TELECOM Digest Mon, 21 Mar 94 08:26:00 CST Volume 14 : Issue 139 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson History May Repeat Itself (Donald E. Kimberlin) Hush-a-Phone (Steve Brack) Seeking CATV List (John Conwell) Ripped By InfoAccess (Jacque Bussey) SIT Tones - Where in the Archives? (Paul Cook) Country Code for San Marino (Clive D.W. Feather) Clever Data/Fax/Voice Switch Needed (Jody Kravitz) Re: Appel a` Communications Pour CFIP'95 (*in French*) (Jan Ceuleers) Information Security Work Group Meeting (Michael S. Baum) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 94 02:34:00 EST From: Donald E. Kimberlin <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: History May Repeat Itself In article , rmcguire@wiltel20.wiltel.com (Russ McGuire) posted an announcement about Wiltel achieving an agreement with EmTelCuba to build the first recent-generation broadband link between Cuba and the U.S. by laying a new fiber optic cable between Florida and Cuba. I have a close interest in works of this sort due to my own personal career work in such spheres, so I had some private communication with Russ about this matter. Wiltel seems to be playing down the matter, in essence saying it's no biggie because the distance is short and there's no earth-shattering technology to announce. I don't see it that way. In fact, the Wiltel execs have achieved something even AT&T for all its prestige and established ability couldn't do. We have here a case where David didn't slay Goliath, but did finesse a route that Goliath couldn't follow. And, in the longer run, we may see some very old telcom history repeat itself. That may in part have to do with a burden AT&T had to bear with the Cuban government. It's a telecomm lesson in dealing with what are called "emerging nations." The Cuban-American Telephone Company of the pre-Castro era was a 50/50 AT&T-ITT venture that got expropriated very early on. Due to that very nature, Cuba's connectivity to the outside world was largely hegemonized by the Yanquis at AT&T until very recently. Up until 1951, in the era when the means of providing connectivity around the globe was HF radio, Cuba had only a few channels via AT&T into the U.S. (via AT&T's Fort Lauderdale Overseas Radio Station, and a few odd HF links to Spain and several of the Caribbean nations, and that was about it. In a breakthrough technology for 1951, AT&T laid its Type SA Submarine Cable System between Key West and Havana (78 miles) and provided at one swoop a dozen stable, reliable analog voice channels. (Those who know about the more recent technology of submarine cables will recall that the 1957 TAT-1 across the Atlantic was the Type SB Submarine Cable System, and may have puzzled what Type SA ever was.) The U.S. was enjoying growing business with Cuba through the 1950's, and telephone traffic was such that overflows had to spill off the cable onto the HF radio, which was at that point intended to be a "back-up." With the advent of Operator Toll Dialing and the intimate relation between Cuban-American and AT&T, the dial networks of the two countries were completely open to each other, in terms of what operators could accomplish. People were becoming more and more telephone-dependent, and the offered traffic between Cuba and the world skyrocketed. To handle this, AT&T and Cuban-American opened up one of the few SHF troposcatter links AT&T ever used, a 900 mHz link between Florida City (just south of Miami) and Guanabo (near Havana) in the mid 1950's. That link could provide 600 (and more, with expansion) telephone channels, or one analog video link. (In fact, the entire tropo system, like all such links, ran both frequency and space diversity. This meant the redundant link could be used for video at most times, not interrupting telephone use when video was ordered.) It was a heady time for the television networks when their (then) landline video networks reached Miami, and it was possible to "do a remote from Havana," and there were a few. Having the new tropo with the old SA cable for a "backup" also permitted shutting down the HF radio operation from Fort Lauderdale. It should have been some very good business, indeed. That's the way it was when revolution came to Cuba: More than 600 channels of telephone circuits out to the U.S., with dialing capability and open access between the networks, plus the few bits of HF to other nations that had been in place for a number of years. And, that's the way it stayed for almost 30 years afterwards, with the tropo to Florida City being the prime connectivity pipe for Cuba to the outside world, controlled by an entity the Cubans had no reason to admire; seen as both economically ex-colonial and politically unacceptable. Yet, it was the