TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Feb 95 16:58:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 95

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Indian Supreme Court Ends State Control of the Airwaves (Rishab 
Ghosh)
    Book Review: "Data Link Protocols" by Black (Rob Slade)
    Re: "Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway" (Reid 
Goldsborough)
    Area Code 500: It Doesn't and Does Work - or Both (Paul Robinson)
    Re: AT&T 500 Service and the Hospitality Industry (Dave Ptasnik)
    A Strange Man Calls Me About 500 (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    976 Look-Alike Exchanges (Henry Becker)
    Ericsson GH337 Codes (Michael Holstein)
    BellSouth Joins World Wide Web (Nigel Allen)
    VocalTec Internet Telephone (Jeffrey Friedman)
    GSM-PCN Chipset, Radio, Baseband (Urban Nilsson)
    Pointers to Telecom Resource Server Sites on the Net (Robert Shaw)
    Need a Contact for Teradyne RFTS 4SIGHT System 2000 (Usager hqtel)
    Wanted: Used Business Telephone Systems and T1 (David M. Russell)
    Telco Signaling Requirements (Richard Brehove)
    Cellular Service in Palo Alto (Javier Henderson)

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 America
On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the 
moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. 

Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual
readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu *

The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick
Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax 
or phone at:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: 500-677-1616
                        Fax: 708-329-0572
  ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the              
*
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    
* 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   
* 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as 
represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 
*
**********************************************************************
***

Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such
as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your 
help 
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars 
per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Indian Supreme Court Ends State Control of the Airwaves
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 13:11:48 EST
Reply-To: rishab@dxm.ernet.in
From: rishab@dxm.ernet.in


The Indian Supreme Court yesterday (9th February 1995) directed the
government to create an independent autonomous regulatory body for the
airwaves (like the US FCC) and end the state monopoly on broadcasting
and satellite uplinks.

The judges took an interesting position that the "GREATER IMPACT" OF
ELECTRONIC MEDIA and its "wider range of circulation of information"
as opposed to the press, CANNOT BE USED TO RESTRICT or deny THE RIGHT
TO FREE EXPRESSION. This may have important consequences, for all over
the world, including in the US and India, the electronic media is
denied freedoms allowed to the press with the excuse that it's somehow
different.

The three-judge bench, comprising of Justices PB Sawant, S Mohan and
BP Jeevan Reddy, made the ruling after an government appeal against a
previous ruling by the Calcutta High Court. The Calcutta High Court
had earlier upheld the right to telecast as fundamental, which would
theoretically prevent any regulation or censorship whatsoever. The
consensual Supreme Court judgement, while denying the government's
power of monopoly, upheld its right to subject the electronic media to
regulation and censorship.

However, Justice Reddy, in his separate ruling did not mention
censorship.  He pointed out that the century-old Indian Telegraph Act
of 1885, which has been ingeniously extrapolated to support the
government's monopoly over electronic media and right to 'licence'
data networks, was "wholly inadequate and unsuited for" electronic
media, and said that Parliament should enact new laws to govern such
media.

Unfortunately the Supreme Court has no powers to legislate, and new
laws have a habit (as seen with the Digital Telephony Bill in the US)
of increasing, rather than decreasing, government authority. The
explicit statement that the electronic media should not be more
restricted than the press will, hopefully, prevent that.

The legal battle started with the Doordarshan, the state TV monopoly,
objecting to the Cricket Association of Bengal's contract with Trans
World International granting the latter worldwide broadcasting rights
to a cricket tournament. Doordarshan used the 1885 Act to prevent TWI
from uplinking to satellite, till the courts intervened.


