TELECOM Digest Mon, 28 Feb 94 19:15:00 CST Volume 14 : Issue 107 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Area Code Closeness (Roger Fajman) Re: Area Code Closeness (Mike King) Re: Area Code Closeness (David A. Kaye) Re: Area Code Closeness (Carl Moore) Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email (thssamj@iitmax.iit.edu) Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email (Steven King) Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It? (Tad Cook) Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It? (Brett Frankenberger) Re: Digital Cellular Phones (Henrik Rasmussen) Re: Digital Cellular Phones (Mike Borsetti) Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Michael Israeli) Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Tad Cook) Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Mike Wilcox) Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (jdl@wam.umd.edu) Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Dave Levenson) Re: Need Information on ISDN Phones (Eric Bobinsky) Re: Air Cell (John D. Gretzinger) Re: These Cell Phones Don't Work - Why? (Henrik Rasmussen) Re: These Cell Phones Don't Work - Why? (Dave Levenson) Re: Another Misprogrammed COCOT (Jay Hennigan) Information Request For PBX-Computer Interworking (Masahiko Ohashi) 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 GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at 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 gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger Fajman Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 18:34:31 EST Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness > Trivia comment/question: What places have *three* different area codes > as part of their local calling area? Lots of places in the Washington, DC area. Everyone in the large DC Metro Calling Area can dial the 202, 301, and 703 area codes as local calls. There are a number of places that can dial the 202, 301, and 410 area codes as local calls. Ashton, MD, where I live is one such place. > What community in the USA gets local service into four area > codes? There is one such place. By 'local', I mean no toll charges even > though 1 + AC + 7D dialing is required. Layhill exchanges in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC can make local calls to the, 202, 301, 410, and 703 area codes. So can Bowie, Berwyn, Hyattsville, and Silver Spring, MD exchanges. Local calls to another area code here can be dialed as AC + 7D or 1 + AC + 7D. ------------------------------ From: mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 16:17:44 (PST) In TELECOM Digest V14 #105, Pat noted: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By coincidence, it appears we have two > persons named 'Mike King' in this issue, but the first one is Michael > rather than Mike. At least I assume it is two different people; the > net addresses are different. Yes, it messed me up at first in my > editing of this issue also. Both responding on the same thread, yet! PAT] Yeah, it sort of threw me for a minute, too. I've spent a good portion of my life trying to train people not to automatically assume my first name is "Michael," and I never thought Pat would do so. So when I started reading #105, and the last line on the screen was the line in the contents showing the subject to which I had replied, with that, um, other name, I began to wonder. Not to worry, I'd *never* alias myself with the name for which Mike is often a diminutive. ;-) Mike King mk@tfs.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, as the circulation list for this Digest continues to grow, I have a lot of identical names on it, but never before do I recall two persons with the same name in the same issue. Did you know that once every three or four years there is a convention in the USA of persons named "John Smith". Everyone by that name is invited to attend the convention held at some hotel. Can you imagine how crazed the hotel switchboard operator must be by the time the convention is over? "Please connect me with John Smith ..." Generally several hundred people by that name attend the convention. Now you know why I am so crazy. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness Date: 28 Feb 1994 01:20:09 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] TELECOM Digest Editor questioned: > Trivia comment/question: What places have *three* different area codes > as part of their local calling area? Mountain View, Calif, the home of Ames Research, where NASA puts satellites together and all that. It's in area 415 (San Francisco), touches 408 to the immediate south (San Jose region), and 510 (the East Bay Oakland area) to the east. A call from Mountain View to Sunnyvale in 408 is local, as is a call to Fremont in 510. