TELECOM Digest Mon, 15 Nov 93 01:32:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 760 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Remote Call Forwarding (Peter Tindall) Re: Nationwide GTE 800 Outage? (Macy M. Hallock) Re: AT&T Ships 800 Number Directory to One Million Consumers (Ken Thompson) Re: Problems With CNID (Chris Farrar) Re: Nationwide Caller ID (Chris Farrar) Need Caller ID / Number Identification Help (Reinhard A. Hamid) Re: Motorola Cellular Tech Manual Wanted (Ed Greenberg) Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (Jack Decker) Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (James Taranto) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (James R. Ebright) Re: Wanted: Info on Cellular Phone Monitoring Systems (Brett Frankenberger) Cell Phone Suggestions Sought (John R. Levine) Re: Help: Need to Query V&H Database (Dave Niebuhr) Questions About New Numbering Plan (Jim Wohlford) Re: Microsoft Telephony API/SPI (Nigel Roles) "Q" Not Followed by "U"? In English? (Steve Atlas) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Remote Call Forwarding Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1993 00:29:00 EST From: Peter Tindall In article @eecs.nwu.edu barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett) writes: > This is the same solution that I use. However, I would like to > point out that not ALL cellular providers will forward your calls free. > According to my third-party compilation of roaming agreements and > standard service policies, some charge air-time even when a call is > simply routed through their switch and forwarded to another number. Yes. Cantel (at least in Ontario and Quebec) has started charging for call forwarding minutes (only when the total call forwarding in a month exceeds 1000 minutes). Example: You use 999 minutes : No charge You use 1000 minutes : you pay $500.00 (+50c/minute for all minutes extra). I really believed this was a typo -- so I contacted the regulator here in Canada (the CRTC) and obtained a copy of the amended tariff page. Sure enough it is correct. I also understand that the no charge threshold was recently increased from 1000 to 2500 for corporate users, although I have no official confirmation -- just the mumblings of a Cantel customer service rep. I do believe that a token charge is in order since some resources are tied up, but charging the same (50c) per minute for both airtime and call forwarding time (which uses only a tiny part of the switch's resources) is unfair. Peter Tindall VE3TJP ptindall@accesspt.north.net (905) 820-7052 af288@freenet.carleton.ca ------------------------------ From: fmsystm!fmsys!macy@wariat.org Date: Sun, 14 Nov 93 08:09 EST Subject: Re: Nationwide GTE 800 Outage? Reply-To: macy@telemax.com Organization: F M Systems/Telemax Medina, Ohio USA In article bnunes@netcom.com (Brian Nunes) writes: > I work in West Los Angeles, also covered by GTE, and we too could not > dial out to any 800 numbers yesterday. GTE here in Ohio lost their link to the 800 database at least twice not too long after 800 portability went into effect. I've had clients give me trouble reports since then that sound like the link has been out of service for several short periods since then. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG +1.216.723.3030 macy@telemax.com macy@fms.com Telemax, Inc. - F M Systems, Inc. 152 Highland Drive Medina, OH USA ------------------------------ From: ken thompson Subject: Re: AT&T Ships 800 Number Directory to One Million Consumers Date: 14 Nov 93 14:42:00 GMT Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > Don't forget ... this directory lists only those businesses who have > AT&T 800 service. A great many other businesses also have 800 numbers, > but won't be in the book. Actually only those who PAY to be in the book are listed. Ken Thompson N0ITL Disk Array Hardware Development Peripheral Products MPD-Wichita NCR Corp. an AT&T company 3718 N. Rock Road Wichita,Ks 67226 (316) 636-8783 Ken.Thompson@wichitaks.ncr.com [Moderator's Note: You are correct. The default on 800 numbers is exactly the opposite of regular (or 'POTS') service where the norm is be listed for free and pay for non-pub. With 800 service, non-pub is free and you pay to be listed, either in printed books or with the 800-555-1212 database. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: comp.dcom.telecom@cld9.com Subject: Re: Problems With CNID From: chris.farrar@cld9.com (Chris Farrar) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 93 11:16:00 -0600 Organization: C-9 Communications Lunatix!chelf@ms.uky.edu said something along the lines of the following: > When the in-use light went on, some rather strange data noises could > be heard over the scanner, then nothing (like a dead line). I left it > there for a long while and never heard anyone talking or anything like > that. > Could it be possible that Caller ID is at fault? Or, more likely (in > my opinion), the phone needs to be junked. It seems as if the phone > *itself* is calling places at random. I'd say it was the phone myself. He should try a normal phone on his line, and see if the problem disappears. From the sounds of it, someone in the area may have a cordless that is triggering his base. Chris chris.farrar@f20.n246.z1.fidonet.org Origin: CSRNET Reply To: user@csrnet.cld9.com (11:100/160) ------------------------------ Reply-To: comp.dcom.telecom@cld9.com Subject: Re: Nationwide Caller ID From: chris.farrar@cld9.com (Chris Farrar) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 93 11:36:00 -0600 Organization: C-9 Communications Emmanuel@well.sf.ca.us said something along the lines of the following: > but not from others where Caller ID definitely works. Dialing *67 has > no effect -- your number is always transmitted onto the Caller ID box > regardless of privacy setting. This may indicate that Caller ID data > is really sent on all calls, including the private ones, which means > the possibility exists of capturing it on non-800 calls. Strange. I have a caller id system on my computer, and it actually lets you see what was sent. Bell Canada uses the multi-message format, and when you dial *67 before making the call, the string in the computer definitely shows an absene of the incoming number. Caller ID signal with a phone number (multi-message format): ff80 13 1 8 31 31 30 36 30 39 31 34 3 7 39 37 39 34 32 30 38 4d Caller ID signal with call blocking received ff80 d 1 8 31 31 30 36 31 32 37 4 1 50 ff83 Field 1 has 8 digits, and contains date and time. Field 3 (in first example, contains 7 digits, and is the phone number, with 4d as the checksum. In the call with blocking, field 3 is missing, but there is a field 4, which contains 1 digit, namely 50 hex, which indicates the reason the message is missing is because the caller is using blocking (*67) Chris Origin: CSRNET Reply To: user@csrnet.cld9.com (11:100/160) ------------------------------ From: hamid@tnt.uni-hannover.de (Reinhard Abdel Hamid) Subject: Need Caller ID / Number Identification Help Reply-To: hamid@tnt.uni-hannover.de Organization: Universitaet Hannover, Theoretische Nachrichtentechnik Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1993 11:37:38 GMT Hello Americans ! I am able to use an international voicemail network that is able to send messages to every telephone in the United States. But for a test I would like to know the American number it is calling from, when it sends messages. So, who (with an caller-id display) could help and email me the telephone-number I can send my test voicemail to? Later I will call you and ask for the number, the display showed during my voicemail. Thanks in advance. Greetings from Germany. Reinhard hamid@tnt.uni-hannover.de [Moderator's Note: The thing you'll need to take care on is to find a place where *inter-lata* caller-id is working; otherwise you'll want someone in the same community as the voicemail. Do you know *where* in the USA the voicemail system is located? What town or what state? You may otherwise waste your time putting through calls only to get a report from your American contact that the caller-id display said the calling number was 'out of area' or similar. Caller-id is not yet universal here you know, or even very common between different LATAs. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1993 11:27:57 -0800 From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Motorola Cellular Tech Manual Wanted Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) The manual is called the Technical Training Manual and costs $30 plus S&H from Motorola. The number is 1-800-331-6456 for USA transactions only. Overseas orders and inquiries may be sent by FAX ONLY to +1 708 523 8060. I will be receiving mine early next week. I will post a review to {Telecom-Tech} and TELECOM Digest. Note: Although I haven't received it, my credit card was charged about $38 already. The claimed next day shipment by UPS, and I didn't expect to have it yet (and don't :-) Ed Greenberg edg@netcom.com Ham Radio: KM6CG ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1993 18:07:02 -0500 From: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized Reply-To: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu In a previous article, djcl@grin.io.org (David Leibold) says: > The Star specifically mentioned one person's experience in Frankenmuth, > Michigan. I can't verify whether the company involved is Ameritech, GTE > or whoever, though the Phonefiche says this is supposed to be under the > Bay City/Saginaw directory area. Wonder how those folks will do when > 810 gets started next month (splitting 313 Detroit region). According to my Michigan LATA map, Frankenmuth is Michigan Bell (now Ameritech), as is all but one of the adjacent exchanges (the exception is Millington, served by the Wolverine Telephone Company). Frankenmuth is in the Saginaw LATA (northern half of the 517 area code). Jack ------------------------------ From: taranto@panix.com (James Taranto) Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized Date: 14 Nov 1993 21:07:44 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC djcl@grin.io.org wrote: > Digest readers who are interested in testing 905 out could try to get > Toronto weather information at +1 905 676.3066 to see if 905 will work > (pre-recorded message). I work in (905) area as well, and could > provide the work number(s) on request. It works from Brooklyn, N.Y., though the recording said it was nine degrees out. Can that be right? It was in the 70s today in NYC! Cheers, James Taranto taranto@panix.com ------------------------------ From: jebright@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James R