TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Feb 94 01:51:00 CST Volume 14 : Issue 83 Inside This Issue: Happy Valentines Day, Sweethearts! Re: Questions About Voice Mail (Steve Cogorno) Re: New York Telephone Issuing "New" Rotary Phones (David A. Kaye) Re: Telephone Nunbers in France (Earle Robinson) Re: New Hello Direct Catalog (Michael Schuster) Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me (Warren Burstein) Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me (jamesw@netcom.com) Re: A Small Town in Wyoming (Joseph R. Schumacher) Re: A Small Town in Wyoming (Carlene Lanham) Re: CLASS/Caller-ID/Bellcore/CCITT/ANSI Documents Sought (Robert Shaw) Re: Shannon's Law (Sean P. Peacock) Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area (Monty Solomon) Why Caller ID Instead of ANI? (Lynne Gregg) Re: Horrid AT&T 2500YMGK Sets (Fred Goldstein) Internet Access (Jonathan Weinberg) Re: What is This Number? (Ma Bell) Two-Line Tropez 900MHz Now Available (Ken Jongsma) Re: Party Lines (Paul Robinson) Re: Guard Your Royal Database (Hackers Still With Us) (Paul Houle) 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: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Questions About Voice Mail Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 16:24:24 PST Said by: Stan Schwartz > - I have call waiting on the line. If I don't answer the second > line, the call DOES NOT get forwarded to the mail box (it just rings > at the caller's end); > - If I "busy-out" the line (*70 or off-hook), since I have call waiting > and the software is looking for call-waiting first, any incoming calls > will get a busy; > In short, the way the NYNEX reps explain this, since I have call waiting > on the line, the only time a call is forwarded to the mailbox is if the > phone is on hook and I don't answer. This doesn't sound kosher to me, > since I've seen the way other systems work. This is the way the reps WANT to place the order -- that doesn't mean you have to take it :) Ask them to install No Answer Diversion as well as Busy Diversion when the set up your order. They will try to tell you it can't be done, but it can. You also may want to get regular Call Forwarding, as you can call forward your calls directly to the voice mail so it won't bother you (sort of a Do Not Disturb function). Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am surprised you find reps who say it cannot be done. Here it is quite common and is known as 'transfer on BY/DA' (busy/no answer). For the former it transfers immediatly and for the latter, after three unanswered rings the CO pulls the call back from the subscriber and diverts it. The caller hears the slightest pause in the ringing cadence as the CO quits ringing the one phone and sets up the connection to start ringing elsewhere. 'Transfer on busy' is quite similar to a hunt group, but apparently not entirely the same. Does anyone know why? IBT gives 'hunting' for free but charges a monthly fee for 'transfer on busy' (which can be had without the 'no answer' part if desired, or vice-versa). ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: New York Telephone Issuing "New" Rotary Phones Date: 13 Feb 1994 18:06:41 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Meanwhile, legitimate users of pagers and voicemail such as I (computer consultant) may eventually need to go out and buy DTMF units just to check on our messages. As it is now I tend to avoid non-Pacific*Bell pay phones because the off-brands are often not programmed to think of my voicemail's exchange as local or even in operation, or they block after the first digit. As to drug buyers, yeah, you have a point. Anyhow, rotary dialing hasn't come to the SF Bay Area yet, and I hope it never does. It's just a nuisance. Some of the big pager companies like Metromedia had established policies limiting the number of calls, so at least they made more money on the busy drug-dealer paging. One, and I want to say it was PageNet, charges some extremely high amount for overpages, amounting to thousands of dollars. > just one rather effective harassment technique to use. The 7-Eleven now > has a sign in their parking lot: "Gangbangers, drug sellers and drug buyers > at this location go to jail! We call police!" PAT] Perhaps if the 7-Elevens paid better wages the kids would be encouraged to work for them instead of selling drugs. When I was their age I could live on minimum wage. Today? Heh. It might pay the electric bill. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I started my working career in 1958 the minimum wage was *$1.05 per hour*, and that is exactly what my employer, the University of Chicago paid me. I was a junior in high school and I had a part time job as a switchboard operator when the boards were located in the old phone room on the sixth floor of the administration building, 5801 South Ellis Avenue. Since restaurants and hotels were exempted from the minimum wage law, I was the rich one among my buddies who worked washing dishes or sweeping floors in restaurants; they got paid 65-85 *cents* per hour. After high school when I went to work full time for UC as an operator they paid me $1.25 per hour I think, and that was enough to pay for my own apartment, but in 1960 a nice one-bedroom apartment in Chicago along the lake cost about a hundred dollars per month. Cigarettes were 24 cents per pack at Walgreen's and if you bought them from a vending machine you put in a quarter but got a penny back tucked in the celophane wrapper of the package. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 13 Feb 94 11:38:54 EST From: Earle Robinson <76004.1762@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Telephone Nunbers in France Jean-Noel Marchalot says: > Never heard about something called Minitel? Any idea about the > penetration rate compared with Internet? (probably an order of > magnitude larger). Of course, I've heard of Minitel, since I live in Paris, and have to use Minitel, but do it as little as possible due to the exorbitant cost. Who wants to pay $12/hour to make a plane reservation on Minitel when elsewhere one can call a toll-free number? And that after wading through endless menus to keep you online longer -- yes, that is done deliberately to maximize revenue -- and that all at 1200 bps using primitive graphics! It is cheaper to call CompuServe at 9600 bps, soon to be 14.4k bps, pay $8.95 per month for unlimited access to plane reservations and other services like weather, for which you have to pay upwards of $12 per hour on minitel, and with far inferior graphics when maps are displayed. Minitel is a success due to the lack of competition, and the unfortunate ignorance among consumers that they are paying through the proverbial nose. > Sure, now they are still really lucky to enjoy a network that has > evolved in 15 years from one of the most backward to one of the most > advanced in the world. There must be some mysterious mechanism, beyond > competition, that made sure that France Telecom would be a little > responsive to the users' needs and the users do more than "bow and > obey"? In fact, the evolution to a modern network began over twenty years ago, and the telephone network is indeed modern, though this is often crippled for data communications through four to one compression on many lines, so anything over 2400 bps is impossible. As for users' needs, it is also true that France Telecom is more responsive, mainly because of the spectre of competition looming on the horizon. But, all that is at costs to the consumer which are horrendous. For example, it costs me more to call my wife in the country (Seine et Marne, in the Paris region, 85km) than to call from New York City to Los Angeles. In fact, callback services to access the USA have rates that make it cheaper to talk to New York or Los Angeles than to call Bordeaux from Paris. Now, Minitel is touting the coming new "high" speed: 4800 bps. Elsewhere, 14.4 is now the norm and 28.8 is on the horizon. er ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: Re: New Hello Direct Catalog Date: 13 Feb 1994 19:31:18 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In article , Thomas Lapp wrote: > I received the Spring 1994 Hello Direct catalog in the mail today, > (800-444-3556) and it has a bunch of interesting gadgets in it. Some > of the ones that caught my eye that I either didn't know existed, or > else have never seen in catalogs before: [lotsa neat stuff deleted] An item that caught my eye is the charger/conditioner for cellphone batteries. It uses intermittent negative pulses during the rapid-charge phase, which I'm told will prevent loss of capacity due to gas build-up at the electrodes. Is there truth to this, or is it another urban myth? Mike Schuster schuster@panix.com 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM schuster@shell.portal.com GEnie: MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: warren@worlds.com (Warren Burstein) Subject: Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org Organization: worlds.com Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 10:43:38 GMT In johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) writes: > Along sort of the same lines, I note that after buying Contel, they > quickly sold off a lot of the Contel properties. I used to work for a company on Long Island (it was in Little Neck, I think) called Network Analysts Corporation which not before I left was bought by Contel. I'm curious if they are still around and who owns them these days. warren@nysernet.org ------------------------------ From: jamesw@netcom.com Subject: Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 23:56:01 GMT Does anyone have any information on exactly what is going on with] Contel in the High Desert? The information I have is that it is still owned by GTE and they are planning to merge it into their GTE California unit in June/July. Any details greatly appreciated. James ------------------------------ Date: 13 Feb 94 12:18:57 GMT From: JOSEPH.R.SCHUMACHER@gte.sprint.com Subject: Re: A Small Town in Wyoming sullivan@msri.org (John Sullivan) wrote: > Could it be that in this town, four-digit dialing is possible? Or > does everyone just know what the exchange is? (The phone book at the > next gas station showed Buffalo as 684, I think.) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although four digit dialing might still > be possible, it is unlikely. Probably everyone in town gives their number > out that way, with the exchange assumed. My home town (Granville, Iowa, population < 300 and falling) still has four digit dialing. The listings fit on a page and a half. ------------------------------ From: cl@nde.unl.edu (carlene lanham) Subject: Re: A Small Town in Wyoming Date: 14 Feb 1994 03:43:35 GMT Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln My question is this: is it possible to configure these new digital switches for four-digit dialing? We're a small town where we occupy only the 848-2xxx, 3xxx, and 41xx's. It would make things easier for everyone. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sure it is possible. The switch is just told to expect four digits only if the first digit is 2 through 9; to expect eleven digits if the first digit is 1 and some variable number of digits (one through thirty or so, detirmined by time-outs or # as the terminator or carriage return) if the first digit dialed is 0. Of course all this assumes your 'small town' does not have any local calling to anywhere other than the town itself. If local calling includes some other nearby village -- or even if it does not, but there is a lot of traffic on the phone wires between the two points -- then at least a few people in town are going to get sore at having to dial eleven digits to reach a number five miles away where seven digits formerly was sufficient. To get around this, I guess you could make all dialing require a time-out or # to terminate the sequence at which point the switch would then interpret what it had been given in the context of the entire string of numbers presented to it. You say things 'would be easier for everyone', but would they really? Does no one in town csll any other exchange in the same area code beginning with a 2, 3 or 4? Do you see the problem? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 14:55:57 +0100 From: SHAW Subject: Re: CLASS/Caller-ID/Bellcore/CCITT/ANSI Documents Sought wynship@cats.ucsc.edu wrote in TD #72: > > + CCITT "Recommendations" regarding CCITT Common-Channel > Signaling System No. 7. (Especially those relating > to the above -- is caller-ID info. transmitted as > part of a TUP or an ISUP? If the former, is it > transmitted as part of an IAM or something else?) Gopher into info.itu.ch on port 70 or telnet into ties.itu.ch and logon as 'gopher'. Then go to -> ITU Document Store (ITUDOC)/ -> SEARCH ITUDOC database using KEYWORDS in Titles search on 'signalling' and you'll get back some hits. If that doesn't get what you want, send mail describing exactly what you're looking for to tsbedh@itu.ch -- that's the email address of the ITU-T (ex-CCITT) Telecommunication Standardization Bureau's Electronic Document Handling unit. Cheers, Robert Shaw Information Services Department International Telecommunication Union Place des Nations 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland TEL: +41 22 730 5338/5554 FAX: +41 22 730 5337 X.400:G=robert;S=shaw;A=arcom;P=itu;C=ch Internet: shaw@itu.ch ------------------------------ From: speacock@netcom.com (Sean P Peacock) Subject: Re: Shannon's Law Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 04:43:03 GMT n1epotsp@ibmmail.COM wrote: > I'm the one who originally posted this question, for those who don't > know. It's nice to know what Shannon's law says -- if you assume a 30 > dB SNR and 3100 Hz bandwidth, the law above works out to about 31 > kilobits per second. If you happened to get a quiet channel, say, 40 > dB SNR, the equation returns about 41.2 kilobits per second. However, > this is still quite a ways off from a full-duplex, 28.8 kbps link, or > 57.6 kbps total transfer rate. So my question still stands: How do > they do it? Are they assuming a particularly quiet channel? Are they > assuming more than the standard 3100 Hz of bandwidth is available? V.32, v.32bis and v.34 modems use echo cancelling technology. Essentially each modem knows what it sent and how long it will take to echo so they ignore it. This allows each modem to use the full bandwidth with only a slight loss in S/N ratio. Sean ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 14:28:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area > I would guess that the reason that "911 calls" are sent to a "fixed" > location and then transfered to the proper local agency is due the > wide geographic areas that most cellular systems cover. In Massachusetts we call *SP (*77) to reach the state police and the call