Rishab Aiyer Ghosh          rishab@dxm.ernet.in           
rishab@arbornet.org
Vox +91 11 6853410 Voxmail 3760335       H 34C Saket, New Delhi 
110017, INDIA 


------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 13:41:05 EST
From: Rob Slade <roberts@mukluk.decus.ca>
Subject: Book Review: "Data Link Protocols" by Black


BKDTLKPR.RVW   941229
 
"Data Link Protocols", Black, 1993, 0-13-204918-X
%A   Uyless Black
%C   113 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ   07632
%D   1993
%G   0-13-204918-X
%I   PTR Prentice-Hall, Inc.
%O   (515) 284-6751 FAX (515) 284-2607
%P   270
%T   "Data Link Protocols"
 
Much of what goes on at the physical layer level in data 
communications 
is mature technology, fixed in hardware.  The network, internetwork
and higher layers vary widely depending upon situation and 
application.  
The data link layer is the one most in need of study and 
understanding.  
This is the layer concerned with the actual transmission of data, and
its reliable receipt.
 
Three chapters relate to the basic concepts of the data link layer, an
introduction, error detection and correction, and controls.  The
remainder of the book concentrates on the specific protocols; BSC,
HDLC, LAPB, LAPD, LAN protocols, LLC and so forth.  Two chapters are
of particular interest to the online community, covering asynchronous
file transfer protocols (X modem and descendents, Kermit, and others)
and LAPM (Link Access Protocol for Microcomputers or V.42).  Frame
relay and Internet protocols are touched on.
 
This work deals with the concepts rather than implementations.  The
actual programming of specific protocols will require additional
detail.  However, for an understanding of the options at this layer in
the stack, this is a good starting source.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995   BKDTLKPR.RVW   941229. Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's
book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest.


Vancouver      ROBERTS@decus.ca   
Institute for  Robert_Slade@sfu.ca
Research into  rslade@cue.bc.ca   
User           p1@CyberStore.ca   
Security       Canada V7K 2G6     

------------------------------

From: Reid Goldsborough <reidgold@netaxs.com>
Subject: Re: "Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway"
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 10:45:17 -0500
Organization: Net Access - Philadelphia's Internet Connection


On Mon, 6 Feb 1995, Rob Slade wrote:

 ... a review of my book. Thanks for posting your views.

> The book is a collection of enthusiastic essays about life in the 
telecom-
> rich future, with a piece concluding each chapter by some 
politician,
> "industry leader", Famous Person, or other "expert".  Sometimes, 
it's
> hard to determine whether the "viewpoint" is an addendum to the 
chapter, 
> the chapter is an introduction to the viewpoint, or whether both are 
related

> solely by proximity.

Are you sure you read *my* book? Straight Talk About the Information
Superhighway is not a collection of essays. It's a conventional
nonfiction book, with each chapter building upon the last, mostly
analysis on my part but with lots of quotes and other information from
those in private industry developing the technology, those in the
goverment promoting and overseeing it, those in the nonprofit sector
who are trying to steer it so it benefits the public interest, and
those using today's online services.

You may feel it's a collection of essays because this was a line used
by one of the publisher's promotion writers. Did you read the 
promotional 
materials but not the book?

> The author must be sensitive, in advance, to possible charges that
> this material is all very "blue sky".  After the opening story, he
> argues that this is not a fantasy, but that future technology will 
be
> very much like it.  Of course, the technologies presented -- email,
> multimedia extensions, teleconferencing, voice recognition and
> macros -- are all available *now*, but it is obvious that 
Goldsborough
> is not really experienced in the most effective ways to use them.

There's a chapter in the book about all the hype surrounding the 
information superhighway. You should read it.

> This is an extended series of the usual mass-media magazine 
articles,
> high on "gee whiz!" and low on content.

You seem very down on conventional media. Have you had bad experiences
here? In truth, there's quite a bit of content in the book, though as
the introduction points out it's not a technical book. I do talk about
the technical challenges involved, the need for vastly increased
bandwidth, better video servers, affordable set-top boxes, and so on.
But the book is mostly about how lifestyle and workstyle issues, how
the information superhighway will likely affect our jobs, the way we
educate our kids, how we vote, entertainment and shopping, how we
gather news, and how we communicate and relate with one another.