only significant tool available. Another incident made the hurt deeper. The rift in relations between the countries, while not disrupting the technology, did cause problems in matters of money. Since AT&T and Cuban-American were partners in operating the links, each had a literal "open account" with the other, with settlements of revenue shares that could no longer be made. Meantime, calls originating from Cuba were given unlimited access to the U.S. network with automatic dialing. As the reach of that U.S. network expanded, fingers in Havana could reach wherever in the world a U.S. operator could reach, and matters of paying for it weren't considered. For about ten years, there were no settlements, and no meaningful communication between AT&T and the new regime in Cuba. However, the balance due AT&T was getting larger and larger. I was working in the AT&T offices in Miami the day word came down that we were to cut off the trunks from Cuba. Nothing like that had ever been done before. (In the world of international telecommunications, attempts are even made to keep some channels open during war, just in case the politicians should decide to try to talk out their differences. This doesn't mean that circuits are never shut down; it doesn't mean the technicians engage in friendly chat on them, but more often, some are kept up without publicity, at least so long as the physical plant holds up. The general public may not have access to them, but the governments do.) So, it was high drama in the Miami Testroom on that day. It only took about three hours for the telegrams to arrive from Cuba, asking what was wrong. Western Union was still operating with Cuba on its old submarine telegraph cable, the second oldest in the world. That cable has a special history of its own, more of which fits later in this story. AT&T had, of course, covered all its political bases and had the plan laid about how to handle this largest of "unpaid phone bills." The response was to tell the Cubans no more free access could be had; that if they wanted service reconnected, it would have to be on the basis of all future calls being paid on the U.S. end. That is, all calls sent-paid into Cuba, and all collect outbound, so AT&T could get its share of the revenue from somewhere. They'd have to agree to that, and leave it that way indefinitely. It didn't take long for the Cubans to agree, of course, so by later in the afternoon, the circuits were back up, with operators at Miami enforcing all outbound calls from Cuba as collect on the U.S. end. That situation remained for many years. It was, of course, just another hurtful Yanqui action as seen by the Cubans. As the satellite era grew upon the world, the Cubans saw an opportunity to bypass the Yanquis, if they could only get the needed funding and connectivity. During the years of closeness with the USSR, some Molnya earth stations had been installed, but these were largely limited to communications with Russia, and not useful for much connectivity into other parts of the world. Finally, by the 1980's, alternatives seemed feasible. The Cubans invited the world to bid providing them with new links to the global community. AT&T had reason to want to replace the now-aged analog tropo system. It was occupying 900 mHz spectrum Southern Bell should by then have for use of the growing cellular mobile telephone business. AT&T proposed a fiber optic cable between Florida and Cuba, but lost out to a bid from Italcable, Italy's highly entreprenurial international carrier. The Cubans accepted a deal with Italcable hauling their telephone trunks out by satellite to Italy and from there to the world. The U.S. and AT&T were stuck with the old tropo, and the SA cable, when it was functional. The SA cable would often be out of service for several years at a time, because whenever it got damaged (fairly often by a ship in the shallow waters of the Florida Strait), a whole, protracted negotiation via third parties would ensue about what nation's cableship would be permitted in Cuban waters and who would pay the bill. And that situation prevailed until Hurricane Andrew ended the life of the Florida City tropo antennas. (Most Americans saw the wreckage on TV as part of the Hurricane Andrew stories.) Now things were changed. While the U.S. had lost most of its connectivity to Cuba, the Cubans did not lose the world. It was being handled through Italy. (By that point in time, the Cubans claimed that some $80 million was due them in unsettled accounts that were frozen in the U.S., as well.) AT&T was indeed strapped by the way things had gone for three decades. Enter Wiltel on the scene. It turns out that John Williams, the leading founder of Wiltel's parent company, was born in Cuba in 