usually gets routed to the nearest state police barracks. They forward the call to the local police if it is out of their jurisdiction. Near the New Hampshire border your call might get routed to the New Hampshire state police instead of the Massachusetts police so one can call *MSP (*677) to reach the Massachusetts State Police. I think that calling *777 reaches the New Hampshire state police from inside Massachusetts. FYI, here is a list of some of the star code for Cellular/One Boston: *SP Mass State Police *CG Coast Guard *611 Customer Service *811 Credit *FYI Information *1030 WBZ Traffic *1045 WXLO Traffic *COIN News *1SC Sports *STI Smart Traveler *LOT Lottery Info *TV4 WBZ TV 4 Weather *HELP Emergency Roadside Assistance *SUN NYNEX Weather *TIME NYNEX Time and Temperature Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty@roscom.com ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: Why Caller-ID Instead of ANI? Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 12:42:00 PST > It can only restrict what the LECs do as local service providers, > and the IXCs as local/intra-state carriers (and of course, what any > person inside the state is able to do). FYI, no IXC, to my knowledge actually passes CPN (calling party number). > Ethan, there have been lots of proposals to use ANI (CAMA/FG-B/FG-D) > as CallerID. I don't know anyone who has proposed the use of Caller > ID delivery mechanisms as a method of delivering ANI. (Actually, ISDN You can play games with ANI, but CAN'T use it in delivery of Calling Number Services, since there's no PRIVACY flag tied to ANI. Now, I'm stumped as to why you'd want to do the reverse (use CPN as ANI), since ANI is most readily available, but CPN isn't. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 09:28:26 -0500 From: goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com Subject: Re: Horrid AT&T 2500 Sets I concur with Randy Gellens that today's ersatz 2500 sets are cheap and flimsy. But I noticed something interesting at a local hardware store. A display case filled with AT&T telephone sets (the usual cheap kind with chirpers instead of bells) was accompanied by a few new AT&T "Signature" telephone sets. One was shaped sort of like a 2500, though a bit squashed; another was in the Trim-Line(tm, no doubt) format. Upon examination, I saw a mechanical bell ringer adjustment on the bottom of the 2500-style. Even more unusual, the set must have weighted ten pounds! It didn't even feel like a flimsy set with a lead weight, just heavy. And it was clearly marked AT&T Property for Lease Only, or some such words. The store said it was not for sale, either. It was a series that AT&T made only for rental customers. Since it's a rental, they're responsible if it breaks, so it's made better. I wouldn't mind buying one of these sets, but I suspect most of us don't really want to rent. I'm surprised that AT&T isn't making these available to rental PBX customers; maybe they can be had if you ask, but maybe they're only sold to residential customers. I know that Cortelco (ITT brand phones) still makes industrial-grade 2500 sets, but they aren't sold at consumer outlets. Maybe I'll call up Graybar and get me some. You'd think that retailers would recognize a good niche market for quality telephones. Hasn't Japan Inc. taught them anything? :-) fred ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 10:53:30 EST From: jweinber@ccgate.tfincc.DLJ.COM Subject: Internet Access I am thinking about getting a SLIP/PPP connection to the Internet for my company. I have a few questions, which I was hoping that someone here could help with. Here goes: 1. Do any providers support 28.8 kbps (V.fast) connections at this time? 2. If I get a dialup IP account as opposed to an online connection, would I still have to setup a separate EMAIL gateway for my MS Mail users to exchange mail with the net? (I have a 50-User Novell Network). 3. What is the best MS Windows based TCP/IP software to use a dialip IP connection? 4. Does anyone have any recommendations of service providers in the NYC area? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Jonathan Weinberg Network Insight ------------------------------ From: mabell@iastate.edu (Ma Bell) Subject: Re: What is This Number? Date: 14 Feb 94 04:37:51 GMT Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa In whitmore@tahoma.cwu.edu (Rattlesnake Stu) writes: > carlene lanham (cl@nde.unl.edu) wrote: >> And, I've heard that some exchanges have a number that you call and it >> will repeat back to you your own phone number. Does anyone know >> anything about this number? What might it be? Most exchanges have their own ANI numbers, but finding them can be a chore. I gave the ol' telco a call the other day. Nobody seemed to know the number, although they gave me a few numbers that I could try -- I even spoke with a technician! You might try giving them a call in your city; just tell them that you're installing a multi-line system in your business