Reid 
Goldsborough~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~reidgold@netaxs.com
Computer columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer
Author of the book Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway

Places to read parts of Straight Talk About the Information 
Superhighway:
* Satore Township. Point your Web browser at 
ftp://ftp.crl.com/ftp/users/ro/mikekell/html/satore.htm.
* Macmillan Information SuperLibrary. Point your Web browser at
http://www.mcp.com/, then click or choose Alpha.

To order the book, phone Macmillan Publishing at 800-428-5331.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 07:07:52 EST 
From: Paul Robinson <paul@tdr.com>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Area Code 500: It Doesn't and Does Work - or Both


Our next message on NPA 500 is subtitled "Fun and Games with Bell
Atlantic" for reasons which will become clear.

TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: [deleted] *my* 500 number started
> working perfectly today. [deleted] when I use my own phone to dial 
> 1-500-677-1616 (my number) it rings once and I am told it will try
> my alternate numbers (because it found my home number to be busy). 
> When I do 0-500-677-1616 and tell it to bill the call to the phone I
> am using, it vanishes for a couple seconds and I get call-waiting 
...
                      
I decided to try the number to see if it works here or not.
                      
Here in Montgomery County, Bell Atlantic does the following:
 
       0-500-677-1616 returns a SIT tone ("<dew dew deep>") followed 
by
                      "We're sorry, the number cannot be completed as
                      dialed, please check the area code and the
                      number and dial again.  Thank you."  Then a rude
                      rattling noise and it repeats; this sounds like
                      a local recording.
       1-700-555-1212 "You have reached the AT&T Long Distance 
Network"
                      (Yes, I know the "official" number is 555-4141,  
                      but this one has worked with AT&T, MCI, and 
Sprint
                      for over ten years and I've gotten in the habit
                      of using it.)
       1-500-677-1616 AT&T's sound mark ("<TRILL> AT&T") and it begins
                      a ring.  I hung up at this point.  (No offense
                      intended, Mr. Moderator, but I just wanted to
                      see if the system worked or not, I really didn't
                      have any reason to call you.)
 10288-0-500-677-1616 AT&T's sound mark ("<TRILL> AT&T") then "True
                      Connections" and then asks me for a pin or a
                      calling card number.
 10288-1-500-677-1616 returns a SIT tone ("<dew dew deep>") followed 
by
                      "We're sorry, it is not necessary to dial a
                      carrier access code for the number you have 
dialed."
 10222-0-500-677-1616 Gives me a live MCI operator, probably because 
they
                      cannot route this call.  (I wanted to check; I 
never 
                      can be sure with Bell Atlantic what might 
happen.)

This was cute; real cute. I then decided to see how much fun I could
have reporting this to 611.  That was even *more* interesting. (Note:
I made the try via MCI's 10222 carrier code after calling 611 because
I didn't think of it until later.)

After going through a couple of voice mail menu prompts, the attendant
answers. When I give her my number, I gave her my virtual alternate
ring number, only to have her tell me that's not the number I'm,
calling from.  (I never use the "real" physical telephone number so I
don't even know it.) After I give her the main billing number which is
a different line, she then plays a game of asking me the main number
which I don't know, I already told her I don't know, and *which she
has on a screen in front of her, since later she proceeds to inform me
of the correct number*.  Finally we get that taken care of.  Also,
they *still* have the *former* owner of this number listed as the
subscriber.  I've had this number for over three years, but they still
don't have it right.

After I tell her that I *can* dial 1-500 or 10288-0-500, and *can't*
dial 0-500 or 10288-1-500, her response is to ask me if this is a
problem from other phones in the house, and "Could there be a problem
with your dial pad?"  I was about to try a different phone (which I
knew would have the same problem) when reality set in and I realized
that the question didn't make any sense.  I take a deep breath to calm
myself and explain carefully that if there was a problem with the dial
pad, it would not have worked when dialing the carrier access code
first, either, would it?  She then conceded this point.

Then she proceeds to suggest it's a carrier problem!  I explain to her
two points, first that the refusal to accept 0-500 sounds like it's
Bell Atlantic's recording, and that the carrier access code not
allowed recording must be theirs, and second, that the 500 area code
is similar to the 800 area code, the numbers are carrier specific and
shouldn't even *need* a carrier access code, thus I believe the
problem is in Bell Atlantic's switch.