1918, and that his family had business interests there until the revolution. Finally, there was someone in the U.S. who was "sympatico" to talk with -- someone who could reason the Latin way. Where AT&T's hegemony couldn't work, Williams' personal diplomacy could. It wasn't too difficult for Wiltel to offer an arrangement that restored a link the Cubans wanted, but do it in a way they could tolerate. The net result will be CUBUS-1, not a great technogical feat, but indeed, a great international relations feat. CUBUS-1 will be, in a way, a repeat of another submarine cable between Florida and Cuba 135 years earlier; one most of the world knows nothing about. That cable was the second long international one in 1858, just months after the landmark (but short-lived) cable laid across the Atlantic by the Anglo-American Cable Company with Cyrus Field as its American figurehead. Within months of the laying of the 1858 transatlantic cable, entreprenurial Englishmen had another one operating from Punta Rassa, Florida to Havana. The immediate question is: Why? Who wanted to connect the then mosquito-infested southwestern part of Florida to another country? There was hardly any population there, yet here were people, literally living and working in a tent town, setting up a telegraph line to another country. It turns out that (as in a later Alascom case not well publicized across the Bering Straits during the Cold War era), the engine of trade was operating. Cattle ranchers in Florida were shipping stock on the hoof from the outpost of Fort Myers to Havana, lightering them down the Peace River and its tributaries to Charlotte Harbor for embarkation to Cuba. A telegraph cable along the route made good business sense. And, connectivity back north along the Peace River, to gain entrance to the growing U.S. telegraph network made sense, too. Cuba and the U.S. had electrical communication many years before other capitals around the world did. In fact, it made so much sense that within a very short time, the cable route from Punta Rassa was extended beyond Havana to Kingston, Jamaica, providing connectivity there, as well. (Using the limited technology of 135 years ago, a long piece of the submarine cable was merely laid out on top of the ground crossing Cuba. That method was later used worldwide for a number of early submarine telegraph cables, crossing large stretches of dry land by just laying the cable on the ground.) As Western Union grew into international telegraphy, it purchased the Punta Rassa-Havana cable, bringing it ashore on Key West to provide a terminal for that small fishing village, too. When Key West grew large enough, the portion from Punta Rassa was abandoned, since Fort Myers and Key West were developing their own communication routes to Miami and Tampa as those cities grew. So, the Western Union maps showed a Havana telegraph cable that terminated at Key West and Punta Rassa was forgotten. Today, there's a small bronze marker in Key West that says it was the terminal for the "first telegraph cable to Cuba." It's one of those partial truths of corporate history books, and forgets the much earlier history of the _real_ "first cable to Cuba." What does CUBUS-1 portend beyond Havana? Might it be extended to Kingston? Might it even provide a jumping-off place for Cuba to become a telecommunications hub for the Caribbean? It's much too early to know now, but history does have a way of repeating itself, doesn't it? ------------------------------ From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu (Steve Brack) Subject: Hush-a-phone Organization: University of Toledo Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 01:40:14 GMT A few days ago, someone mentioned the Hush-a-Phone case. I was wondering what that case was about. Steven S. Brack sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu Toledo, OH 43613-1605 STU0061@UOFT01.BITNET MY OWN OPINIONS sbrack@maine.cse.utoledo.edu ------------------------------ From: John Conwell Subject: Seeking CATV List Date: Sun, 20 Mar 1994 15:40:20 EST I am interested in following the discussions on this List, but am also curious about a possible List specifically for Cable TV, or land-line video transmissions. If anyone knows of such a list, I would appreciate the information. Thanks :} ------------------------------ Date: 18 Mar 1994 18:24:04 GMT From: jabussey@ualr.edu Subject: Ripped By InfoAccess Organization: Arkansas Children's Hospital Has anyone had any DEALINGS with InfoAccess? For some reason 4 EXPENSIVE calls to this service was added to my phone. Although NO calls to it were made from our phones! There are only two people in my house, me and my wife and neither of use dialed this number. We called them to see about the