and you need to do some testing. And if that doesn't yield anything, you can always use a 1-800 ANI number. The one I use is: (800) 775-5513. Please don't abuse it; they'll just change the number and then none of us can use it. Ma Bell [*][0][#] mabell@iastate.edu Elec. Engr. Major ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 18:35:20 EST From: Ken Jongsma Reply-To: jongsma@swdev.si.com Subject: Two Line Tropez 900MHz Now Available Paging through the latest Hello Direct catalog, I noticed hat they are featuring a new model Tropez cordless phone that is designed for two lines. The base does not have a dial pad, in that respect it is similar to their single line DL model. The handset has a small LCD display that will display Caller-ID. The price? $349. ($319 if you order before an unspecified date.) Hello Direct can be reached at 1-800-HI-HELLO or +1 408 972 1990. Usual Disclaimers. Kenneth R Jongsma jongsma@swdev.si.com Smiths Industries 73115.1041@compuserve.com Grand Rapids, Michigan +1 616 241 7702 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 22:13:20 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Party Lines Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA wnp@aaf.alcatel.at, writes: > two party lines may be shared on a device ("Frequenz-Weiche" in German), > don't know what it'd be called in English. Subscriber Carrier. This was usually used in places where a single house (in the U.S.) wanted a second voice phone line but there were no extra pairs available, and it would split the signal into two (voice) lines on one wire. Since phone service in Europe is so frightfully expensive, I can understand where such a scheme would be used to create the equivalent of Party Line service. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 13:18:49 -0500 From: Paul Houle Subject: Re: Guard Your Royal Database (Hackers Still With Us) In comp.dcom.telecom TELECOM Digest Editor notes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was an instance several years ago of > obscene calls made to Queen Elizabeth II which were traced to an interna- > tional origin here in the United States. It took a cooperative effort > between British Telecom, AT&T, and Illinois Bell to catch him, but they > finally did. The story has been here in the Digest in the past. PAT] Heck, about eight years ago there was a phile going around listing lots of what were described as "phun numbers". These were everything from various modem dialups to tone sweeps, and there was one number that claimed to be for Queen Elizabeth. Anyway, let's just say that, uuuh, a phriend of mine who wasn't particularly mature at the time called the number. Somebody answered, "Buckingham Palace." And my phriend asked to speak to the Queen and the guy said "That's a good joke, can you tell me another one." He hung up and my phriend called back, and asked to speak to the Queen, adding that this was a very expensive long distance call from America (well, maybe it was expensive, but he wasn't paying for it). He said, "I know, but it's three o'clock in the morning." My phriend apologized and never called back. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've seen lists like that. They usually include the phone number for the Pope as well. About twenty years ago some phreak went on one of those public tours they give of the White House, and I don't know how he did it but he managed to rip off a copy of the internal telephone directory listing all the direct dial centrex numbers for top staffers and one Richard Nixon. Even though the White House had a plug-style 'cordboard' handling the calls to 202-456-1414, for many years there have been centrex lines there as well served out of the Executive Office Building on its phone system. In other words, you could dial 202-456-1414 and ask to speak with the Resident President then in power and get politely transferred to one of his telephone representatives (actually highly placed flunkies authorized to respond in the Resident President's name in limited situations) or if you knew about it, you could dial 202-XXX-2591 and ring the phone on his desk direct in those days. Well!! This bird made copies of the appropriate page in the directory and sent them off to a couple dozen radical newspapers, anti-war groups and others. It was published in quite a few 'underground' newspapers at the time to everyone's delight except of course the Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company employees assigned to the EOB and White House telecom office who suddenly had the task of changing a lot of phone numbers in a hurry. Poor President Nixon ... he alluded to 'the problem' in one of his press conferences once during the interim of a week or so between when the listing first was made public and the time it was in all the papers and the telecom office wised up and began changing all the internal centrex numbers. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #83 *****************************