Grudgingly, she agrees to write up a trouble ticket and I give her the
number so they can check on it; (Pat, if you get a "strange" call from
*Bell Atlantic* checking your 500 number from *AT&T*, I was the one
who caused it).  We shall see what happens.

Based on my prior experience will Bell Atlantic, I hope this is a
"difficult" problem; that they can fix easily.  If it's an "easy"
problem, then I'm worried they will make a mistake and I'll end up
getting my phone service switched over to foreign exchange service
from West Virginia or something else. :)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I got a weird response today when 
trying
my 500 number from the McDonald's Restaurant where I had lunch. O-500
worked fine, and as expected when I pressed # without a pin the 
response
was that the call had to be billed to a calling card. No other options
were given. So far so good.  Then I tried 1-500 and got the intercept 
usually given out on phones restricted from 900/976, i.e. "the call 
you
have dialed cannot be placed from this telephone. An operator will not
be able to place the call for you." Instead of hanging up, I stayed on
the line and after a couple seconds, ringing started ... it rang twice
and a new intercept came on the line, "your call cannot be completed 
as
dialed, please check the number and dial again, this is a recording 
708-1T".
This happened three times in a row, from 708-677.

Now didn't someone write here just a couple days ago and say that when
they tried 1-500 from a (genuine Bell) payphone that the call was auto-
matically dumped to 0-500 and dealt with that way?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: davep@u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: AT&T 500 Service and the Hospitality Industry
Date: 10 Feb 1995 16:36:35 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


Darryl Kipps <72623.456@compuserve.com> writes:

> As MIS director for a small chain of hotels, I am concerned about
> the increasing number of comments I'm seeing here regarding the
> inability to access 500 numbers from most PBX's.

> At any rate, I'd appreciate billing procedures and rates for 1-500 
> service.  I'm assuming that 0-500 numbers are always billed to 
either the 
> callee or a calling card.  Thanks for listening.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 
> On calls dialed 1-500 and billed direct (or dialed 0-500 if the 
guest
> slips it to you by pressing '1' in response to 'bill this call to 
the
> number you are calling from') you will be billed by AT&T at the rate 
of
> 25 cents per minute during peak and 15 cents per minute at night and
> on weekends/holidays. Peak is 8am to 5pm your time, Monday through 
Friday.

Pat - 

I called AT&T to ask about a 500 number I had reserved.  They had no
record of the reservation.  I then asked if I could reserve the number
again.  They said that they did not have the prefix I had requested


(467).  I presume this is why they dropped my reservation request.

All of which brings me to my point.  If different carriers "own"
different 500 number prefixes, I would expect each to set its own
rate.  While AT&T might charge .25/.15, Integreslime might charge
$5.00/$4.99.  This would be a big ouch to the hotels.  Keeping up with
all of the carriers and all of the rates would be challenging at best.
Were it my switch, I would probably block 1-500 calls.  Trying to
allow direct dialing and hoping to recharge accurately would not be
practical.  0-500 calls might be OK, but so many slime carriers ignore
billed number screening.  If the bill just appears on the local telco
statement, it is too hard to screen the bills looking for fraudulently
billed 0-500 calls.  The only way I would allow 0-500 calls would be
if the local telco refused to bill for the teleslime.  If the 
teleslime 
has to send in a separate bill, it is easy enough to discard.


Dave Ptasnik  davep@u.washington.edu


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well you are correct that once the 
others
get into the act, it will be a lot harder to keep track of. I only 
answered
Mr. Kipps on the basis of AT&T, which is -- so far as I know -- the 
only
player in 500 right now, although other telcos do have prefixes 
reserved
for themselves. If anything though, I think the others will try to be 
competitive with AT&T on this service. The only cases where you get 
the
outrageous, non-competitive pricing (such as your $5.00/4.99 example) 
are
when the teleslimes have a more or less captive customer base such as
COCOTS in out of the way places, correctional institutions, etc. They 
know
if you are at a COCOT on a street corner somewhere calling collect, 
you
probably -- for whatever reasons of your own lifestyle, etc -- do not 
have
much choice in the matter, so they pull out those high rates. And of 
course, there is always sex: the teleslimes who specialize in hot chat
with very high billings per minute also have many users without a lot 
of
options (the user is aware of) ... and a need which requires 
attention.

