TELECOM Digest Tue, 16 Mar 93 02:18:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 181 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson New Deadline For ISAC: Intl. Symp. on Applied Computing (Jose Acereto) Troubles With WWIV and USR Modem -- Please Assist! (Tim Clinkenpeel) California SS7 Announcement in Newsbytes (root@sanger.chem.nd.edu) Telecom in East Tennessee During Blizzard (Steve Moulton) Common Carrier Research (Arinc, TAT) (Charles Gross) Steve Jackson Wins Court Case! (Steve Jackson via Rich Greenberg) Did the Blizzard Affect AT&T? (Garrett Wollman) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (Garrett Wollman) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology (John R. Grout) Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology (David H. Close) Re: Disabling *70 (Steve Forrette) Housemates and Telephones (was Disabling *70) (Nigel Allen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jicaza@academ01.mty.itesm.mx (Jose Ignacio Icaza Acereto) Subject: New Deadline For ISAC: Intl. Symp. on Applied Computing Date: 16 Mar 93 00:44:43 GMT Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey CALL FOR PAPERS International Symposium on Applied Computing: Research and Applications in Software Engineering, Databases and Distributed Systems October 13-15, 1993 ITESM, Campus Monterrey - Monterrey, Mexico (* Please note: 1. Deadline moved to April 30 2. This event (ISAC) is different from SAC (Symposium on Applied Computing) oreganized yearly by ACM's SIGAPP 3. A printred copy of the old call for papers appears in IEEE Computer, Nov. 1992, pp. 21 *) This Symposium is being organized by the Informatics Research Center and it is sponsored by the ITESM (Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey) in conjunction with Texas A & M University. Objective The goal of this event is to promote the use of new computing technologies through: * The presentation of original research with an applied focus. * The exchange of experiences in technology transfer and use (both successful and unsuccessful). * The presentation of new ideas and technology that could impact industry in the near future. Scope The program committee is issuing a call for papers in the following principal areas: software engineering, databases and distributed systems. Some of the topics of interest include, but are not limited to: Software Engineering * Methodologies for Software Engineering * Total Quality Management in Software Engineering * Object-Oriented Techniques Applied to Information Systems * Software Factory Implementation Issues * Management and Control of: Software Projects, Risk and Configuration. * Software Engineering Development Environments * User Interfaces Databases * Object-Oriented Database Systems * Data and Object Modeling for Information Systems * Data, Object and Repository Administration * Heterogeneus Distributed Database Interoperability Distributed Systems * Complex Network Management * High Speed Network Management * Network Security * Distributed Systems Modeling and Design * Local Area Networks as Distributed Systems * Distributed Application Design * Real-Time Distributed Systems Design and Development * Client/Server Architecture Implementation Issues Tutorial In addition to papers, proposals for full- or half-day tutorials are welcome. Proposals should include: tutorial title, outline, brief description of topics to be covered, intended audience, assumed attendee background, and resume of the speaker. Submission of Papers & Proposals The paper should identify the area to which it belongs, and also include an abstract. It should have a cover page containing the following information: title, authors names, affiliation, and the e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers of a contact author. Use a serif font, size 10, single spaced with a maximum of 10 pages. No papers nor tutorial proposals sent by electronic means will be accepted. Please submit 5 copies of a paper or tutorial proposal, written in English, to the Program Chair or the Tutorial Chair. Location The International Symposium on Applied Computing (ISAC) will be held in Monterrey, Mexico from October 13-15, 1993. Important Dates April 30, 1993: Deadline for submission of papers and tutorial proposals. July 8, 1993: Notification of acceptance or rejection to authors. August 5, 1993: Deadline for submission of camera-ready papers Program Chair Jose I. Icaza e-mail: jicaza@mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx Tutorial Chair J.Raul Perez-Cazares e-mail: rperez@mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey Centro de Investigacion en Informatica, CETEC 6o. Nivel Torre Norte Av. Eugenio Garza Sada 2501, Monterrey, N.L. Mexico C.P. 64849 Tel. (83) 58-2000 ext.5082,5076 Fax (83) 58-1400 ext. 5081 Tel. (83) 58-2000 ext. 5082, 5076 Fax (83) 58-2000 ext. 5081 ------------------------------ From: tpehrson@javelin.sim.es.com (tim clinkenpeel) Subject: Troubles With WWIV and USR Modem -- Please Assist! Reply-To: tpehrson@javelin.sim.es.com Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp. Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1993 02:21:29 GMT I'm having real woes with getting my USR Courier HST Dual Standard v.32 to work with WWIV BBS (latest version). I'm hoping that someone out there has the same hardware and has already solved this problem. I am unable to do all of the following under one configuration (I've tried factory, custom and WWIV): o call out and get a good connect to 2400 and below modems; o have 2400 and below callers make good connects to WWIV (sans garbage); o have high speed modems make good connects to WWIV ("). Quoted below are two setups: the custom one suggest to me by a supposedly knowledgable person (unavailable for further comment) and the setup WWIV 'recommends' via auto modem detect. Note: WWIV recognizes my modem as 'USRC2'. One thing I find particularly troubling is the presence of &B2 in the setup, which is not a legitimate parameter. Any insights greatly appreciated. --begin quoted-- (----"custom"----) B0 C1 E0 F1 M0 Q0 V0 X7 &A2 &B1 &C1 &D2 &G0 &H1 &I0 &J0 &K2 &L0 &M4 &N0 &P0 &R2 &S0 &X1 &Y3 (how relevant are the status registers? i'll quote them if need be) (----wwiv; quoted directly from modems.mdm file, should be self-explanatory) FILE: "USRC2" NAME: "USR Courier (No V.42 - &A2 mode)" CONF: "ATZ{~~~~~~~AT{~~AT&W{" SETU: "ATC1E0F1H0M0Q0V1X6&A2&B2&C1&D2S38=1{~~AT&H1&I0&K1&N0&R2&S0S0=0S2=1{" INIT: "ATB0H0M0{" ANSR: "ATA{" PICK: "ATH1{" HANG: "ATH0{" DIAL: "ATB1DT" SEPR: "/" DEFL: MS=38400 CS=38400 EC=N DC=N AS=N FC=Y RESL: "OK" "Normal" NORM RESL: "RING" "Ring" RING RESL: "NO CARRIER" "No Carrier" DIS RESL: "ERROR" "Error" ERR RESL: "NO DIAL TONE" "No Dial Tone" NDT RESL: "BUSY" "Busy" DIS RESL: "NO ANSWER" "No Answer" DIS RESL: "RINGING" "Ringing" RINGING RESL: "VOICE" "Voice" DIS RESL: "CONNECT" "300" MS=300 CS=300 CON RESL: "CONNECT 1200" "1200" MS=1200 CS=1200 CON RESL: "CONNECT 2400" "2400" MS=2400 CS=2400 CON RESL: "CONNECT 4800" "4800" MS=4800 CS=4800 CON RESL: "CONNECT 9600" "9600" MS=9600 CS=9600 CON RESL: "ARQ" EC=Y CS=38400 RESL: "HST" "14400/HST" AS=Y MS=14400 RESL: "V32" '/V.32' AS=N RESL: "NONE" EC=N RESL: "SYNC" ---end quoted------ Again, thank you to anyone who is willing to take the time to help me sort out this mess. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to figure out how to do it myself. tim clinkenpeel: aberrant analytical skeptical agnostic idealist. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 11:12:01 -0500 From: Hierophant Subject: California SS7 Announcement in Newsbytes An article appeared in the 12 March Newsbytes (clari.nb.telecom) announcing the arrival of some CLASS end-user services in California. It briefly outlines the functionality of Call { Trace | Return | Screen }, Select Call Forwarding, Repeat Dialing, and Priority Ringing. The article points out that the SS7 technology would have allowed PacBell to offer the "controversial Caller ID services", but "While the company cannot offer Caller ID in California because of regulations set by the California Public Utilities Commission, it is allowing California residents to make use of the SS7 technology ..." This is in contrast to the discussion here in the Digest, in which it is indicated that PacBell wasn't prohibited from offering Caller ID, it merely decided that the requirements placed on this service by the PUC would keep Bell from making the outrageous profit it desired, and they decided not to offer it for that reason. However, PacBell now has "reliable" sources which claim that "the Bad Old PUC won't let you have Caller ID". Once again, I have yet to see ANY RBOC own up to its motives. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 12:55:49 EST From: Steve Moulton Subject: Telecom in East Tennessee During Blizzard > By the way can anyone give us any weather related telecom updates > from the eastern states? Are they even getting through at all? PAT] In Knoxville, telephone and water were about the only services that could be depended on. Power failed at 5:30 am Saturday morning, and there were periods when it took up to a couple of minutes to get dial tone, but telephone service was dependable until about 8 pm Saturday. At that time, battery went away, but would return for a few minutes each time the electricity flickered on (which it did several times from 10 pm to 2 am). Presumably, since I am something like eight miles from the CO (615-69x, 615-53x) there was a battery in a vault somewhere that ran down). ATT long distance service had all circuits busy whenever I tried Saturday (one or two rings, then an ATT intercept message); finally I had the inspiration to try another carrier (10333 - US Sprint) and got through for the one LD call I had to make. Call completion was immediate and clear. Sunday, I spent most of the day logged in and connected to Florida State, so WRT telecom things seem to be in pretty good shape. Hundred of homes in the Knoxville are still without power (Monday noon), after our 15 inches of snow (I measured 18 inches in an area not susceptible to drifts; had four foot drifts on our deck) and nine degree temperature at 8 am this morning. I just talked to a four wheel drive owner who has only catnapped in the past 48 hours; as of last night city government and the Red Cross were still calling for four wheel drive owners to help with medical emergencies. We are digging our way out. My back hasn't ached like this since I left Cincinnati years ago. Steve Moulton Grad Student Ayres 111 (615) 974-8298 moulton@cs.utk.edu University of Tennessee Department of Computer Science [Moderator's Note: We've seen nothing like that here in Chicago for 25 years. We gpt a 27 inch snow storm January 30 - February 1, 1967. I was at UC at the time and had worked all night in the phone room, no busier than usual even though the snow was piling up outside all night. Trouble is, 7 AM comes around, and not one single person from the day shift showed up! There was only one operator all night, but usually 10-12 operators on the