charges and they said the calls were made from our phones and that we need to write a letter to the information provider and complain. In the mean time how can I handle this $50 charge with the Phone company? I refuse to pay it but if its mixed in with my phone bill how can I NOT pay it without having my phone service interruped? If anyone has any ideas please email me: jabussey@ualr.edu or 'root@[144.30.128.156]' (include the [] in the address) Thanks in advance!! Jacque Bussey ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 94 08:17:00 EST From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: SIT Tones - Where in the Archives? I thought there was a reference to SIT tones in the telecom archives somewhere, but I can't find it. These are the three tones that one hears at the beginning of a toll network announcment (We're SORRY! All circuits are BUSY now ...) Does anyone have the specs on these? Paul Cook Proctor & Associates 206-881-7000 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Subject: Country Code For San Marino Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1994 01:42:38 GMT From: Clive D.W. Feather San Marino is a small country physically inside Italy. To the best of my knowledge, it is always phoned as just another area code within Italy (i.e. +39 541). I have a note in my files that San Marino has been allocated the country code 295 but is not yet using it. HOwever, I recently saw a posting, here I believe, that it has been allocated 378. Can anyone tell me which is right? Clive D.W. Feather | Santa Cruz Operation clive@sco.com | Croxley Centre Phone: +44 923 816 344 | Hatters Lane, Watford Fax: +44 923 210 352 | WD1 8YN, United Kingdom ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 94 00:08:44 PST From: kravitz@foxtail.com (Jody Kravitz) Subject: Clever Data/Fax/Voice Switch Needed I would like to share a single POTS line (without distinctive ringing) between a dial-in modem, a Fax machine, and an answering machine. All of the devices I've seen require incoming data calls to either be in "answer mode" (squirting carrier), or to press some magic key on the keypad at just the right time. My existing UUCP callers cannot accomodate that. What I really want is something that makes the voice callers do something special, leaving the fax/data determination to the presence/absence of tone. Simple and elaborate schemes are welcome. Thanks, Jody ------------------------------ From: Jan.Ceuleers@k12.be (Jan Ceuleers) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1994 07:05:16 GMT Subject: Appel a` Communications Pour CFIP'95 (*in French*) Organization: K12Net Belgium I quote Jean-Marc Jezequel: > Colloque Francophone sur l'Ingenierie des Protocoles These French are incredible. Do they really think protocol development has anything to do with the language the developer happens to speak? Origin: Experimenter Board, Antwerp, Belgium (2:292/857) Gated from FidoNet at 2:29/777 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1994 08:07:41 EST From: Michael S Baum Subject: Information Security Work Group Meeting This is posted for information purposes only: American Bar Ass'n Section of Science and Technology Information Security Committee Please correspond to: Michael S. Baum, Esq. 33 Tremont Street Cambridge, MA 02139-1227 Tel: 617/661-1234 Fax: 617/661-0716 Net: baum@im.com Notarization and Nonrepudiation Work Group INFORMATION SECURITY COMMITTEE, EDI/IT DIVISION Section of Science and Technology American Bar Association You are cordially invited to participate in a meeting of the above-referenced work groups of the Information Security Committee on Thursday-Saturday, April 14-16, 1994 in Washington, DC. These interdisciplinary work groups will continue to address conventional and electronic notarization and certification authority issues. The meetings are focused around the work product of its respective participants and will be highly results driven. During this session, an extra day will be allotted to facilitate accelerated production of the work product. At the last meeting (January 19-20, 1994), further progress was made on the development of "Model Certificate-based Public Key Guideline/ Rules of Practice" ("Guideline"). It was decided that the Guideline, as a first step, should reflect the requirements for "higher assurance" implementations. Also, following nearly a year of discussion and debate, a proposal was approved (by majority vote) recommending that the Section support, in principle, the creation of an entity to provide specialty certification of attorney-notaries engaging in professional services related to transnational electronic commerce. Joe Potenza, Section Chair has kindly agreed to permitted us to hold the meeting at his law firm in downtown Washington, DC. Please observe the hosts office's strict non-smoking rule. The meeting agenda and logistics are attached. I look forward to seeing you in Washington, DC. Sincerely, Michael S. Baum Chair, Information Security Committee and EDI/IT Division INFORMATION SECURITY COMMITTEE April 14-16, 1994 Tentative Agenda Thurs., April 14 Major Theme: Outline, Scope and Purpose 8:30- 9:00 Continental breakfast and registration. 