But who in their right mind would sign up with teleslime for a 500 
number
where *they* had to pay that $5.00 rate on calls made to them with 
pins
or where anyone calling them had to pay the same?  See my point?  
People
who get 500 service are probably going to more sophisticated than 
that.
So you may get cases where Ameritech (one company proposing 500 
service)
may charge 26/13 and Sprint may charge 24/17. Each one will offer some
different little gimmick in their version of 500, and as so often 
happens
it will be an applications-driven thing as to which works out best for
each individual user over a long period of time.  But I really cannot 
imagine the teleslimes getting in on this and trying to adapt it to 
their
high prices and otherwise scam operations. Who would accept it?

With that in mind then, if I am correct, I would still maintain hotels
and other PBX admins can probably deal with 1-500 without too many 
hassles. Whoever gets in the game will probably have rates that follow
AT&T closely or are cheaper -- probably never more expensive. So what 
you
do is, as long as everything coasts along in that 25/15 - 24/17 - 
range
I expect they will also use, live with it. Watch for the occassional 
big
charge, and when/if it starts to get out of hand, *then* clamp down.  
PAT]

------------------------------

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
Subject: A Strange Man Calls Me About 500
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 12:30:00 CST


This happened several days ago. You may remember we had an article 
here
listing the prefixes assigned in 500 service, and the telcos they were
assigned to. A day or two after that article appeared, I got a note 
from
the sysadmin here saying he had received a call from someone who 
wanted
to know 'how to get in touch with TELECOM Digest'. Normally any 
inquiries
about the Digest mail, problems, etc are just handed over to me by the
admin. The fellow called the admin on the phone to ask how to reach me
and the admin wisely said he would take a message and relay it. I got 
email from the admin and returned this fellow's call within five to 
ten
minutes. I called him on that MCI common-subscriber 800 number, where
you call it, then enter a pin to be directed to the subscriber.

This fellow answers the phone by using my name: "Ah hello Mr. Townson,
Thank you for returning my call." ... <suspicious at this point, I
decide to let him do the talking> ... this fellow said he did not have
an email account, and 'did not know that much about computers' but he
was hoping I could send him a copy of that list of carrier prefix 
assignments for 500. He wanted to know where I got it. I told him it
was sent in by a reader, and mentioned the site where that reader 
could
be contacted if he had any questions. Ah, he said, he certainly was
familiar with that site, in San Jose, CA. I tossed out the phrase
"Bellcore" and he knew all about them also.

I told him I couldn't help wondering how, since he had no email and
no computer, he would have known about a not that well known public
access Unix site in San Jose. He claimed he read about it some 
magazine.
He claimed he wanted to obtain a particular 500 number -- a vanity 
number -- but it was not available from AT&T so he thought he would
find out which company did offer it. I asked him how he heard about
TELECOM Digest. Now get this:

He told me he was located in Brooklyn, New York, on Avenue U near
Flatbush Avenue. He had gone to his local library to see what the
reference librarian could tell him. The librarian gave him a few 
sources
for telecom information and he 'decided' to try this Digest. In a book
giving internet resources he found that the Archives are housed at 
MIT.
He called some person on the staff at MIT who knew from nothing about
the Archives. Then he noted that this resource guide referred 
inquiries
to 'telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu' so he called Northwestern University
to ask about the Digest. He finally was connected with the sysadmin
who took the message for me.