day shift. I thought I was going to go crazy by 8 AM when all the campus offices had (in theory) opened up. Very few people showed up for work in those offices either. The day supervisor made it in about that time and flipped out when she saw me and something like a hundred lights on the switchboards all blinking for attention. She went right on the 'Telepage' (a paging system with loudspeakers in offices all over campus, hallways, cafeterias, etc broken down by 'zones' for where you wanted to voice page someone) and using the switch position marked 'All Call' she announced "if there are students or employees who know how to run a switchboard, please report to the phone room at once. Help is desparately needed in the phone room, 5801 Ellis, 6th floor." And I think she sat there and repeated that announcement over and over a dozen times in the next fifteen minutes or so, stressing " ... do NOT attempt to call the switchboard, just COME to the phone room ...". Volunteer operators came straggling in over the next several minutes, and by that point some of the full time regulars had started making it in also. For the evening shift starting about 4 PM, she had found out who would make it in and who would not, and had things organized. PAT] ------------------------------ From: A. Charles Gross Subject: Common Carrier Research (Arinc, TAT) Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 20:35:04 GMT I am doing research on limited spectrum sharing/common carrier arangements and how they are structured and regulated. Specifically, I am seeking information on how the 1) transatlantic cables are regulated and 2) how ARINC shares its spectrum among a variety of users. Any information or comments would be greatly appricated. Thanks, Adam acg@eff.org I speak for myself ------------------------------ From: richgr@netcom.com (Rich Greenberg) Reply-To: richgr@netcom.com Subject: Steve Jackson Wins Court Case! Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 22:00:00 CST [Moderator's Note: News of interest about Steve Jackson, passed along to the Digest by Rich Greenberg. Thanks, Rich! PAT] Newsgroups: austin.eff From: Steve Jackson Subject: We have a verdict. Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1993 21:24:46 GMT We won. Pete Kennedy, our attorney at George, Donaldson & Ford, called me with the news about 3:30 today. Apparently the decision came in late Friday while Pete was at the CFP. The judge ruled for us on both the PPA and ECPA, though he says that taking the computer out the door was not an "interception." (I have not read the decision yet, so no quotes here.) He awarded damages of $1,000 per plaintiff under the ECPA. Under the PPA, he awarded SJ Games $42,259 for lost profits in 1990, and out of pocket costs of $8,781. Our attorneys are also entitled to submit a request for their costs. No word on appeal yet. Look for a more complete and coherent account after we all read the decision. Please copy this announcement to all electronic and other media. Thanks for your support through all this! ------- End of forwarded message ------- @DATAPHONE@@USER@* Christopher Davis * * * [CKD1] * 226 Transfer complete. 17512509 bytes received in 5.2e+02 seconds (33 Kbytes/s) ------------------------------ From: Garrett.Wollman@UVM.EDU (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Did the Blizzard Affect AT&T? Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 17:50:21 GMT Over the past week, I have been calling my parents in Reno, NV (702 829), to tell them the results at the World Figure Skating Championships which took place in Prague. (This is necessary because they live to far south to deserve same-day coverage in the eyes of our all-knowing network TV programmers.) Now my PIC is AT&T, since nobody has given me enough on an incentive to change. Starting Friday evening, before the blizzard had even gotten as far north as New Jersey, the sound quality on my AT&T calls began to deteriorate dramatically (this is from 802 864), and stayed noticeably degraded at least until Sunday. During this period, I used Sprint for my calls, and noticed no degradation. Does anybody have ideas on why this should be? (TELECOM Digest readers may remember some months ago I reported on the battle of the Montreal radio stations taking place on our local NBC affiliate. They have now taken this to new heights of oddness: sandwiched in between the advertisements for CHOM and "Mix 96", during popular syndicated programs like "Wheel of Fortune", they are now running ads for CBC *Television*. (Big surprise to me ... not that I nmormally *watch* "Wheel", you understand.)) Garrett A. Wollman wollman@emba.uvm.edu uvm-gen!wollman UVM disagrees. ------------------------------ From: Garrett.Wollman@UVM.EDU (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught Up With Modern Technology Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 17:50:21 GMT @DATAPHONE@In article hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > At the destination sorting station (Goleta for us), > the mail is sorted into route order based on the 9 digit zip. All > this for 29 cents. When I was in Finland a while back, they used electronic sorting as well. However (and here's the catch), for a meager FIM 1,80 (about 50 cents or so), first-class letters which arrived at the post office before 5PM on any postal day would be delivered the next day. Even with all the automation, the USPS still wants $8.95 for this. ------------------------------ From: grout@sp90.