9:00- 9:30 Participant introductions, meeting logistics and questions. 9:30-10:30 Presentation of updated Guideline outline and contributions 10:30-10:45 Break. 10:45-12:30 Discussion of proposed Guideline outlines. 12:30-13:30 Lunch & informal presentation - TBD 13:30-15:00 Identifying outstanding issues re: outline, scope and purpose. 15:00-15:15 Break. 15:15-16:45 Survey and record points of agreement/disagreement. 16:45-17:00 Wrap-up. Friday, April 15 Major Theme: Tone, Style and Content 8:30- 9:00 Continental breakfast and registration. 9:00-10:30 Presentation of contributions by authors. 10:30-10:45 Break. 10:45-12:30 Discussion of purpose and style of various sections. 12:30-13:30 Lunch & informal presentation - TBD. 13:30-15:00 Break-out session on Guideline contributions. 15:00-15:45 Break. 15:15-16:15 Status report and discussion of Clipper Resolution; Discussion on digital signature legislation. 16:45-17:00 Wrap-up. Saturday, April 16 Major Theme: Work Product!; Notarial Matters 8:30- 9:00 Continental breakfast and registration. 9:00-10:30 Break-out sessions on Guideline. 10:30-10:45 Break. 10:45-12:30 Additional presentation by contributors to the Guideline; Review of outline and contributions; Discuss work assignments. 12:30-13:30 Lunch & informal presentation - Bertram Cottine, Esq. 13:30-15:00 Discussion of corporate form for the accredited certifying organization for attorney-notaries. 15:00-15:45 Break. 15:15-16:15 Resolve work assignments; meeting review; appointments. 16:45-17:00 Wrap-up. NOTARIZATION AND NONREPUDIATION WORK GROUP INFORMATION SECURITY COMMITTEE April 14-16, 1994 Meeting Details Papers: All prior participants who plan to attend must submit their agreed upon contributions as soon as possible to: baum@hulaw1.harvard.edu and to sudiaf@panix.com. Please bring a copy of the contribution to the meeting in both paper form and on disk. First-time participants (who plan to attend the April meeting) must submit a brief paper (~3 pages in length) relevant to the subject matter; or discuss their planned contribution to the Committee (please contact Michael Baum for details). A binder of prior papers will be presented to new participants during registration. Prior participants are requested to bring their Work Group binders. Meeting Location: Banner, Birch, McKie & Beckett 1001 G. St., N.W. - 11th Floor "Floating Conference Room" Washington, DC 20001-4597 Tel: 202-508-9100 (Attn. Lisa Jones) Fax: 202-508-9299 SMOKING ANYWHERE IN THE BUILDING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED Meals: Continental breakfast and refreshments during the breaks will be served as well as a light lunch (at cost). Hotel: The closest hotel to the meeting is the Grand Hyatt Washington, 1-202-582-1234. The next closest hotel is the Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza, 1-202-737-2200. RSVP: Please confirm your intention to participate to Ann Kowalski, Section Manager, Section of Science and Technology (ABA Chicago, Phone: 312-988-6281 or kowalskya@attmail.com) as soon as possible. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #139 ****************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Area # 700 EMAIL 03-21-94 11:08 Message # 7208 From : CHAOPSYC@MOOSE.UVM.EDU To : ELIOT GELWAN PVT RCVD Subj : Re: origins of conscious ÿ@SUBJECT:Re: origins of consciousness, cont'd From chaopsyc@moose.uvm.edu Mon Mar 21 11:10:04 1994 Received: from moose.uvm.edu by uu9.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP; id AA25151 for eliot.gelwan; Mon, 21 Mar 94 11:10:04 -0500 Received: from localhost by moose.uvm.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03-UVM/CSO) id AA82182; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 11:08:05 -0500 Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 11:08:05 -0500 Message-Id: <01HA8ADD0UD48X4R31@jazz.ucc.uno.edu> Reply-To: chaopsyc@moose.uvm.edu Originator: chaopsyc@moose.uvm.edu Sender: chaopsyc@moose.uvm.edu Precedence: bulk From: RJPPS@jazz.ucc.uno.edu To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: origins of consciousness, cont'd X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0b -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Family IS the definition of chaos! -Bob ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253