TELECOM Digest Fri, 18 Feb 94 11:32:00 CST Volume 14 : Issue 89 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Linc Madison) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Blake Patterson) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Carl Moore) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (David A. Kaye) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (John R. Levine) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (jdl@wam.umd.edu) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (David Esan) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Scott Statton) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Rob Boudrie) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Don Lynn) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Ed Ellers) Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Arthur Rubin) Re: AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin (Mike King) Re: AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin (Jay Hennigan) Re: AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin (John R. Levine) Re: Paging Available on Cellular Phones (Ken K.P. Lo) Re: Paging Available on Cellular Phones (Monty Solomon) Re: Digital Cellular Phones (Ed Leslie) Re: Digital Cellular Phones (David Boettger) Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area (Al Varney) Re: Horrid AT&T 2500 Sets (Bill Mayhew) 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, 18 Feb 1994 02:27:44 -0800 From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) In article Randy Finder wrote: > I was watching a show one late night and saw a TV ad for a product > with a 1-900 number. What made me notice was that the number > was 1-900-200-QQQQ. > ^^^ > I know that "normal" area codes can not have phone numbers with an X00 > in them, but how wide are the available seven digit combinations for > 1-900 (and 1-800) numbers. I presume that 1-900-555-QQQQ is going to > get you 900 number information/ available for movies and TV to use as > fakes, but is for instance 1-900-000-0000 available? On the contrary -- N00 exchanges *are* permitted in normal area codes. I thought they weren't, but there were a couple of them listed in the 312/708 (Chicago) split list. They are only used if the area code is *extremely* full. Also, 1-900-555-5555 is/was a real number that charges money for something not at all related to directory assistance (something to do with {USA Today}, I think). The very first '900' number I ever saw was 1-900-210-xxxx ($.50 per call) and was a presidential preference call-in vote on Saturday Night Live in 1984. It was available anywhere in the US and Canada. So far, the restriction that the seven-digit portion must begin with [2-9] is still true. I have noticed, though that I seem to be seeing more N1/0X prefixes in '800' numbers lately. Is '800' getting anywhere close to full? Linc Madison * Oakland, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 94 09:12:40 EST From: blake@hou2h.att.com Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Organization: AT&T The FCC or some other bureaucracy assigns the three digits following 900- to specific carriers. I.e., AT&T has fifty or so six-digit numbers beginning 900-, MCI has a different set, etc. Providers of 900-type info services contract with a carrier and can only get 900 numbers that begin with six-digit prefixes from that carrier's set. The last four digits can be 0000 to 9999, but it is first-come first-served. Carrier's don't necessarily "open" all the prefixes assigned to them, i.e., Sprint may "own" 900-200-, but may not let anyone use it. There is not yet any "portability" of 900-type numbers as recently happened with 800-type numbers, ie. if a 900-type information provider changes from one 900 carrier to another, that provider's 900 number will change. You can get a list of currently available six-digit prefixes by calling each 900 carrier. I don't know whether any carrier owns 900-200-, but I see no technical reason why not. Blake Patterson AT&T Bell Labs ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 94 06:57:04 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers I have seen 800-500 and 800-800, and there are some N00 prefixes in what is now 213/310/818. ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Date: 18 Feb 1994 06:24:09 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Randy Finder (naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu) wrote: > 1-900 (and 1-800) numbers. I presume that 1-900-555-QQQQ is going to > get you 900 number information.... Careful there. 1-900-555-5555 belongs to {USA Today} newspaper, and it's used for various promotions including their weather service. I wonder how many mistaken directory assistance calls they've charged? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 22:12 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > I know that "normal" area codes can not have phone numbers with an X00 > in them, ... Sure they can. The 200, 300, 400, 500, and 600 prefixes are used in the 201 and 908 areas in New Jersey. (609-300 is also in use, even though 609 is nowhere near full. I think it's a casino in Atlantic City.) There are many X00 prefixes in the Los Angeles area as well. I haven't seen any 700, 800, or 900 prefixes, probably because the possibility of confusion is too great. There aren't any 1XX or 0XX nornal numbers, since they couldn't be dialed with seven digits. In most cases these prefixes are used for cellular, paging, PBX direct inward dial, and not for regular individual POTS lines. > how wide are the available seven digit combinations for 1-900 (and 1-800) > numbers. I presume that 1-900-555-QQQQ is going to get you 900 number > information 900-555-1212 gets you directory assistance (or used to), but 900-555-5555 is the {USA Today} info line which for a while was also accidentally connected to 800-555-5555, causing a lot of excitement in the Digest. There are a lot of numbers in 800-800-XXXX, a prefix opened by Sprint before 800 portability started. > is for instance 1-900-000-0000 available? Probably not. Many local switches are programmed to reject numbers of the form NNX-1XX-XXXX and NNX-0XX-XXXX locally, and not send them to long distance carriers. I suspect that a lot of switches would reject 100 and 000 prefixes in 700, 800, or 900 numbers as well. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However there is the prefix 800-800. It belongs to Sprint I believe. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 20:01:22 -0500 From: Jonathan Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Normal area codes may contain X00 prefixes if they are running out of numbers, but I oppose this practice, and if I controlled the numbering plan, then this would not happen. An example of an X00 prefix is the 201 200 prefix. Also, the 1-900-555-1212 number has been temporarily disconnected. ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Date: 17 Feb 94 16:57:52 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY In article naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu (Randy Finder) writes: > I know that "normal" area codes can not have phone numbers with an X00 You know wrong. There are 32 x00 exchanges in the NANP. 201 200 JERSEY CITY, NJ 201 300 NEWTON, NJ 210 500 RIO GRAND CITY, TX 213 200 GARDENA, CA 213 300 LOS ANGELES ZONE 1, CA 213 400 GARDENA, CA 213 500 GARDENA, CA 213 600 LOS ANGELES ZONE 9, CA 213 700 GARDENA, CA 213 900 LOS ANGELES ZONE 1, CA 310 600 GARDENA, CA 312 400 HOMEWOOD, IL 313 300 BIRMINGHAM, MI 313 400 BIRMINGHAM, MI 313 500 SOUTHFIELD, MI 313 600 SOUTHFIELD, MI 416 200 TORONTO, ON 416 600 TORONTO, ON 609 300 ATLANTIC CITY, NJ 609 400 ATLANTIC CITY, NJ 619 500 DEL MAR, CA 702 500 LAS VEGAS, NV 702 600 LAS VEGAS, NV 702 700 LAS VEGAS, NV 810 500 SOUTHFIELD, MI 818 300 ALHAMBRA, CA 818 400 LOS ANGELES ZONE 1, CA 818 500 GLENDALE, CA 818 700 NORTHRIDGE, CA 908 400 ELIZABETH, NJ 908 500 CLINTON, NJ 908 600 TOMS RIVER, NJ David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ From: n1gak@netcom.com (Scott Statton) Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 18:17:32 GMT In article naraht@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu (Randy Finder) writes: > I know that "normal" area codes can not have phone numbers with an X00 > in them, Ahhh -- but you DON'T know ... for example (just a quick grep of the V&H tapes will reveal: 201-200, 213-200, 416-200, 604-200, 201-300, 213-300, 213-400, 818-400, etc. > but how wide are the available seven digit combinations for > 1-900 (and 1-800) numbers. I presume that 1-900-555-QQQQ is going to > get you 900 number information/ available for movies and TV to use as > fakes, but is for instance 1-900-000-0000 available? That's why the NANP calls it NXX ... it can be any N [2-9] followed by any two X [0-9]. Now certain codes will likely never be assigned, for instance 911. Other codes, like 211, 411, and 611 will likely eventually be assigned, and the services that those N11s represent will be moved into the 555 number space. While 800 numbers NOW do database queries to determine which carrier gets the call, 900 routing is still static. When you become an IXC you ask the administrators for a couple of 900 prefixes. Any 900 number in that space is yours to do with as you wish. I used to post the list frequently. Scott [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And in fact we have such a list in the Telecom Archives as part of the Area Code Guide. (ftp lcs.mit.edu). PAT] ------------------------------ From: rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob Boudrie) Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Date: 17 Feb 1994 14:07:56 -0500 Organization: Center for High Performance Computing of WPI 900-555-5555 is (was?) {USA Today's} information line. There was a much publicized bug in the long distance routine software a few years ago when 800-555-5555 connected you to the 900 number (and billed your phoine as such) even if you had 900 blocking on your line. AT&T Boston Spokesman Rick Brayhill, as quoted in the {Middlesex News} (Framingham, MA) refered to the Internet Usenet groups as an underground network (forget the precise terms) where hackers and people looking to get something for nothing like Boudrie obtained this number. Adam Gaffin, columnist (adamg@world.std.com) did a good job on the article, including mention that AT&T Bell Labs has its engineers connected to the so called underground network. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 01:12:39 PST From: DLynn.El_Segundo@xerox.com Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers The Los Angeles area (213, 310, and 818 area codes) has used some of the X00s for exchanges for a few years. At least 213-600, 818-300, 818-500, and 818-700 are in use. However, there are no exchanges below 200, since leading 1 and 0 still mean something special. There apparently are some taboo numbers not used as exchanges above 200, however. There are no exchanges in the LA area that duplicate any southern California area codes (though northern California area codes ARE used as exchanges). Examples: there is no 310-213, but there is a 310-510. There is probably no technical reason for this; just to avoid confusion when hearing a familiar number in an unfamiliar use. Don Lynn ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 15:58:50 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) > ... but is for instance 1-900-000-0000 available? I'd bet it is. Unlike normal phone numbers an 800 or 900 number will ALWAYS be dialed after the area code, so there would not be a need to keep the NXX from conflicting with other codes. (I guess that would make it an "XXX" instead of an NXX!) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 17 Feb 94 21:13:08 GMT Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc. 1-818-500 is a normal exchange here in shaky California (Glendale, to be precise.) Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) ------------------------------ From: mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) Subject: Re: AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 07:06:26 PST In TELECOM Digest, V14 #84, Eric De Mund said: > AT&T calling card calls from my office in California to my parents in > New York results in a telephone number other than that of my desk > phone appearing on my AT&T calling card bill as the calls' origin. You're probably using a PBX with DID service. In that case, the number on your phone can be totally unrelated to the billing number of the trunk like on which your call was placed. > When I telephone that number, I get an internal recording telling me > that that number isn't in service. (I work for a DOE/UC laboratory in > Berkeley.) More than likely, that trunk is only used for outgoing calls. > I called AT&T and asked them about it. Front line and second line > customer service tell me that there's nothing that can be done to > resolve the calls' origin. Is this true? Yes. They have no control over your employer's phone system or the lines used to place the call. Mike King mk@tfs.com ------------------------------ From: jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin Date: 18 Feb 1994 01:38:49 -0800 Organization: Disgruntled postal workers against gun control In article Eric De Mund writes: > AT&T calling card calls from my office in California to my parents in > New York results in a telephone number other than that of my desk > phone appearing on my AT&T calling card bill as the calls' origin. > When I telephone that number, I get an internal recording telling me > that that number isn't in service. (I work for a DOE/UC laboratory in > Berkeley.) > I called AT&T and asked them about it. Front line and second line > customer service tell me that there's nothing that can be done to > resolve the calls' origin. Is this true? If your office has a PBX with direct-inward-dialing to your desk and one-way outbound trunks to AT&T, yes it is true. The number appearing on your calling card bill is a non-dialable number (even though it looks like a standard phone number) which identifies the outbound trunk that was used to reach AT&T. When you dial 9 (or whatever you dial) to get an outside trunk, the PBX will assign one for the duration of that call based on a route selection table. There is not a single wire from your desk to the telco central office uniquely identifying your office phone. As far as the local phone company is concerned, you are calling from the number assigned to the trunk handling that call. This number is what is passed to AT&T as the originating number. Depending on how the PBX is set up, it may or may not be dialable from outside. If it were dialable, it would likely ring in to the switchboard at your office. In your case, it would seem that the trunk group handling calling card calls to AT&T is optioned as outgoing only, hence you get an intercept recording when trying to call it. The situation you describe is common in PBX systems. Many cellular systems are set up the same way and will display a non-dialable number on caller-ID, ANI, and calling card calls as the oiginating number. Jay Hennigan jay@rain.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 21:51 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. In article is written: > AT&T calling card calls from my office in California to my parents in > New York results in a telephone number other than that of my desk > phone appearing on my AT&T calling card bill as the calls' origin. Does your office have a PBX with direct inward dialing? If so, it's true, the billing number that AT&T sees is the ANI billing number for the trunk on which the call happens to be sent, which as you've discovered bears no relationship to the number of the phone on your desk. This isn't considered an error, since ANI information is used to tell the telco who to bill for the call, which it does, since they know that the trunk is one of the group assigned to your office PBX. (If you complain about the call to AT&T, they should be able to check the number with Pac Tel and verify that it comes from your office.) The PBX has its own SMDR recorders that log which numbers are called from which extension and let them allocate out the phone bill. ANI doesn't necessarily give the recipient a number on which he can call the caller back. This distinction between billing number and calling number is why 800 numbers that attempt to bill back the caller based on ANI are so bogus -- just because the caller was allowed to make a direct-dialed 800 call doesn't mean that he's allowed to bill anything else to that number. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: KKPLO@ELECTRICAL.watstar.uwaterloo.ca (Ken K P Lo) Subject: Re: Paging Available on Cellular Phones Organization: University of Waterloo Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 12:41:16 GMT In article drharry!aboritz@uunet.UU.NET (Alan Boritz) writes: > scol@az.stratus.com (Scott Colbath) writes: >> Bell Atlantic here in Phoenix announced yesterday that they were >> making available to their cellular phone customers the ability to be >> pagable on their cell phones. Is this being done anywhere else? It >> sounds like a good idea. One is able to ditch the pager and just carry >> a phone. Any comments? > That's nothing new. Just set call-forward-on-no-answer to your pager > number and you've got the same thing. I don't think so. In this case, you still have to carry a pager. I think Bell Atlantic is offering a phone with built-in pager, right? What is the main advantage of this? So you don't have to answer every call? I am wondering if UK and Hong Kong are doing the same thing with their one-way CT2 phones. Ken K P Lo