Ebright) Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk Date: 15 Nov 1993 03:33:11 GMT Organization: The Ohio State University In article john.eichler@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (John Eichler) writes: > oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) wrote: >> I should think that New York Telephone, which fills the front pages of >> every telephone directory with glowing talk of up-to-date digital >> technology, would be embarassed at its apparent failure to deploy ISDN >> beyond a handful of Manhattan exchanges. > It's almost a 'catch-22' proposition. The phone companies are slow to > implement ISDN because there is little demand for it and the demand is > waiting for the service to become available. Huh? ISDN was originally a way to get 56KB service ... but modems on regular analog lines can almost do this today. ISDN vs market forces. ISDN 0, Market 1. > This is just another example of the difficult time we will have > installing a nationwide 'information highway'. It will be if TPC (the phone company) is in charge of installation ;) > I guess the only way to move the telephone companies is for tens of > thousands of us little guys to keep asking them for ISDN until they > wake up and realize that they are losing big bucks in not providing > this vital service. Buy a V.fast modem for $499 and get most of the benefit without the aggrevation of Waiting For Godot ... Jim Ebright e-mail: jre+@osu.edu ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: Wanted: Info on Cellular Phone Monitoring Systems Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1993 03:34:19 GMT mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) writes: > The only thing I would add is that making a device like this and > *using* it would violate the federal wiretapping laws, which is a > felony. No. It is illegal, but it violates the ECPA, not wire tapping laws. > It may be true that cellular phone use isn't really private, because > anyone could be listening, but it's no more legal for them to listen > than it is for them to bug your bedroom or boardroom. As a practical matter, though, it might as well not be illegal, because it is virtually unenforcable. And I know of no instances of prosecution for violation of the ECPA. (Some people feel that it is unconstitutional, but that's a separate issue). > Under federal law, any conversation going through a cellular switch is > considered a telephone conversation subject to the wiretap laws (the > technical term is "wire communication". A cellular phone is just as > private as a landline phone, because people have the same legal right > not to be "scanned" as they do not to have someone tapping in on a > craft set. Nope. In fact, cordless telephones do not have a special act protecting them, and it is perfectly legal for you to listen to your neighbors (or anyone else's) cordless telephone conversations (providing that you do so by monitoring the air waves, not by tapping into their physical wires). The fact that the conversation eventually passes through a regular land-line switch (or even, a cellular switch, if they happen to be talking to a celluler phone on the other end), is not relevant. Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ------------------------------ From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Cell Phone Suggestions Sought Date: Mon, 15 Nov 93 0:14:16 EST I'm looking for a cell phone for my car. I go back and forth between home, in Boston where cell service works fine, and my tiny timber barony, in northern Vermont, where cell service is marginal, though supposed to be better when they add towers in a few months. Desirable criteria: -- good performance in marginal conditions -- multiple NAMs -- hands free feature, if it works well enough that callers can hear you over the noise in the car Any suggestions? Also, experience with the local cell carriers here (NYNEX and Cell One/Boston) and Vermont (Contel and Cell One/Vermont-Western-New- Hampshire) would be appreciated. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Nov 93 16:41:08 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Help: Need to Query V&H Database In TELECOM Digest V13 #751 neptune!banks@iex.iex.com (Nathan Banks) writes: > Here in Texas, the state Senate recently passed legislation (SB 632) > allowing rural communities to petition the PUC to extend their > respective local calling scopes to "communities of interest" of up to > 22 miles. > I am currently researching my community's locality of interest by > looking at county maps and interviewing members of the community to > ascertain their civic and business needs outside of our current 2-3 > mile local calling scope. > I was wondering if someone could suggest how I might access a "V&H" > coordinate database to query the following information. If a little work isn't minded, then the first thing to do would be to get a local map and using the mileage guide (how many miles to an inch) and take a compass, set it to as close to the mileage desired as possible and draw a circle around the desired community(ies) using your community as the center of the circle. Then using the telephone book, look up the community names within that circle and obtain the NXXs for them. Failing that, you could contact the telco for information. Another way is by driving to those communities and noting the mileage. Say you have to take care of some business in Community B and you live in Community A. Just note the mileage on your vehicle when you start and note it when you get to Community B. You probably come up with the figures that the telco has since I think that they are based on airline miles, not road; you'll be close though. I do this when I travel to compute driving costs per mile, time per trip, driving costs per mile including food stops/breaks, overall time, etc. Sounds nutty but its fun to me and helps me keep track of expenses. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Subject: Questions About New Numbering Plan Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1993 00:38:08 EST From: Jim Wohlford I am researching for a paper on numbering plan changes, and would appreciate any late breaking news or information concerning the following: 1) Who will administer the plan after Bellcore retires? 2) How will the PBX world deal with maintenance and upgrade of their routing plans? 3) What, if any, involvement might the FCC have? 4) How will telecom ever be simple again? Any info will be graciously accepted at jwohlfor@gmu.edu. I have read all that I can find in the industry magazines, but I find more questions than answers. I will summarize my findings for a later posting. Thanks in advance! Jim Wohlford Compuserve 70214,636 jwohlfor@gmu.edu George Mason University Telecommunications Program ------------------------------ From: nigel@cotswold.demon.co.uk (Nigel Roles) Subject: Re: Microsoft Telephony API/SPI Reply-To: nigel@cotswold.demon.co.uk Organization: Interconnect Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1993 11:19:09 In article joe@erix.ericsson.se (Joe Armstrong) writes: > Does anybody have any information available about products which use > the recently published Microsoft Telephony API/SPI? > Do you think the Microsoft Telephony API will catch on? Up to now the > CCITT has been the principle organisation responsible for telephony > standards. The microsoft API seems to represent a radical departure > from this. Is this the future? [Select Switch Designers Hat] Good question. Anyone can invent a standard, but in telephony unless it follows existing standards you might have an acceptance problem. Conversely Miscrosft are inevitably a force to be reckoned with. Personally, the AT&T Novell Telephony API looks much better. It follows the CSTA call model, and as such looks much more professional in that it appears to have been written from the telecomms perspective, not the computer perspective. This strikes me as vital if you want switch manufacturers to support it. There are other issues as well; both specs. are pretty big, but Microsoft's looks quite unmanageably large, as opposed to just plain daunting. We intend going the AT&T Novell route. [Select PC Programmers Hat] There is not a lot to choose between the two specs. A non-telecomms programmer might not perceive the better pedigree of the AT&T Novell one because the nomenclature (calls, connections, devices, states) will be completely new stuff either way. ------------------------------ From: atlas@newshost.pictel.com (Steve Atlas) Subject: "Q" Not Followed by "U"? In English? Organization: PictureTel Corporation Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1993 04:27:04 GMT > [Moderator's Note: ... > The problem with Q is that it must be followed by U in 99 percent of all > words in common use ...] Pat, Your explanation of why Q and Z don't appear the telephone dial was interesting, but to be picky, what English words contain the letter "q" not followed by "u"? I know there are Arabic names such as Iraq and Qatar, as well as people whose Arabic names are transliterated. But English words? Steve Atlas atlas@pictel.com [Moderator's Note: Well, if you want to discriminate against the Arabs, you're going to make my job answering this one a lot harder. :) QADARITES were members of an early Muslin philisophical school assert- ing the doctrine of free will in opposition to the Jabarites. QINTARS are monetary units in Albania. Each QINTAR is equal to 1/100 lek. QOPH (sometimes spelled KOPH) is the 19th letter of the Hebrew alphabet. A few you can look up on your own: QARMATION QASHQAI QERE QERI QYRGHYZ A real motley collection, eh? In conclusion, please remember that TELECOM Digest is supported through the generous gifts of readers who benefit by the articles here and the material in the Telecom Archives. I pay the bills (mostly for the phone, generally about $200-300 per month for the connection, etc, and friends help me pay my phone bill and feed the cats. All gifts are acknowledged and appreciated. Checks payable to Ameritech are perfectly acceptable and will be used to retire my old phone bill in Chicago. (Skokie phone rates are much cheaper; I don't expect the bill to go over a hundred dollars per month here). If you prefer, checks can also be payable to TELECOM Digest earmarked for production and distribution of this journal. If you want a specific accounting of how your gift was used, just ask for it anytime. Our mailing address remains: 2241 W. Howard, Chicago, IL 60645. Thanks very much for all your help. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #760 ****************************** Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253