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Modern Technology Reply-To: j-grout@uiuc.edu Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development Date: Mon, 15 Mar 93 21:29:04 GMT hhallika@tuba.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) writes: > Even if the writer did not use the nine digit zip, the system looks > up the nine digit zip for that address and codes the envelope with it. > For hand-written addresses, a person reads the address, keys it in, > then the machine codes the envelope. I'm not sure of what the > operator has to key in. I'd expect it to be something like number, > street, city, state, zip so the envelope does get coded with a full > nine digit zip. At the destination sorting station (Goleta for us), > the mail is sorted into route order based on the nine digit zip. All > this for 29 cents. It is city, state, street number, street and apartment number (often forgotten) ... there are various automated ways to get nine-digit zip information, including a CD-ROM version of the nine-digit zip code manuals. Two years ago, before I moved here, I found out my new nine-digit zip code at a museum exhibit which used this CD-ROM, and so I put it trustingly on my change of address notices. To my surprise, _most_ of the businesses and magazines that use nine-digit zip codes copied my apartment number (from the separate field for it on the notice) into my address while managing to both ignore the _correct_ nine-digit zip I gave them _and_ to automagically generate an _incorrect_ nine-digit zip which did _not_ use my apartment number. John R. Grout j-grout@uiuc.edu University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Center for Supercomputing Research and Development ------------------------------ From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close) Subject: Re: US Post Office Not Caught up With Common Technology? Date: 16 Mar 1993 05:11:09 GMT Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena Marvin Sirbu writes: > If the U.S. Postal Service began offering fax service there would be > an incredible hew and cry from companies like Mailboxes Etc. and > others that a Fedral Government agency that does not have to pay taxes > was competing unfairly with a private sector business. Maybe its time to propose a divestiture for the USPS? You know, break them into multiple competing organizations like Ma. Then the above would not be a valid complaint. (Yeah, I've heard the objections. Perhaps the change in terminology would help: divestiture instead of privatization.) This seems to me the kind of proposal only a Democrat in the Presidency could get away with ... Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Disabling *70 Date: 15 Mar 1993 21:56:34 GMT Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA @DATAPHONE@In article hpubvwa!tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) writes: @DATAPHONE@> In article killer@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu > (Francis J Park) writes: >> I am dealing with a highly annoying roommate who is fond of turning on >> *70 to disable call waiting when he calls out voice. > Gee, I would LOVE to have a roommate who uses this feature! Far > better than ones who don't disable Call-Waiting, and then just ignore > the beep. You mean there are still people out there that share phone lines? :-) Seriously, I can't imagine not having my own service. When I had roommates, I've always gotten my own line installed. In addition to modem traffic, one big issue with me is being able to get messages in a reliable manner. I understand that some telco voicemail offerings address this issue by providing the caller with a menu selection as to which person at the called number they would like to leave a message for. This way, each person sharing the line can have their own voicemail box. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1993 19:00:00 -0500 Subject: Housemates and Telephones (was Disabling *70) Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto @DATAPHONE@In article killer@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Francis J Park) writes: > I am dealing with a highly annoying roommate who is fond of turning on > *70 to disable call waiting when he calls out voice. There is a great deal to be said for roommates getting their own phone lines. When I moved into a shared house ten years ago, I made a point of getting my own phone line (with one phone in my bedroom and an extension in the kitchen). This turned out to be particularly useful later on when the housemate in whose name the house phone line was in had problems paying his phone bill. (And when I started getting harassing phone calls on my line, they upset me but they didn't affect my housemates -- and I was able to put an end to the harassing calls by having my phone number changed.) I lived at the house at 16 Major Street in Toronto for four years, and I liked my housemates, but I'm glad that I had my own phone line there. I know one couple with four phone lines: one for her, one for him, one for the computer, and one for the community group they help run. So my advice to killer@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Francis J Park) and his "highly annoying roommate" is to seriously consider getting another phone line. Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada nigel.allen@canrem.com Canada Remote Systems - Toronto, Ontario 416-629-7000/629-7044 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #181 ****************************** Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253