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

From: jlundgre@kn.PacBell.COM (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Apartments Getting Into the PBX Business
Date: 29 Dec 1994 07:39:39 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


David G. Cantor (dgc@ccrwest.org) wrote:

> In TELECOM Digest, Volume 14, Issue 437, John Lundgren states:

>> ... many larger apartment complexes are getting a PBX ...  as of
>> Jan 1, anyone [in California] can get into the business of
>> furnishing dial tone.

> It was roughly two years ago when the California PUC turned over
> responsibility of telephone wiring in an apartment complex to the
> owner.  By PUC regulations, the owner is required to provide at 
least
> one working line from the telco point of demarcation to each
> apartment.  The telcos simply stopped maintenance of the usual rat's
> nest and left it for the apartment management.

You misinterpreted my previous post.  It had _nothing_ to do with
wiring.

I was talking about furnishing *dial tone*.   As in PBX.


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs  
Rancho Santiago Community College District  
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706   
jlundgre@pop.rancho.cc.ca.us\jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu 

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

From: lotr@iac.net (Chris Mork)
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
Date: 29 Dec 1994 11:52:32 -0500
Organization: Internet Access Cincinnati 513-887-8877


I was poking around in the FCC's telnet site and came across some
legal briefs filed by the FCC concerning these "scam" practices of
switching carriers with "free give-aways". It seems some companies
(including the big boys) want to give you these "gifts" or "free
money" with some VERY fine print " ... by the way, by accepting this
gift, you agree to switch carriers ... bla-bla ..."

Needless to say, the FCC was not amused. There were even some
companies taking advantage of "non-English speaking" or "illiterate"
customers, getting them to sign on the dotted line without their full
comprehension!

Unfortunatly, I can't remember the file name/path, maybe someone can
find these and post them? All I remember was "FCC.GOV"


Chris Mork    lotr@iac.net

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

Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T 
From: drharry!aboritz@uunet.uu.net (Alan Boritz)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 94 22:14:12 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - +1 201 934 0861


Paul Robinson <paul@tdr.com> writes:

> I would recommend to the father that he call his local telephone
> company and tell them to switch service back to MCI; don't even
> mention this check to the son; assuming anyone even notices, if AT&T
> complains, ask for a copy of the signed order from the subscriber.

And who's going to pay for the PIXC change?  His lazy son? <g>

> The son is not the subscriber and has no authority to change the
> service.  It is not your position to prove you didn't authorize it,
> it's theirs to prove they have an authorization from someone who can
> issue the authorization.

But it's not going to stop AT&T from issuing ANOTHER PIXC change just
like the did the first unauthorized change.  The subscriber should
first issue an order to the local telco to not accept account changes
from anyone but HIM.

> Or just ignore the whole thing and dial 10222 to get MCI before 
every
> call, which is what I used to do when I wanted to use AT&T on the
line
> I had switched to MCI in order to get the free bag from them; I 
dialed
> 10288 to get AT&T before calls, or I just use the other line which 
is
> still on AT&T.

Absolutely do NOT ignore it.  Slamming is a sleazy way of doing long
distance business, and no one should have to put up with it.  State
public utilities regulatory agencies are usually interested in
investigating such incidents.  The father should file a simple
complaint against his local telco requesting that they be ordered to
change his PIXC back to the original LD carrier, that AT&T be charged
for all costs associated with the PIXC changes, and that the local
telco be ordered to refund to the subscriber any additional long
distance charges (and lost discounts) due to the unauthorized change.


aboritz%drharry@uunet.uu.net  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - +1-201-934-0861

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

From: Barton.Bruce@camb.com
Subject: Re: Flexible Hunt Groups With PBX?
Sender: Barton F. Bruce / CCA <BRUCE@Eisner.DECUS.Org>
Date: 29 Dec 94 23:09:54 -0500
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


In article <telecom14.470.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, Robert Macfarlane 
<rob@babylon.
montreal.qc.ca> writes:

> A businessperson friend of mine runs a BBS out of an office which 
has
> 14 voice lines on a hunt group. He has so far installed an 
additional
> eight lines on another hunt group dedicated to the BBS.

> Here's my question: are there PBX's which would allow re-allocation 
of
> lines from one hunt group to another, at different times of the day?

> My idea is to move some of the 14 voice lines from the voice hunt
> group to the modem hunt group from 6 pm to 6 am, since this is peak
> time for BBSing.  The voice lines are otherwise sitting there 
completely 
> unused during the night.  And there's really no need to have more 
than 
> eight lines to the BBS during the day.

> Are there PBX's which can do this sort of thing, or am I just 
fantasizing?

The idea is already in use, but the problem you have missed is that
the CO, not the PBX, controls normal hunting. But there ARE ways.

In the 'good-old-days' there were often 'hunt-break' switches
installed at a site to kill off the hunting beyond the LTN so all the
brass could have their night lines set up with higher lines in the
hunt group with NO CHANCE of unexpected calls reaching their offices.

Probably as a special assembly thing, you could get a hunt break
installed such that some block of numbers, that was a hunt group all
by itself, extended the voice group by day and the modem group at
night. Crude but possible. Painful switching required to get the
lines off the PBX and onto modems, too.

Far better, if T1 DID is cheap where you are, is to simply manage your
OWN hunting. Have an adequate block of DID numbers. NB that most PBXes
do NOT require all station numbers to be in the DID range, so a single
DIDable number could be the pilot into a LARGE hunt group of 
extensions 
with modems attached. Any DID trunk could access these extensions by
dialing *THE* single lead number. Though not necessary, doing it this
way precludes savvy users cheating during the day by dialing
explicitly to modem ports removed from the daytime group.  OTOH,
having ALL modem extensions DIDable allows easy testing.

Having the CO and the PBX use circular hunting (least recently used
allocation) ensures that broken equipment has minimal impact.

Obviously analog DID trunks work too, but T1 ones are better.

Perhaps a simple example will help.

Say the PBX has a t1 for DID, so you have 24 voice lines of dialin,
and each one can randomly access any extension in the allowed range.
Say you have the 200-600 numbers available, and 599 is *the* first
line in the modem hunt group. There are 22 modems in the modem hunt
group, but the last 21 could be on extension numbers outside 200-600,
e.g. could be 1xx numbers. Say the first company DID number is
333.4200, that makes the modem number 333.4599.

During the day, the PBX is reprogrammed to just have eight extensions
in the modem group. During the night, all 22 are available and when in
use, only the two remaining DID trunks would carry random calls to 
other extensions in the 333.4200-4699 range. All modem calls are to
333.5999, but the CO has NO IDEA how many are available. It simply
presents each successive call to the next to be used trunk and the
PBX either rings some extension or returns busy signal.

If there were four FAX lines during the day (say at 333.4234 which fed
a hunt group including 191, 192, and 193 (not directly DIDable), the
latter three could be cut off in the evening and their capacity gets
added to the modem pool. If you prefer to leave the FAX machines all
available, that is ok, except heavy evening infaxing could cut into
modem ports -- whatever call comes in uses that trunk.

Just be sure to keep the required minimum voice ports open for
emergency communication to staff working late.

You can change your split daily to suit varying needs.

DID trunks may cost enough more that this is a POOR idea unless they 
are already justified for normal dial to the desktop needs.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #473
******************************

                                                                                 