All this, mind you, because he had heard 'from someone' that the 
Digest
had printed, a day or two before, a list of exchanges assigned to the
carriers doing or planning to do 500. I asked this fellow who he was 
and
what he did for an occupation. He claims he is 'a retired cab driver'.
He sounded to me like he was in his late sixties or even perhaps his 
seventies. All this time I am thinking to myself he knows far too much
to be a retired cab driver in Brooklyn. For a retired cab driver in
Brooklyn who has no email, no computer, 'not much computer knowledge'
he certainly knows a lot about unix sites in San Jose and how to get
ahold of site admins at MIT and Northwestern. He claims he 'bought a
computer but never did take it out of the box; it is still sitting
in the corner, maybe I should set it up.'  I asked him how should I
send the message to him with the listing he asked about.  Maybe he
would like to give me a more precise mailing address. Ummm ... well 
... 
would I read the list to him over the phone?  He asked about a couple
of companies on the list; rattles off who they are subsidiaries of;
wants to know about a couple prefixes in particular. I asked if he
had a fax machine; if so, give me the number and I will fax the
list. He stalls me on that one also. He says he has a fax but would
have to set it up, and 'maybe I can get back to you in a couple days
with the phone number it will be on ...'

I am holding my nose ... something stinks at this point. I mention
that given his location, Avenue U and Flatbush, I believe he must be
right by the Bell System international cable which runs close to 
there. He knows all about that also.  He told me he has 'half a dozen
700 numbers', a couple of 800 numbers, and he wants a vanity 500 
number.
'Just an unemployed, retired cab driver from Brooklyn .. not much to
tell about me ...'. What ticked me off the most was when I called the
MCI 800 number using the pin he left, he *knew* it was me calling,
even though he claimed 'it was just a guess, I was not expecting any
other calls on *that particular* 800 number this afternoon ...'

Anyone have any ideas who he is?  It just all seemed very odd to me;
his persistence in locating me by telephoning MIT, getting no where,
then telephoning Northwestern, then knowing when I called back, 
claiming
no email or network connection of any kind -- indeed, not even a 
computer
installed -- but he immediatly recognizes the name of a site on the
other side of the country; he knows far, far too much about the 
industry
to be a retired cab driver in Brooklyn, 'living near Avenue U' and
wanting his own vanity 500 number to go with his 'several 700 
numbers'.
He knows about Bellcore and obviously about 800 ANI.    

I'd like his name and address please, if possible. He wouldn't tell me
himself.     

Thanks,

PAT

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 05:47:34 -0800
From: HBecker@ix.netcom.com (Henry Becker)
Subject: 976 Look-Alike Exchanges


I am trying to compile and maintain a complete list of 976 and 976
look-alike exchanges in the United States.  Does anyone know where I
can find such a list?

If you only know of exchanges in your local area I would appreciate
receiving this information.  With it I can compile and maintain this
list, and with Patrick's permission provide it for inclusion in the
Telecom Archives.

------------------------------

From: holst@vm.meb.uni-bonn.de (Michael Holstein)
Subject: Ericsson GH337 Codes
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 07:52:45 GMT
Organization: Medizinische Einrichtungen Bonn


I am looking for the Code to get the IMEI no. of my Ericsson phone.
Does anybody know the sequence. I think it was something like *xx# but
I can't remeber it.


Thank you,

Michael Holstein

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 05:08:28 -0500
Subject: BellSouth Joins World Wide Web
From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Internex Online 


BellSouth Corporation has set up a WWW server at 
http://www.atglab.bls.com
which may be of interest to Digest readers.

It contains general information about the company and its 
subsidiaries, 
and a limited number of company press releases.

Stentor, the consortium of Canadian telephone companies, now has a WWW
server at http://www.stentor.ca which you may also enjoy looking at.
It offers a limited amount of information about Stentor and its member
companies.


Nigel Allen    ndallen@io.org

------------------------------

From: jff@ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey Friedman)
Subject: VocalTec Internet Telephone
Date: 10 Feb 1995 15:23:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom


I'm trying to track down information about a program mentioned in
today's {Wall Street Journal}.  It is supposed to be downloadable from
somewhere on the Net.  It is from a company called VocalTec, and lets
you use the Net as a telephone.  Anyone with a 486 or faster machine,
with a 14.4 modem, a sound card and microphone, can talk in half-
duplex 
mode with anyone else with the same equipment.


