TELECOM Digest Sat, 15 Jan 94 00:17:00 CST Volume 14 : Issue 30 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Norwegian CLID (was "Anonymous Call Rejection") (styri@balder.nta.no) Re: Technical Description of PBXs Wanted (Al Varney) Re: Internet <- > FIDOnet Mail/File Transfer (Alan Boritz) Re: ISDN: Coming Soon to my House? (Rob Knauerhase) Re: ISDN: Coming Soon to my House? (Robert L. McMillin) Re: All Wire Isn't The Same (Alain Fontaine) Re: All Wire Isn't The Same (ssatchell@bix.com) Re: All Wire Isn't The Same (Tom Watson) Re: Truckstop Calling Cards (Ed Greenberg) Re: Truckstop Calling Cards (Ben Cox) Re: Truckstop Calling Cards (John R. Levine) Re: Phone Line Simulator Wanted (Paul Cook) Re: Phone Line Simulator Wanted (ssatchell@bix.com) Re: Phonebook on CD-ROM/Internet? (Pat Barron) Re: Phonebook on CD-ROM/Internet? (Matthew Aldridge) 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: Fri, 14 Jan 94 21:55:16 +0100 From: styri@balder.nta.no Subject: Re: Norwegian CLID (was "Anonymous Call Rejection") In article mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote: > Perhaps some of us do want to read the full argument. It would be > very enlightening to know how this issue is viewed in other countries > -- especially one like Norway whose telecommunications decisions > usually seem very well thought out. Well, there are two parts to this. One is implementing CLID, the other is giving ANI to other operators so that they may use that information for CLID. The first CLID customers in Norway will be ISDN users. However, the question is not only about technology. There's been a long discussion about the privacy considerations (from the originating end of the call). I'm not the right person to give a neutral account of that debate. The question about sending ANI out of Norway is in general covered by CCITT agreements. It may be done, but I don't like to open up that privacy debate once more. Wrt the privacy debate, it's funny to note that there wasn't much said about the privacy of the people being called. One reason for this may be that CLID was only viewed as available to ISDN customers, and that would mean business customers. Personally I look very much forward to the moment I can screen them late night calls. The privacy debate extends to detailed billing as well as CLID, but opposition comes from the comsumer rights people. Personally I was a bit bored at this stage, but I managed to stay just to watch the fun when the concept of "B number masking" was introduced. > Apart from the idea of doing all exchange modernisation and number > changes at ten to four in the afternoon ... on Thursday afternoons, > isn't it? If you think about the work usually noticed by the always important customers you're wrong. The final stage of such work is usually started at 5 pm Fridays. Thursday afternoon would be the time new number plans are implemented. Please don't ask what we do the other days ... Haakon Styri Norwegian Telecom Research *** std disclaimer applies *** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 94 17:33:31 CST From: varney@ihlpe.att.com Subject: Re: Technical Description of PBXs Wanted Organization: AT&T In article mmr@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Mike Renault) writes: > Don Pelton writes: >> I'm looking for sources of good technical descriptions of PBX >> technology and standards. Can anyone suggest books, articles, >> newsgroups and/or other internet resources? Standards documents? > PBX standard for the US is ANSI/EIA/TIA-464-A-1989. > Title is "Private Branch Exchange Switching Equipment for Voiceband > Application". > My copy cost $67.00. This document is aimed towards the designers of > PBXs. Call Electrionic Industries Association in Washington DC to > order, sorry I don't have their phone number. My 10-year-old number for orders is: (202) 457-4966. The address: Electronics Industry Association 2001 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006 (Is there really an "Eye" street or is it "I Street" renamed?) Their Catalog of EIA/JEDEC Standards is about $10 -- good reference. To understand the Standards, you'll need the IEEE standards on test methods and measurements. Catalog of standards is free (last I heard), on 1-800-678-IEEE or +1 908 981-0600. Note that EIA-464 refers to PBX interface standards for connection to public networks. For PBX internal information, you'll have to pry that out of a talkative vendor -- other than UL, Nat. Elect. Code and Fire Code standards, PBXs have no standards. Witness the PC versions .... Seriously, some older PBX designs are described in various conference proceedings (NCF, ISS, IEEE, etc.). State-of-the-art PBX designs are unlikely to be publicly documented, unfortunately. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Internet <- > FIDOnet Mail/File Transfer From: drharry!aboritz@uunet.UU.NET (Alan Boritz) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 94 07:58:50 EST Organization: Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - +1 201 934 0861 xyzzy@imagen.com (David McIntyre) writes: >> I would like to have some information on transferring mail between >> Internet/Bitnet and FIDOnet: >> 6. How should (binary) files be transferred? >> UUEncoded or so? > Yes. Excuse me, but files are NOT transferred through routed mail within FidoNet. Most gateways (including mine) will block such messages without prior arrangement. >> 7. Are FIDOnet users (especially points) able to order files from the >> SIMTEL collection or other public file systems? If yes, how? > I suppose they could, though a mail-server. No, not unless set up in advance. fidonet.org is set up to block mailing lists and ftp servers. Unlike the internet, most FidoNet routed mail is done through regular timed pots line calls, so each routed message carries a price tag. In general, if a message can't be entirely understood as plain language (clear text), it can't be sent via routed mail to a FidoNet system. Alan - f102.n2605.z1.fidonet.org aboritz%drharry@uunet.uu.net or uunet!drharry!aboritz Harry's Place BBS (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - +1-201-934-0861 ------------------------------ From: knauer@ibeam.intel.com (Rob Knauerhase) Subject: Re: ISDN: Coming Soon to my House? Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 18:19:47 PST Organization: Intel Mobile Software Lab, Hillsboro, OR In a previous message, Robert L. McMillin wrote: > [...] my switch is set up to handle ISDN! [...] According to my > friend, ISDN is currently tarriffed in California under a provisional > business class of service, which means that I'll pay probably a little > more per month ($35, I recall) than I might if there were an ISDN > available under a residential service plan. Nonetheless, it does seem > quite reasonable given the potential benefits. That depends on your usage; for me (in GTE Northwest land), it'd be much much more expensive than POTS lines. It might be for you, too, depending on how you plan to use it. After talking to five different people in the local GTE residential and business sales offices (favorite quote: "What is ISDN?", from two people in residential sales), I finally found someone willing to admit that they could sell me ISDN service. Interestingly enough, their price was $48/month for 2B+D, which would provide two voice lines and two phone numbers. This is about the same price as two unmeasured POTS lines -- what a deal. Of course, this is GTE. There has to be a catch. For data, they charge the same as measured-by-minute local calls. I asked if that mightn't be perhaps the silliest way to bill it (data calls by the minute), when a major benefit of digital telephony is that when I'm not using it, I'm _not using it_! (mostly) That of course didn't phase them. Even at pennies/minute, the advantage of faster speed is removed by cost when I can do plain-ol' 14.4K with compression for "free." Is _anyone_ bothering to campaign phone companies and Public Utilities Commissions so that we can get this tarriffed in a reasonable manner (at least in places other than Oregon)? [Side note for those keeping score: US West in Portland offers 2B+D for $90/month, no limit on data. Of course, you can't make an ISDN data call between GTE and US West just yet, but they're working on it.] Rob Knauerhase [knauer@ibeam.intel.com] Intel Mobile Software Lab ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 94 02:29 PST From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: ISDN: Coming Soon to my House? On Thu, 13 Jan 1994 16:20:27, MCINTIRE@imagen.com (David McIntyre) said: > In article rlm@helen.surfcty.com > (Robert L. McMillin) writes: >> The thread about quantization and signal/noise on a POTS line has me >> thinking that maybe all this will be increasingly obsolete. According >> to the 800 number posted recently on this forum, my switch is set up to >> handle ISDN! > What is this 800 number again? 800-995-0346 Of course, this is in Pac*Bell land only. Additional news: while the site survey hasn't been done yet, I'm assured by someone else locally that Pac*Bell will install any needed repeaters free, a big turnaround from the days when that company required big fees to extend digital services. But the best news is yet to come. According to my friend the ISDN reseller, the new rate card for Pac*Bell digital services shows some BIG price cuts. Unfortunately, I don't have the info with me, but suffice it to say that T1 will be nearly cheap enough to be within reach of the residential high-volume talker -- around $135 a month is what I remember him saying. (But there's still an impossibly high installation fee of around $700.) And get this: no per-mile charges out of the CO. Switched 56 and SDS (Pac*Bell's ISDN offering) will be substantially cheaper. It may not be very long before we start talking about residential T1-class services. (I hope that before this becomes reality, Pac*Bell drops the $0.01/min for local calls it charges under the provisional business tarriff; residential service is residential service!) I expect that one of the hot topics this year will be T1 and/or ISDN ISA and NuBus cards, this supplanting the continuous dull roar of speculation and hearsay surrounding the ITU's v.37 standard-in-progress. While it's premature to predict the demise of the analog modem, its last hurrah is in sight. Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The message referenced above posted by David McIntire was an unauthorized posting to Usenet's comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup which has since been cancelled by myself so as a result it was not seen by the list readers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: fontaine@sri.ucl.ac.be (Alain Fontaine) Subject: Re: All Wire Isn't The Same Organization: Universite Catholique de Louvain Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 13:47:18 GMT In article , oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) wrote: > In John Warne <19064001@SBACVM.SBAC.EDU> > writes: >> The cross-sectional view of one wire reveals the plastic outer sheath >> is formed around the conductors in a cloverleaf-like pattern, holding >> a certain relationship between the conductors for the length of the >> cable (AT&T *used* to make their two-pair stuff this way), resulting >> in less crosstalk between pairs. > I am sure the person posting this is well-intended, but I