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 15:10:31 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness NO, when 219 hits Ohio, it hits the 419 area, NOT 216. Thanks to the 301/410 split, some of the Maryland suburbs (such as Silver Spring) in the DC area now have local service to four area codes. That is, all of 202 and parts of 301,410,703. Local calls to a different area code are dialed as NPA + 7D with the leading 1 optional. ------------------------------ From: thssamj@iitmax.iit.edu (jani) Subject: Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology / Academic Computing Center Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 22:02:27 GMT It's probably an Internet account not a Internet connection which is ~$20 / month or so. ------------------------------ From: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com (Steven King, Software Archaeologist) Subject: Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email Date: 28 Feb 1994 23:07:32 GMT Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group Reply-To: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com terminus@uahcs2.cs.uah.edu (Scott(Mac Info HQ)) publicly declared: > Well, at $0.065/message and $200-$500/yr that menas 8-21 messages of > unknown length you have to read each day. If each message takes only > one minute to read (unlikely) that will be $3.90/hr. Personally, my free > time is worth more than that. And who says you have to read them? My terminal program has a wonderful scripting capability, and can capture them to disk in case I need them later ... Heck, I can even automate it to call and "read" my mail when I'm nowhere near the computer. Still, $200 to $500 annually isn't much of a profit. $41.67/month? I suppose it would pay a fraction of my phone bill. The offer reeks of scam. To anyone who looks into it, please tell us what you find out. Steven King -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group ------------------------------ Subject: Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It? Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 11:35:31 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) bob@bci.nbn.com (Bob Schwartz) writes: > This happened to me and I've never heard of such a thing. > I have several lines and while talking on line line, which is hooked > up to a fax machine and a phone (distinctly seperate stations), the > phone integrated into the fax machine began to ring. then, right on > que, the fax machine answered and my conversation was obliterated by > fax tones The line has no special features such call waiting or three > way calling. It does however recieve from a remote call forwarding > source, but I can't see how RCF would have any involvement. > Has anyone seen or heard of such an occurance and how could it be? I have no idea what a "line line" is, but I assume that you are talking on the same line that the fax machine is hooked to, and that either you are behind one of those line sharing devices, or the fax machine has that feature. What is happening is that either your line sharing device or the fax machine is using a cheap filter for detecting CNG tone from the calling fax machine. The feature is so poorly implemented that it "falses" on a voice during the phone conversation, signals the fax machine, which then starts trying to handshake. Get a dedicated fax line. tad@ssc.com (if it bounces, use 3288544@mcimail.com)| [put "attn Box #215" Tad Cook | Packet Amateur Radio: | Home Phone: | on fax or cover pg!] Seattle, WA | KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 206-527-4089 | FAX: 206-525-1791 ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 23:23:16 GMT bob@bci.nbn.com (Bob Schwartz) writes: > This happened to me and I've never heard of such a thing. > I have several lines and while talking on line line, which is hooked > up to a fax machine and a phone (distinctly seperate stations), the > phone integrated into the fax machine began to ring. then, right on > que, the fax machine answered and my conversation was obliterated by > fax tones The line has no special features such call waiting or three > way calling. It does however recieve from a remote call forwarding > source, but I can't see how RCF would have any involvement. Once possibility is that the ring detefctor on the fax machine might be of very low quality. Detecting a ring should be trivially easy (look for a high voltage AC signal), but some boxes will trip on any relatively high voltage transient, and/or on any 20 Hz signal. If that is the case, a voltage spike or some sound on your conversation could cause the fax machine to think it has received a ring, and answer the call ... Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ------------------------------ From: Henrik.Rasmussen@lambada.oit.unc.edu (Henrik Rasmussen) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones Date: 28 Feb 1994 02:54:59 GMT Organization: The University of NC, Chapel Hill, the Experimental BBS > Bill Bauserman william.d.bauserman@gte.sprint.com Note the above domain: are GTE and Sprint still related in some way? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 16:43:43 PDT From: Mike Borsetti, Cellular One/San Francisco Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones william.d.bauserman@gte.sprint.com writes: > Most cellular companies I have dealt with have set up (or are setting > up) their network to allow the digital user to drop to analog, but not > vice versa. That is, if you have a dualmode phone and the call starts > as analog or switches to analog because no digital channels are > available, then that call will remain analog until it ends, it will > not switch back to digital. By personal experience, I can say that this is not the case on Cellular One's San Francisco's digital (TDMA) cellular system. If for any reason you are in analog and the cellsite you're about to be handed off to has a digital channel available, you'll be assigned to it. I'm curious as to why a cellular company would deny analog to digital handoffs, as it would seem that it is in everyone's best interest to maximize digital usage. Mike Borsetti ------------------------------ From: izzy@access.netaxs.com (Michael Israeli) Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? Date: 28 Feb 1994 23:23:50 GMT Organization: Net Access - Philadelphia's Internet Connection > According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number > 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'. The number 201-200-0001 > has been disconnected. I didn't try any others in that prefix. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let > us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their > number? What about at the other end of the line, any from the 919-999 > range? PAT] Here in the 610 area code, and also in the 215 area code, the numbers 00XX often seem to be some kind of "test" numbers. One will be 'being checked for trouble', another 'busy', another a strange busy signal. Is it possible that when you call a number that has been disconnected that your call is actually FORWARDED to that number? Michael Israeli - (izzy@access.netaxs.com) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 11:40:19 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number > 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'. The number 201-200-0001 > has been disconnected. I didn't try any others in that prefix. the Moderator responds: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let > us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their > number? What about at the other end of the line, any from the 919-999 > range? PAT] The highest dialable number in the range is 919-995-9999 in Buxton, NC. It appears to be a working number with ring-no-answer when I called. The lowest is 201-200-0002, which is a trading desk at a brokerage house in Jersey City, New Jersey. These two exchanges are 386 miles apart. tad@ssc.com (if it bounces, use 3288544@mcimail.com)| [put "attn Box #215" Tad Cook | Packet Amateur Radio: | Home Phone: | on fax or cover pg!] Seattle, WA | KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 206-527-4089 | FAX: 206-525-1791 ------------------------------ From: mwilcox@frx401.intel.com (Mike Wilcox ) Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? Date: 28 Feb 1994 21:27:25 GMT Organization: Intel Corporation , Folsom In article dave@westmark.com writes: > According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number > 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'. The number 201-200-0001 > has been disconnected. I didn't try any others in that prefix. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let > us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their > number? What about at the other end of the line, any from the 919-999 > range? PAT] From 916-351 (Folsom, CA) 201-200-0000 "Being Checked For Trouble" 201-200-0001 "Has Been Disconnected" 201-200-0002 Answered at a business 919-999-9999 "Cannot be completed as dialed. 9161T" One interesting note about the recordings on the 201-200 numbers: The first recording read the number as two oh oh oh oh oh oh. The second recording read the number as two oh oh zero zero zero one. Mike Wilcox mwilcox@pcocd2.intel.com Intel Folsom Folsom Information Technology Telecomm and Network Services [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did you notice that the intercept machine is smart enough to normally pronounce three trailing zeros as 'thousand' and two trailing digits as 'hundred' but in the event of a four zeros it does not say 'zero thousand'. Here, the lady says 'oh! oh! oh! ooooh!' sort of like something else was going on when the recording was being made. :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 22:18:40 -0500 From: Jonathan Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? I tried 201 200-0700 and got the same checked for trouble recording. The phone company explained that: (1) it was a local recording in NJ; (2) the recording is a generic recording that doesn't mean very much; and (3) the number doesn't belong to anybody, or, if it does, then they wouldn't do anything about it. In general I am really confused about incorrect recordings. It is annoying when the recording is wrong. And the phone company doesn't do anything about it because as far as they are concerned I have the wrong number. One time the recording (for somebody in one of my classes who had moved while we were working on a project together) referred me to a number outside my area; I called it and the person had no idea who the person that I was trying to reach was; I called the phone company and explained how important that it was to contact this individual, and they put in a repair report; the next day, the maintenance center called me back and said that the recording was the way that the customer ordered it. Maybe the customer or the service rep made a mistake filling out the original service order? ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? Reply-To: dave@westmark.com Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 00:04:57 GMT dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number > 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'. The number 201-200-0001 > has been disconnected. I didn't try any others in that prefix. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let > us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their > number? I don't particularly want to disturb folks in Jersey City just because they have interesting telephone numbers. I don't know if they'd find it interesting. I did, however, try 201-200-0002 and it was a ring-no-answer on Saturday afternoon. That probably indicates that the number is working ... and therefore that it is the lowest working number in the NANP. 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: cabobin@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (ERIC BOBINSKY) Subject: Re: Need Information on ISDN Phones Date: 28 Feb 1994 16:03 EST Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center In article , varney@ihlpe.att.com writes: > In article btaylor@csuchico.edu (Beverly > Taylor) writes: >> In article , The Network Group <0004526627@ >> mcimail.com> wrote: >>> I need to know a source for ISDN phonesxxx -- excuse me: voice >>> terminals. >>> I have heard that AT&T has a few of these but haven't heard of any >>> other manufacturers such as Northern Telecom or others. Apparently the >>> Northern product for Meridian Digital Centrex is not an ISDN phone. >> We have used TelRad, Fujitsu, and AT&T ISDN sets. They're all used to >> run on an AT&T 5ESS. We're very satisfied with all of them and have >> only found these three will work with our CO switch. > I believe Bellcore lists vendors that support the National-1 ISDN > interface. These should all work with the 5ESS switch (on 5E8 and > later). We've got a couple of ISDN videophones from BT up in one of our labs -- email me if you want more details. (cabobin@timelord.lerc.nasa.gov) Eric A. Bobinsky Communications Systems NASA/Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH 44135 USA +1 216 433 3497 +1 216 433 8705 (Fax) ------------------------------ From: JOHN.D.GRETZINGER@sprint.sprint.com Date: 28 Feb 94 16:13:02-0500 Subject: Re: Air Cell In Volume 14 Issue 99 Stu Jeffery mentions a company using mobile phones from an aircraft. I presume he is talking about the air plane being in flight at the time. This would fly in the face of an FCC regulation that specifically prohibits the use of a land based cell phone while in flight. I too would be interested in that company to see how they got around that regulation, or do they have phones that work on both systems. John D. Gretzinger ------------------------------ From: Henrik.Rasmussen@lambada.oit.unc.edu (Henrik Rasmussen) Subject: Re: These Cell Phones Don't Work - Why? Date: 28 Feb 1994 03:09:35 GMT Organization: The University of NC at Chapel Hill, the Experimental BBS About two years ago an incompatability developed between Astro-Net switches and technophone Cellular telephones. This problems caused the Technophones to not recognize they were being paged, so an incoming call never rang the phone. I was told Astro-Net had to make a software mod and Technophone had to make a hardware mod to correct what was apparently a fault on both ends. ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: These Cell Phones Dont Work - Why? Reply-To: dave@westmark.com Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 01:54:50 GMT I still use a 666-channel cellular telephone. It works okay on Cellular One, New York City CGSA. 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: jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: Another Misprogrammed COCOT Date: 28 Feb 1994 18:57:12 -0800 Organization: Disgruntled postal workers against gun control In article Carl Moore writes: > A COCOT I saw on a trip I just took across Vermont had (usual) > roblems with 10xxx access code (I used 1-800-321-0288 instead of > 10288) and also had this problem with use of the Orange Card: > I was able to call 1-800-(Orange Card Number), get the resulting tone, > then punch in the ten-digit code and the ten-digit number I was > calling, then get the next burst of tone, but then got "DISCONNECTED" > on the display I saw. Yep. Many COCOTs cut the tone pad after too few digits to use calling cards. Sounds like this one dumps the call as well. A Radio Shack pocket dialer is one workaround, and if you preprogram your calling card number into it, you avoid having to worry about "shoulder surfers" observing you keying in your card number. Speaking of COCOTs, I've observed that many of them scramble the dialed digits on the tone pad. That is, when dialing an 800 number, I can hear DTMF tones in the handset, but the tones are _not_ the digits I am dialing. However, I reach the correct number. Once the number is dialed, I get a synthesized "thank you", and thereafter the tone pad sends the correct tones. Does anyone know why this is done? Jay Hennigan jay@rain.org Santa Barbara CA ------------------------------ From: ohashi@ncs.nakahara.fujitsu.co.jp (Masahiko Ohashi) Subject: Information Requested For PBX-Computer Interworking Organization: Fujitsu Nagoya Communication Systems Ltd. Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 05:35:37 GMT Hello all! I'm researching standards of pricvate branch exchange (PBX) - computer interworking. I hear that International Organization for Standardization (ISO) starts her work for these standardizations and the first meeting was held at Korea in October last year. Will anyone tell me the result of the ISO meeting and/or schedule of PBX-computer interworking standardiztions? Thanks in advance. Ohashi - Fujistu Nagoya Communication Systems (e-mail : ohashi@ncs.ts.fujitsu.co.jp) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #107 ****************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253