Jeffrey F. Friedman    jff@ix.netcom.com    jeff@friedman.com

------------------------------

From: cedric@marvin.df.lth.se (Urban Nilsson)
Subject: GSM-PCN Chipset, Radio, Baseband !?!?
Date: 10 Feb 1995 15:46:38 GMT
Organization: yacc - the Computer Society at Lund University


Hello!

I have a small question for a friend. Is there someone who knows
anything about the GSM system, perhaps sourcecode, specifications or
anything at all *and* which GSM-chipsets are available and coming up
on the market?

Ill be happy for any info!


Thanks in advance!

Urban Nilsson, Kamnarsv. 5D:210, 226 46 Lund, Sweden, +46 46 395199
cedric@df.lth.se, dat91uni@ludat.lth.se

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 08:37:53 CET
From: SHAW +41 22 730 5338 <ROBERT.SHAW@ITU.CH>
Subject: Pointers to Telecom Resource Server Sites on the Net


The International Telecommunication Union in Geneva is finalizing
development of its World Wide Web Server and we wish to include
pointers to other telecom resource servers on the Net.  We have an
extensive list but there are surely some we have missed so if you have
an interesting WWW, Gopher, or FTP server relating to telecom, send us
an email with the appropriate URL so that we can include it.


Thanks in advance,

Robert Shaw     Information Exchange Division
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: hqtel@cct.hydro.qc.ca (Usager hqtel)
Subject: Need a Contact For Teradyne RFTS 4SIGHT System 2000
Reply-To: hqtel@cct.hydro.qc.ca
Organization: Hydro-Quebec, Montreal, QC, Canada
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 12:21:35 GMT


I'm wondering if someone has an address, a telephone/fax numbers
and/or names of people working for Teradyne. We are interested to
receive information about their Remote Fiber test System 4SIGHT System
2000.


Thank you,

Dr. Jean Raymond    Hydro-Quebec
Telecommunications Control Centre
Montreal, Canada    rayj@cct.hydro.qc.ca

------------------------------

From: itelecom@bilbo.pic.net (David M. Russell)
Subject: Wanted: Used Business Telephone Systems and T1
Date: 10 Feb 1995 15:56:46 GMT
Organization: Integrity Telecommunications


Integrity Telecommunications        214-357-7484      Voice
David M. Russell                          214-357-7485      Fax
2970 Blystone Lane, Ste.102         itelecom@pic.net  email
Dallas, TX  75220-1515

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 09:59:30 PST
From: richardb@trwind.TRW.COM (Richard Brehove)
Subject: Telco Signaling Requirements


I will be specifying interfaces to our new facilities throughout the
world.  I will need to spedify interfaces to the local telephone
network in that country.  Short of going to each country and getting
their individual specs, given that they will give them to me at all, I
want to get a list of what country uses what signalling specification.
I have a list of the names of about 13 different signalling specs,
(R1, R3, C4, C5, etc.) and I need to know If this list is sufficient,
too many, or missing some.

Does somebody have a list of what country uses what signalling spec? I
would appreciate any information.  I will try to keep up with
comp.dcom.telecom, but I would appreciate direct email as well.

(richard_brehove@qmail4.sp.trw.com)

Thank you,

Richard Brehove

------------------------------

Subject: Cellular service in Palo Alto
From: henderson@mln.com (Javier Henderson)
Date: 10 Feb 95 10:12:27 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


I tried posting this in comp.dcom.telecom.tech but got exactly zero
responses.

I'm moving to Palo Alto, and I'd like recommendations for a cellular
service provider up there.


Thanks,

Javier Henderson (JH21)    henderson@mln.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since most of the readers in the know 
about
the topic tend to read the Digest, perhaps a few answers will be 
forthcoming
here for you.    PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #95
*****************************

                                                                                                                   
