol.com (Jared2654) There is a lot of good telecom information at: http://www.tbi.net/~jhall Heavy Wide Area Networking and Voice information. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #317 ****************************** From ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Thu Jun 27 12:20:25 1996 Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA09449; Thu, 27 Jun 1996 12:20:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 12:20:25 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199606271620.MAA09449@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #318 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Jun 96 12:20:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 318 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Pacific Bell Completes Caller ID Blocking Verification Effort (Mike King) Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again (Kevin Hogan) Re: 888 Deployment Not (Pavel Beker) Re: PC Modems and Stutter Dial Tone (Eric A. Carr) Re: TCI Cable Service is Terrible (Joshua Cole) Re: TCI Cable Service is Terrible (Bobby Krupczak) Re: TCI Cable Service is Terrible (Mike Fox) Re: Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today (Fred Atkinson) Re: Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today (Jared Hall) Re: Splitting Area Codes Causes Consternation (John R. Levine) Re: Interesting Facts From Trying to Fax a Cruise Ship (Mark Brader) Re: NPA/Prefix Changes in North Carolina (John Cropper) Re: Information Wanted on French Telecom Organization (Jean-Bernard Condat) Last Laugh! Another Good Use For Friday Free Calls (Van Heffner) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike King Subject: Pacific Bell Completes Caller ID Blocking Verification Effort Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 20:26:53 PDT Forwarded to the Digest FYI: Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:58:14 -0700 From: sqlgate@list.pactel.com Subject: Pacific Bell Completes Caller ID Blocking Verification Effort FOR MORE INFORMATION: Rebecca Perata (415) 394-3701 Pacific Bell Completes Caller ID Blocking Verification Effort Company Plans to Offer Caller ID Service on July 8 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Bell announced today it has completed intensive Caller ID customer blocking verification work and plans to offer Caller ID service on July 8. "We are pleased to report that we have completed an extensive verification process, and are confident our customers' blocking requests are implemented correctly," said Mark Pitchford, vice president of consumer marketing for Pacific Bell. "We've checked every request that was placed through Pacific Bell's 1-800-298-5000 blocking request number and through ballots included in the company's March and April telephone bills. In addition, we checked a sample of more than 1 million customer lines to make sure requests were accurately registered in our equipment." While Pacific Bell will delay its Caller ID service launch until July 8, under the FCC order, the company is required to begin passing Pacific Bell customers' telephone numbers to Caller ID subscribers across the state and outside California by July 1. The company has approached the Federal Communications Commission for an extension on the July 1 deadline, but the FCC said it would not grant an extension. "We are confident that customers have the blocking options they requested so their blocking will be in place before July 1," said Pitchford. "We are still opting to delay our Caller ID launch, however, to complete the associated paper work to ensure all our records match customers' programmed blocking choice." "Our checks show that we had an accuracy rate much greater than 99 percent. In the fraction of one percent where customer requests did not match our records, we are making those corrections. That will be complete this week," said Pitchford. Pacific Bell said most of the confusion over whether people received the right blocking option was due to a lag between installing the blocking option on the customers' line, updating customer records and then mailing confirmation letters. "Our first priority is to ensure that customers receive the blocking option they requested on their line. Our tests show that those orders were and are being installed correctly. We're taking an extra week to make sure all of our record processing has had time to catch up," Pitchford said. Caller ID enables people to see the number of the person calling before they answer the call. In order to see the caller's number, consumers need to subscribe to the Caller ID service and purchase either a telephone with a built-in display device or an electronic display device designed to connect to an existing phone. Caller ID service from Pacific Bell will cost $6.50 per month for residential customers and $7.50 per month for business customers. There will be a $5.00 installation fee for residential customers and $6.00 installation fee for business customers. Pacific Bell has received thousands of calls from customers desiring to order Caller ID. These customers have been placed on a waiting list until the service is available on July 8. Pacific Bell is a subsidiary of Pacific Telesis Group, a diversified communications corporation based in San Francisco. ----------------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 08:12:29 -0700 From: Kevin Hogan Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Delays Caller-ID Yet Again Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article TELECOM Digest Editor asked: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So what *are* they doing about > Caller-ID in California now. What is the latest word as of today, > June 26? PAT] The latest word that I've heard (from San Fransisco radio news this morning) was that Pac Bell was promising to provide Caller-ID starting on July 8, with delays due to "mistakes in processing thousands of customer forms". Kevin Hogan kahogan@hera.EECS.Berkeley.EDU (510) 704-9517 http://www-ucsee.EECS.Berkeley.EDU/~kahogan/ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Elsewhere I read it was 'millions