fear that > through inadvertence the phrasing used may make people buy wire other > than the stuff they wanted to buy. > This is Bad Wire For Two-Line Use. It is the cloverleaf type wire > mentioned above. Many Readers Have Reported Cross-Talk With Such > Wire. The phone company here uses such cable to install the underground ties to the master cable below the street. When I had a second line installed, they just took the second pair. I have no crosstalk problems, and despite the fact that my house is about 100 meter (330 ft) away from the street. Just another data point ... /AF ------------------------------ From: ssatchell@BIX.com (ssatchell on BIX) Subject: Re: All Wire Isn't The Same Date: 14 Jan 94 17:25:01 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation A brief follow-up to Carl Oppendhal's excellent description of the evil of older inside wiring: In debugging crosstalk problems, I'm finding more and more that people who have installed twisted-pair wire don't understand that telephone signals HAVE TO TRAVEL OVER THE PAIR properly to avoid crosstalk. If you use, for example blue/white and orange/white, the telephone signal isn't travelling properly through a pair, but instead is using one wire from each twisted pair. Hooking a second line up will virtually guarantee crosstalk. Also, I've seen installations which connect the ring lead of two phone wires together. This effectively unbalances the pair from the connection point all the way back to the central office, which makes for huge cross- talk problems. Routing of unshielded twisted-pair is important, too. Keep it at least two inches away from any metal object such as water pipes, gas pipes, iron sewage lines, air ducts, electrical conduit, or electrical power wiring. (Don't sweat nails or the occasional pipe hanger.) The original intent of the separation was to provide air space between telephone wire and grounded objects such that a lightning strike wouldn't arc over and damage the wire, but the practice has proven to benefit crosstalk, too. If you can't avoid running next to metal, consider using shielded twisted-pair wire instead. You need only an overall shield, not a shield around every pair. Care in wiring makes all the difference in the world. Stephen Satchell, Principal Satchell Evaluations, Incline Village, Nevada USA Testing modems for magazines since 1984 ------------------------------ From: tsw@cypher.apple.com (Tom Watson) Subject: Re: All Wire Isn't The Same Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 17:53:17 -0800 Organization: Apple Computer (more or less) All this talk about twisting wires and such reminds me of the various outside open-wire lines I see while driving about (Hint: usually near railroads). These have what are called "transpositions" which are magical four-insulator thingy-jobs (high-tech techinical term!) that twist the wires. The fact that they were needed was discovered long-long ago when the concept of long-distance was just being tested out. If one looks at early books, there are all sorts of formulas and diagrams for doing this operation. Perhaps a good history buff will look up some. Tom Watson tsw@cypher.apple.com ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Truckstop Calling Cards Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 16:17:34 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those are called 'Talk Tickets' and > they are a bit expensive at 50 cents per minute of domestic use although Considering that they are paid for up front, talk tickets should cost no more than ten to fifteen cents per minute. Think about it. No billing, no uncollectables, no customer service, no credit for wrong numbers, no nothing. The cost of talk tickets should in no way exceed standard direct dialed rates. Anything more is a rip-off. Ed Greenberg edg@netcom.com Ham Radio: KM6CG ------------------------------ From: thoth@netcom.com (Ben Cox) Subject: Re: Truckstop Calling Cards Organization: Ancient Illuminated Bavarian Sears Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 19:30:05 GMT sp9183@swuts.sbc.com (Scott M. Pfeffer) writes: > Recently I was traveling home from Atlanta to St. Louis. I stopped at > a gas station somewhere in Tennessee or Kentucky for refreshments, > refilling, and relief, and noticed something very interesting in a PAT writes: > cards like this at a similar rate. Personally, I prefer the Orange > Card with its 25 cent per minute rate and no surcharge. PAT] Incidentally, I encountered a pay phone at a gas station along route 70 in Ohio or Indiana (i.e., somewhere between Pittsburgh and Indianapolis or so) that had a HUGE banner attached to it, with a picture of an orange and "Call home for 25 cents per minute" in orange on it. :) Ben Cox thoth@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is correct. The Orange Communications people now have a collect service as well as a calling card. To try it out, use the number 1-800-TALK-4-25. Your call will be forwarded collect at that rate to whatever number you requested. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 94 18:53 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Truckstop Calling Cards Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > [At a truck stop] a stack of pre-authorized long distance calling cards. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Those are called 'Talk Tickets' ... > Western Union also has prepaid calling cards like this at a similar rate. So do Sprint and an outfit called Liberty Tel, both at rates closer to 33 cents/min than to 50 cents. It's not entirely clear to me who the target market is: people with no home phone (particularly students)? people who are too clueless to get a calling card? The anonymous call crowd? Evidently they do sell them, but I wouldn't have thought that the market was very large. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jan 94 13:06 EST From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Phone Line Simulator Wanted dej@eecg.toronto.edu (David Jones) writes: > I am in need of a phone line simulator. It will be used to verify the > functionality of modems for a large computing network. > This device need not be complex -- I need dial tone, DTMF detection, > ring signal generation and an analog path whose noise characteristics > approximate that of a real phone line (i.e. 3300 Hz BW, -34 dB S/N). Any of the Proctor Telephone Demonstrators will do this. There are three models, from two to four lines, and the newest one will also do Caller ID and CENTREX emulation. Contact Proctor via email, fax or phone at one of the numbers below for more information. Paul Cook 206-881-7000 Proctor & Associates MCI Mail 399-1080 15050 NE 36th St. fax: 206-885-3282 Redmond, WA 98052-5378 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: ssatchell@BIX.com (ssatchell on BIX) Subject: Re: Phone Line Simulator Wanted Date: 14 Jan 94 05:18:25 GMT Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation dej@eecg.toronto.edu (David Jones) writes: > I am in need of a phone line simulator. It will be used to verify the > functionality of modems for a large computing network. > This device need not be complex -- I need dial tone, DTMF detection, > ring signal generation and an analog path whose noise characteristics > approximate that of a real phone line (i.e. 3300 Hz BW, -34 dB S/N). > Any ideas as to where I can get one cheap? Even used? David, The cheapest I'm aware of is the PTT 5101, if you can find one used. They are located in Huntsville, AL and you can call (205) 971-8001 for more information. Old TAS boxes are out there as well, like the original Model 100. You can check with TAS at (908) 544-8700. To round it all out, Consultronics (formerly AEA) has a box as well, but I haven't heard of used ones for sale as Consultronics has been upgrading existing boxes; try (613) 225-6087 and see what they say. Teltone has some boxes, but they don't have the right loss characteristics. If you prefer, you can get these phone simulators on rental if your need is short-term, and the rental prices are coming down on the older units. Another option is to find a company with the capability of performing the testing for you. There is Henderson Communications in San Moreno CA at 909-788-8849, or Satchell Evaluations (me) could do it (I'm at 702- 832-7157) for perhaps much less than you could get a simulator. If you are looking for go/no-go acceptance tests, it should cost you very little to use one of the independent test labs. Stephen Satchell, Satchell Evaluations Testing modems for magazines since 1984. ssatchell@bix.com, 70007.3351@compuserve.com, sts@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ From: Pat_Barron@transarc.com Subject: Re: Phonebook on CD-ROM/Internet? Date: Fri, 14 Jan 1994 16:12:42 -0500 Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA ebcguss@ebc.ericsson.se (Claes Gussing) writes: > I was wondering if one can get the phonebook on CD-ROM in the U.S? I > know this wouldn't work in Sweden, since we have some law about > keeping personal data on automatically readable media (as the phone- > book wouldn't be, with OCR ...). I thought maybe in the U.S. this > would work. A CD-ROM carries 650 Mbyte of memory, so some 5-10 disks > should carry the whole U.S! I just bought "PhoneDisc USA" at the local Egghead Software store. US$65.00 for two discs of residential listings (they claim 80 million listings from telephone directories across the country on the two discs). Pretty cool, except: * It's out of date as soon as it's published, * Only includes listed numbers (the company has phone numbers from sources other than telephone directories, but they seem to filter out unlisted numbers on these discs - I don't think they do that on their commercial discs), * You can only search on a person's name, and then limit the search based on their address, city, state, zip, or area code - i.e., can't "reverse lookup" a phone number to see who it belongs to. The target audience for this package is apparently people who have a PC in their home, and just want an on-line phone directory - it's not targetted for commercial usage (the company that sells this - sorry, I don't remember who it is - has other products for business use, with things like "reverse lookup" capability, which they will be happy to sell you ...). I wouldn't put up a server with this info on the net, due to licensing restrictions from the database provider. Pat ------------------------------ From: psyjmja@unicorn.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk (Matthew Aldridge) Subject: Re: Phonebook on CD-ROM/Internet? Date: 14 Jan 1994 22:02:48 GMT Organization: Cripps Computing Centre, University of Nottingham For the interest of those overseas the UK phonebook is available on CD-ROM from British Telecom. It is called Phonebase and subscription costs are quite high, but I guess overseas purchasers may get a special deal. If you want it though I'd get in there quick because they seem to be on the verge of a major policy change -- mainly price increases. Phonebase is also available online, but only currently at V22bis -- ask BT. Later, Matt JD Aldridge Room A13a, Lincoln Hall, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2QU, England mja@cs.nott.ac.uk Arcade BB +44 (81) 654-2212 & +44 (81) 655-4412 User #184 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #30 *****************************