S3 Rm 105 Box 460 Waterloo, Ontario A Student of University of Waterloo (519) 725 - 6332 kkplo@electrical.watstar.uwaterloo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 09:54:10 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Paging Available on Cellular Phones In article scol@az.stratus.com (Scott Colbath) writes: > Bell Atlantic here in Phoenix announced yesterday that they were > making available to their cellular phone customers the ability to be > pagable on their cell phones. The Oki 1150 handheld phone comes with this feature. You can configure the phone to auto answer like a digital beeper. The phone will store up to ten received numbers. I don't recall how may digits can be stored for each number. A similar, and cool feature, is that the party you are speaking with can enter a number into the phone's memory by dialing '*' before and '#' after the number. If they dial a 0 after the #, the phone will disconnect the current call and then automatically place a call to the just-transmitted number. Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty@roscom.com ------------------------------ From: edleslie@apogee.ccs.yorku.ca (Ed Leslie) Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones Organization: York University Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 07:10:00 -0500 Alex Cena (acena@lehman.com) wrote: > It is difficult for me to imagine an all digital cellular network Well, then, you'd best not bring your cellphone to Canada. Both Bell Mobility (Ontario and Quebec) and Cantel (the 'other' provider country- wide) and I believe most (all?) of the other regional providers across Canada are either converting, or have completed conversion to digital service capability. Ed ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 07:22:00 +0000 From: David Boettger Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones In article , wrote: > How are digital systems more fraud resistant? I assume you are > talking about the folks that listen in on the cellular frequencies and > pull your phone ID out (by using one of the decoder boxes specifically > designed to do this) and use it to program another phone that they > sell to someone. Since the decompressor circuit most be in the phone > it will be widely available and known so the jerks building the > decoder boxes should have no problem incorporating that into their > systems. right? The "Cave" algorithm specified in IS-54 (the TDMA standard) is used to encrypt data (ESN and possibly voice). The algorithm is keyed with data that are never transmitted and are only known by the switch and the mobile. David Boettger boettger@bnr.ca ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Feb 94 10:49:31 CST From: varney@ihlpe.att.com Subject: Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area Organization: AT&T In article fieldday!sewilco@kksys.mn. org writes: > John Galloway (jrg@rahul.net) wrote: >> The dispatcher, even with Enhanced 9-1-1 could never know where your >> cell-phone is without asking. Maybe what cell-site you are using, but >> in the fringe those sites can cover a large area. > The smallest cellular cell is too large, as the calls have to be > processed by very sharp lines. An urban freeway is only a block or > two wide, and minor problems may be passed to your state highway > patrol or a county sheriff. This depends on whether that freeway is a > federal or county highway (or private toll road?) and what the > agreements are between such agencies in your area. > No present cellular system can deal with the narrow division between > areas such as an urban freeway and an adjoining city street, much less > where the middle of a city street is the dividing line and how far > from your location you are looking. Even land-line phones have the need to re-route 911 calls to an appropriate agency. If I report a fire at the junior college two blocks from me, the 911 call goes to my city, but the college is in the territory of another fire department. If I report an accident on the local state highway when I reach home, that call has to be forwarded. An accident three blocks east goes to the county, but one block closer goes to the city. I'm sure some areas are even more complex -- even without cellular. Al Varney ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.EDU (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: Horrid AT&T 2500 Sets Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Fri, 18 Feb 1994 11:13:40 GMT We buy ITT-2500 sets from Famous Telephone, though I am sure Graybar has the same units. The "ash" color 2500s are around $30 each; definitely a good value for what you get. I don't have an exact price because I don't work for our phone department, but I did talk to the phone person not too long ago. I picked up an ITT-2500 at a local "Acme-Click" retail store for $28. It was full quality. I got the one that comes in the transparent case, so there isn't any way they can hide chintzy weights inside without it being noticed. However some of the lousy phones the likes of Conair brazenly display the weights in their see-though models. About the only differences in the modern ITT-2500 and a Western Electric 2500 I have from the mid 1960s are: 1) the "network" is on a little circuit board in the new phone while it was in a metal box potted with goo in in the WE. 2) The new TT dial pad uses an IC and 3.579545 MHz crystal while the classic unit has the clever L-C osciallor with germanium transistors. The new unit is insensitive to polarity on the line, whereas you have to get L1 and L2 on the correct terminals on the old unit. Nice to see that technology can survive 30 years without changing too much. Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-0095 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu amateur radio 146.58: N8WED ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #89 *****************************