of customer forms'. I wonder if they will think of some new excuse to delay it still further sometime in the next week or so? PAT] ------------------------------ From: pbeker@crl.com (Pavel Beker) Subject: Re: 888 Deployment Not Date: 26 Jun 1996 20:58:00 -0700 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access I had an 888 number, terminating to my home phone, for about a month, during which I was traveling almost constantly. (Mainly Pac*Bell and Bellsouth areas.) My main purpose for the 888 number was (1) to check messages on my home machine easily / cheaply, and (2) so a few people out there can reach me easily. Both of these mean using pay phones a lot. I don't have actual numbers, but being the consummate telephony geek, I tried calling from many places as I traveled -- and found that no less that 75% of pay phones (!) (including "real" telco phones - not just COCOTs) did not handle 888 at all. The few times I could call the "operator", I found that 80% of the time the operator did not, or could not place the call either! In fact, in Bellsouth-land (north Ga / 706), not only did real Bellsouth payphones not handle 888, the operator consistently connected me to the wrong number -- some private residence somewhere in 706, I expect -- and claimed that (not a joke) "the wires must be crossed." Beyond that, she could not help me. (No problem in 404/770 though). I actually had a 100% success rate from hotels, though -- and of course all the non-PBX private lines seemed to be fine. Anyway, no more 888 for me -- I'll let someone else be the guinea pig. Paul ------------------------------ From: C10973@email.mot.com (Eric A. Carr) Subject: Re: PC Modems and Stutter Dial Tone Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:29:12 -0800 Organization: Motorola SmartNet Trunked Systems In article , kevin@bobray.kray.com wrote: > David Yewell (yewell@ix.netcom.com) wrote: >> I subscribe to telco provided voicemail (The Message Center), and I >> also use the same line for my pc modem. My modem will not dial when >> the stutter dial tone is present. Does anyone know a way to get around >> this problem (other than clearing all the messages and removing the >> stutter dial tone?) >> Is there a modem I can use which will dial anyhow? >> What do alarm company modems do when they are attached to a line which >> is also on a voice mail line? How do they seize the line? > You can blind dial with the modem but in cases this will also > limit the modem in seeing "NO ANSWER", "NO CARRIER", and "BUSY". > You didn't specify if it was a Hayes Compatible modem (I'm assuming it > is :-) Being a Hayes type modem you can modify register S06 which by > default is set to '2' (ie: wait 2 seconds for dial tone before dial). > Bump this up to 8 or 10 (ie: ATS6=8) and if you do not have messages > waiting it will dial as normal (it saw the dialtone quicker). If you > do have messages waiting it will wait 8 seconds for a solid dialtone > before dialing. I've used just about every brand of modem (Hayes, > Practical Peripherals, Zoom, Microcom, USR, etc) with the stuttered > dialtone with no problems after changed S6. I don't think the S6 register has anything to do with detecting dial tone itself; it mearly tells the modem to wait the time value stored in the register before proceding to dial. As is the case with UDS modems, if dial tone detect is enabled, the modem still won't spit out digits regardless of what value is stored in that register. Try using one of the "X" commands (without the parenthesis); i.e "ATX", "ATX1", or "ATX3". "ATX" forces the modem to connect while just showing the default connect message of "CONNECT" regardless of the speed. "ATX1" shows all appropriate connect messages for any rate but does not have dial tone detect enabled. "ATX3" detects distant end busy while still displaying appropriate connect messages without dial tone detect. > You will want to change the init string for what ever program you are > using to dial to include S6=8 -or- issue ats6=8&w to save the profile > as the default (which could depend on your Y register). Read the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > manual for more information or email me if needed. One should also be careful with specifying particular registers by letter. The "Y" register determines whether long space disconnect is enabled or not. It's the "&Y" register that determines if the modem should power up with a user stored option profile. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:09:05 -0400 From: Joshua Cole Subject: Re: TCI Cable Service is Terrible [Stuff about TCI's incompetent service deleted] Pat: Don't for a single instant believe that you are alone in your contempt of cable companies. Comcast cable in Howard County, MD where I reside is just as incompetent. They'll schedule repair times and never show up. They'll call and say, "the tech is on his way and will be there in 10 minutes." Meanwhile, when you call three hours later to wonder where the tech is, the office "plays" dumb. Anyway, if the cable companies want to get into phone service and the phone companies want to get into cable service, then we're all pretty much up the proverbial creek. I'll bet you that some enterprising company could make a killing getting into telecommunications services and actually SERVED their customers and didn't yank them around. Maybe competition will finally force these jokers to get their acts together. Joshua Cole [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you have a cable committee in your town which handles formal complaints with Comcast? If so, does it do any good to lodge a complaint with them? PAT] ------------------------------ From: rdk@morticia.cc.gatech.edu (Bobby Krupczak) Subject: Re: TCI Cable Service is Terrible Date: 27 Jun 1996 14:17:06 GMT Organization: College of Computing Hi! > The cable service where I live has been out for two weeks and no one > at TCI has ever come out to fix it. I have two broken promises on > commitment times, and now they claim the earliest they can come out > is next Tuesday (after promising to come yesterday and missing the > appointment then promising again today and missing this one). At least you can get through to those scumbags. Here in scenic Austell (outside Atlanta) I cant even get through to MediaOne (readers Im sure are familiar with US West's foray into cable service) to order cable. I get lots of marketing literature from them (as well as TV commercials) telling me how they are doing all kinds of great things for me. Pat, you forgot to mention that cable company's marketing arms usually work pretty darn well. Now I'm told by some folks at the Broadband Telecommunications Center (here at GaTech) that the real deal with cable modems is that the current generation will use a POTS upstream channel instead of upstream broadband. Thats exactly the mentality these snake-oil salesman (I mean cable folks) exude -- enough bandwidth to send your credit card number upstream, lots of downstream bandwith to feed you full of crap. Never mind that I may want to publish a digest (or something) from home ... Bobby ------------------------------ From: Mike Fox Date: 27 Jun 96 08:38:02 EDT Subject: Re: TCI Cable Service is Terrible > The cable service where I live has been out for two weeks and no one > at TCI has ever come out to fix it. I have two broken promises on > commitment times, and now they claim the earliest they can come out > is next Tuesday (after promising to come yesterday and missing the > appointment then promising again today and missing this one). This is the crux of the telephone-cable competition debate. If they are both allowed to compute in each other's markets, I think the phone companies are going to clean up. Just two anecdotes that everyone has experienced tells the whole story: I call the cable company at 8:00 pm because it's completely out: "Thank you for calling Time Warner Cable. Our phone center is open from 8 am till 7 pm Monday thru Friday except Wednesday when we open at 9 am, and Saturday from 8 am to noon. If you have an emergency repair, please hold the line and you will be transferred to our answering service." [ two minutes later, a fast busy signal and disconnect]. Some other time I call the phone company after regular hours: "Thank you for calling Bell South. All our operators are busy, please --- [human interrupts] Thank you for calling Bell South, this is Jane, how may I give you excellent service today?" And then they DO give me excellent service. If I could get cable from my phone company, I would be all over that! But I would NEVER trust something as important as my phone to those cable bozos. Later, Mike ------------------------------ From: Fred_Atkinson/SkyTel_at_SkyTelNotesPO@mtel.com Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 08:16:00 CST Subject: Re: Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today I recently applied for a domain name. When I read your story I knew I hadn't received an email bill from them as I requested. So, I called them and was told it had already been sent on email (I never received it) but would send me another copy that same day. I found out about their complaint mechanism. You send an email to: 'complaints@internic.net'. They respond with an automatic email assigning a reference number to your complaint. You 'finger' the reference number like an email address in the format 'finger NIC-960625.2829@internic.net' (assuming that NIC-960625.2829 is your reference number) and it returns the status of your request. If they close it without action, you will know. I sent a complaint day before yesterday. Yesterday, I got three copies of my invoice on email. I just put the payment in the mail to them. Fred ------------------------------ From: jared2654@aol.com (Jared2654) Subject: Re: Unpaid Domain Names Being Removed Today Date: 27 Jun 1996 10:21:30 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Reply-To: jared2654@aol.com (Jared2654) PAT, Hope they're not any of mine. The Internic's never sent me a bill. I've heard that they've really been sending bills to the wrong places. Billing seems to be a real mess over there. I really think that they should concentrate on accurately billing people first prior to disconnection. ;-) Jared Hall ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 10:01 EDT From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Splitting Area Codes Causes Consternation Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > I might suggest that in this era of competition, that the competing > LECs be the ones to offer numbers in new area codes. That's a complete non-starter, for several reasons. The first is that the FCC has decreed no more second class area codes. Area 917 is for cellular, pagers, and other such in New York City, works fine, but they don't like the precedent. (Actually, the NYC area is unusual in that the local calling area already covers two other area codes and parts of two more neighboring codes, so people there are unusally familiar with the idea that a call to another area code can be a local call.) The second is that in most of the area code splits I've heard of, they need new numbers for the incumbent landline LEC as well as for new entrants, so you have to do something about that anyway. But the most important reason is portability. At this point, if you change LECs, you have to change your phone number, which gives a huge advantage to the incumbent. As soon as technically feasible (which will be several years at least), you'll be able to switch LECs and take your number with you. It's not clear how this will work, perhaps by a database lookup like for 800 numbers, perhaps by assigning each prefix to an "original" LEC and forwarding the numbers that have moved, perhaps something else. But with portability, any number can be handled by any LEC so attempts to divide them by carrier will be impossible. Overlays are clearly coming within the next few years -- each time you split you make a million people change their phone numbers, and by the second or third time you have to throw away your stationery and reprint it, splits look pretty convenient. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com "Space aliens are stealing American