TELECOM Digest Mon, 15 Mar 93 00:43:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 178 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (John Higdon) Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted (Hal Stitt) Re: How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line? (Dave Levenson) Re: Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC (Dave Levenson) Re: The Future of Videophones (Martin Briscoe) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? (John Higdon) No 900 in Louisiana? (J. Philip Miller) Sprint Counter-Offers (was AT&T Switch Bribe...) (Paul W. Schleck) FAQ Notes (Dave Leibold) Software For Data Download via High-Speed Lines (Nita Avalani) Information Wanted in CTS Datacomm Modems (William Petrisko) Caller ID For GTE in NC (Matthew Waugh) 800 Number Woes (Dave Rand) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 21:21 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > So, is GTE MobilNet here in San Luis Obispo an A carrier or a B > carrier? We are served by Pacific Bell, but the GTE Mobilnet system > is based in Santa Barbara, where GTE is the local telco. GTE Mobilnet is the B (wireline) carrier in each of its California service areas. Whether it is indeed the LEC in any of those places is irrelavent. It has more to do with timeliness of filed applications and other matters. As long as GTE does actually supply local dial tone ANYWHERE in a cellular service area, it can qualify for a B cellular license. GTE Mobilnet is the Bay Area's B carrier and yet supplies a very tiny number of exchanges with GTE wired dial tone. California roaming arrangements are strange. In San Francisco, the B carrier is GTE and the A carrier is Cellular One (partially owned by PacTel). If you travel to Sacramento while talking on GTE, your call will be handed off to PacTel Cellular (B carrier in Sacramento) with whom you will be roaming. If you travel south from Santa Barbara, your GTE Mobilnet call will hand off to PacTel Cellular in Los Angeles, your roaming provider there. Yes, the competing companies actually hand off calls in progress to each other if the caller travels across the boundaries. (Billing is handled as if the caller made the entire call within the area where the call originated.) John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: halstitt@netcom.com (Hal Stitt) Subject: Re: Cellular System A and B Info Wanted Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 05:37:18 GMT hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: Really, the B carriers are owned by the local >> 'wireline' telephone company in the area. For example, in Chicago, >> Ameritech Mobile is the B carrier; they also operate Illinois Bell, >> our telco. The A carriers are the 'non-wireline' carriers. They will >> frequently be telephone companies also, but in some other part of the >> country. The A carriers often times use the generic name 'Cellular >> One'. Here in Chicago, Cellular One (the A carrier) is owned by >> Southwestern Bell, a telephone company in another part of the USA. On >> the other hand, the same Southwestern Bell is the B carrier operating >> in the St. Louis, Missouri area. So if a telco goes to the territory >> of some other telco to operate cellular, they do it as an A carrier. >> The telco which 'belongs there' (or has historically always been the >> telco in that community) is the B carrier. Is all that clear? :) In >> addition, the A carriers stick among themselves with things like >> roaming agreements; the B carriers do the same. PAT] > So, is GTE MobilNet here in San Luis Obispo an A carrier or a > B carrier? We are served by Pacific Bell, but the GTE Mobilnet system > is based in Santa Barbara, where GTE is the local telco. The border > between GTE and PacBell is at the county line, about 30 miles south of > here. As I understand the system, GTE does all their cellular > switching in Santa Barbara and just has cell sites up here, connected > to SB by T-1 lines. So, a call across the room goes to SB and back. > So, is GTE Mobilnet a B carrier here, or do they switch from B to A > when they cross the Santa Maria River? > [Moderator's Note: Good question. I don't know anything about that > part of the country. Where you have two major telcos serving one metro > area like Los Angeles (Bell and GTE) and they both are in the cellular > business as well, then I guess some arbitrary decision was made in the > past. PAT] The B carriers are generally the wireline carriers, but not always. If the wireline carrier didn't build up a system within a specified time, I believe within two years of being licensed, the area was available to others via a lottery. In your case, Rt. 101 has a lot to do with the outcome. GTE, the wireline carrier in Santa Barbara wound up with an extension as the B carrier up 101 to north of San Ardo. According to The Cellular Telephone Directory, you don't have an A carrier in SLO. McCaw/Cellular One has the A license in Santa Barbara, but their coverage only goes north to Santa Maria. Building systems along major highways got a high priority early on when most cellular phones were mounted in cars. It's still a priority in your area. The density of cellular phone users probably falls off sharply within a few miles east and west of 101. Hal Stitt halstitt@netcom.com (619) 583-8240 ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: How do I Order a Leased Voice-Grade Line? Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:14:08 GMT In article , lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) writes: > I have been asked to provide ordering specifications for a third party > to lease a full-time voice grade circuit here in GTE-CA territory. > The line is to be used to connect two V.32bis modems about six miles > apart (served out of different central offices). The modems are > designed for operation on the public switched telephone network (i.e. > they expect a two-wire circuit with battery, dial tone and ring signal > present). > It seems to me that this is similar to an off-premise extension for a > PBX; is that what I should order? If I get a two-wire "private > circuit" will it have battery, dial tone and ring? Not quite. The OSNA line (used for PBX off-premise stations) has dis-similar ends. The PBX end is a current sink (looks to the PBX like a station) while the station end is a current source (looks to the station like the PBX line circuit). The telco probably does offer a ringdown line (a service designed to support two telephone sets -- go off-hook on either end and the other end receives ringing). That will support a couple of switched-service modems if the originating modem can be programmed to go off-hook without dialing or expecting dial tone. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Summary: Mini-PBX in ISA PC Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 05:16:37 GMT In article , st@bbl.be (Simon Townsend) writes: > Not too many replies, but they may be useful. I enclose them all: > From: bears!rhyre@cinpmx.attmail.com > I'm not sure where to get them, but AT&T makes a voice power card, > that has Unix driver suport. It can handle four phone lines. The AT&T 4-channel Voice Power card has four telephone line interfaces. It has no telephone station interfaces, and no capability to make/break connections between its four ports. Yes, it can answer four trunks, but no, it is not a PBX. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: martin.briscoe@almac.co.uk (Martin Briscoe) Subject: Re: The Future of Videophones Date: 14 Mar 93 11:26:00 GMT Reply-To: martin.briscoe@almac.co.uk (Martin Briscoe) Organization: Almac BBS Ltd. +44 (0)324 665371 > I am working on a research project concerning the future of > videophones and videoconferencing. Is there a future at all? ICCTIS (the UK organisation that regulates Premium Rate "chat-lines") announced last week that they will not allow the use of premium rate chat-line services ("adult" type) on videophones -- so thats a big potential market lost! Martin * 1st 1.10b #405 * Martin Briscoe Fort William - Highland Region - Scotland ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 21:08 PST From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? On Mar 14 at 20:11, TELECOM Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: Except of course, there are times when original > documents are required, such as checks in payment, signatures on other > documents, etc. PAT] My unfortunate experience with the Post Office is that if you REALLY need to get a document from one location to another, you should use another service. NEVER EVER send an original, valuable document through the US mail -- certified, registered or otherwise. I have had irreplacable documents lost and the extra money spent registering or certifying was literally wasted. The USPS has no way of tracking anything within its system (unlike Federal Express which can). All of the fabulous technology notwithstanding, the USPS provides miserable, not even barely-adequate service. Add to that the miserable attitude on the part of counter personel and you have an institution whose demise will draw no tears from me. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 ------------------------------ From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) Subject: No 900 in Louisiana? Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 07:14:15 -0600 (CST) Having just seen an ad for NBC's weather line (1-900-WILLARD) it stated it was not valid in Louisiana. Have they passed a law that makes all 900 service illegal or only those that give their proceeds to charity? J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)] ------------------------------ Subject: Sprint Counter-Offers (was AT&T Switch Bribe ...) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 12:47:40 CST From: Paul W Schleck KD3FU You may recall my short note on this forum a while ago about AT&T offering me $75 to switch from US Sprint and my surprise that a long-distance company would fork over that much hard cash when it's not clear that would get that much in gross receipts (let alone profit) from me in a year. I'd like the thank the general feedback I got from other readers. Some pointed out that it was based on the assumption that once I changed I wouldn't want to change back for a while (is the public realy that passive?). Others recommended that I keep my secondary account with Sprint and use the appropriate access codes whenever I wanted to use Sprint instead (I pretty much surmised that from reading the Digest over the years, but the replies reminded me to call Sprint and confirm it, including retention of my FON card). The switch has already taken place (based on calling 1-700-555-2424), but no check yet. Now Sprint has upped the ante by making a counter-offer. They'll switch me back for free at the end of 30 days (the minimum service committment for the AT&T switch), and give me 75 minutes of long-distance the first month (probably a minute per $1 deal). They assure me I can still pocket the AT&T check. What the heck? Now, if anyone calls me to task for this calling-plan ping-pong, I'll just simply say, "Hey, I'm not the one playing games, you are. If you want to offer me all kinds of marketing hype and switching bribes that profit from the telecom-illiterate, that's your choice. I'm an intelligent consumer who views long-distance as a product, and through the use of tools like 10XXX codes and calling cards (including my soon-to-arrive Orange Card), makes ongoing and intelligent choices about what's best for me." Jon Higdon is right when he says this isn't going to shake out the market and make any one company the clear winner. These tricks and incentives will only cause the consumer to "expect" them and further muddy the waters about costs and profits. Paul W. Schleck pschleck@unomaha.edu [Moderator's Note: Bear in mind that if anyone chooses to use the long distance 1+ plans I am selling, I won't send any rebate checks out; but I will gratefully try to continue sending a quality telecom news- group feed out each day. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 00:28:43 -0500 From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) Subject: FAQ Notes Thanks to those who offered tips, fixes and ideas following the FAQ list that was released many weeks ago. I'm aware of the news.answers group for posting of such list, and I did make an attempt to post the Telecom FAQ there. Unfortunately, it was rejected on some technicalities, so another attempt to post there will have to wait until I can study through the 110 Commandments for that group and get the whole works right. Carl Moore did nab some spelling and other errors; I'm now aware that Ireland switched over to 00+ for overseas dialing. Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG [Moderator's Note: We all owe Dave and Carl Moore our thanks for first starting the telecom FAQ and keeping it up to date. A copy automatically goes to each new subscriber to the mailing list and it can also be found in the Telecom Archives using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. PAT] ------------------------------ From: na@princeton.edu (Nita Avalani) Subject: Software For Data Download via High-Speed Lines Organization: Princeton University Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 20:05:01 GMT Is there any software out there which will allow to download data between remote mainframes and sun/unix servers at the line speed or close to the line speed? The data throughput for Xcom6.2 (LU6.2) was at about 24kb/sec, and about 2-5kb/sec for IND$FILE (LU2). What do people use for T1/T3 lines? Are there any user-friendly, reliable software (with 3270 emulators and GUI) capable of downloading daily from remote mainframes (via T1/T3 lines) at around 1mb/sec - 100mb/sec (or more)? Nita ------------------------------ From: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu (William Petrisko) Subject: Information Wanted in CTS Datacomm Modems Date: 14 Mar 1993 22:28:17 GMT Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson Reply-To: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu I picked up a couple of CTS Datacomm model 9629 leased line modems. I'm curious if anyone has a manual or knows anything about them (what are the two db25's ... sync or async, etc ...) Any info would be appreciated. bill petrisko current address: petrisko@evax2.engr.arizona.edu aka n7lwo soon to be: bill@indirect.com ------------------------------ From: waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com (Matthew Waugh) Subject: Caller ID For GTE in NC Date: Sun, 14 Mar 93 01:31:31 GMT Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC. GTE in NC included a little insert on Calling Number Identification with my phone bill this month. I thought a fairly good explanation of CID, and promising it for us soon. By default we will get Per-Call Blocking on *67 (1167 for pulse dialers). You can get Per-Line Blocking (by which they mean by default your line will not be identified) if you ask, at no charge. When you have Per-Line Blocking, you use, you guessed it, *67 to allow your number to be passed. They request that you return their card to sign-up for Per-Line Blocking by April 23rd, if that tells us anything about their schedule. They also included information on their SmartCall package, that provides all those goodies like Call Return. They note: "Limitation: These services now work on most calls, but only from within your local calling area, and between the NNXs listed on the map." The map lists the 2 GTE service areas in Durham and Monroe. From this, I surmise, perhaps incorrectly, that GTE and Southern Bell aren't talking SS7 yet, and so Caller ID may well have these limitations for a while when it is rolled out. Matthew Waugh waugh@dg-rtp.dg.com RTP Network Services Data General Corp. RTP, NC. (919)-248-6034 ------------------------------ From: dlr@daver.bungi.com (Dave Rand) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 15:57:28 PST Subject: 800 Number Woes For those wanting to make changes to their 800 numbers, with 800 number portability just around the corner, here is a tale of woe. A few months ago, I ordered a personal 800 number. Pacific Bell in Northern California has an excellant plan, with nation-wide and international (Canada) access available for only $5 per month. The only problem is that Sprint is the carrier for the IXC portion. Sigh. Well, I ordered the service. It was turned on the day promised, but only the local area worked. Sprint will only reload their switches at Midnight, so it was the next day before calls outside the area were available. International calls were not available until several days (and many telephone calls) later. Getting billing information from Sprint was almost impossible, and (when I finally got it), wrong. I was quoted the rate of "$0.36 to 0.60 per minute" for daytime calls from Canada ... but I digress. With the service from Sprint getting more and more erratic, and with AT&T offering its Win-Back promotion (install free, and one free month of calls), I decided to switch to AT&T. Pacific Bell agreed to refer my old 800 number to the new one, and Sprint indicated that they would do the same, both at no charge. AT&T was up, with international access, before 9am of the morning the service was due to be turned on. The old Pacbell/Sprint number was scheduled to be shut off the next day (a Friday). On Friday evening, Pacbell had a refer message on, but with the wrong 800 number listed as the referal. That was fixed early Saturday morning. Sprint, however, claimed that it was impossible to do the referal service free, but that they would be able to do it in 3-5 days, for "only" $125 extra, per month. What? After a long talk, and extracting the SA number from Pac Bell (the number that actually issues the referral message), Sprint agreed to translate to the same SA number that Pacific Bell was using. That was on Saturday. By Sunday, international calls were still not working, but calls outside of California (within the US) were. Calls inside of California, but outside of Pacific Bell's territory still aren't working, and Sprint is claiming Pacific Bell is to blame. Pacific Bell (and me!) are claiming Sprint is to blame. Sigh!! The moral of the story: If you have an 800 number, and want to change carriers, wait until portability (May 1). Or have lots of time to waste with service reps at your long distance provider. Dave Rand {pyramid|mips|bct|vsi1}!daver!dlr Internet: dlr@daver.bungi.com [Moderator's Note: I am hoping that 800 portability will be the occassion for many Digest readers with 800 numbers to allow that traffic to be handled through my program, at rates ranging from 17 to 23 cents per minute depending on volume. There is no monthly fee, and this, plus the Orange Card is a way Digest readers can help with the expense of this publication in a painless way. I can now supply 800 numbers at the above rates, but will gladly accept your existing 800 number in my program if you prefer. If my prices are too high, please don't sacrifice anything on my behalf, but if the rates are better than or about the same as you pay now, please consider me. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #178 ****************************** Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253