TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Mar 95 09:17:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 135

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    India's Telecom Costs; Need Global Information (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh)
    Europe Postal Services and Datacom (Elizabeth Gardner)
    Problems Accessing '500' With "Other" Carriers (Danny Burstein)
    Phone Lines Aren't Transitive! (Randy Gellens)
    Thailand's Internet Information Requested (Krairut Phanich)
    Re: BA Files Waiver to Prevent Higher ISDN Costs (Fred Goodwin)
    Re: MCI Cashes AT&T Checks (Steve Friedlander)
    Kevin Mitnick - Advertising (James Bellaire)
    Area Code, Country Code Lists (Rich Greenberg)
    Question on ISDN (Stuart Brainerd)
    Northern Telecom POTS Phones (Stuart Brainerd)
    FTP Transfer Rate Using PPP (schween@uclink2.berkeley.edu)
    Modem Monitor Wanted (schween@uclink2.berkeley.edu)

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: India's Telecom Costs; Need Global Information
From: telco-rg@dxm.ernet.in (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh)
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 95 00:55:33 IST
Organization: Deus X Machina


As readers of the Digest know, Indian telecom is governed by an
archaic Telegraph Act of 1885. It is used by the Dept of Telecom (DoT)
for, among other things, charging an annual $80,000 'license fee' for
e-mail providers, and $50,000 for BBSes. No BBSes have paid, of
course. Paying a license fee gives you no advantages -- no better line
conditions, no priority in routing or allocating new numbers, no
discount in call charges. It just gives you a license to operate.

I've been unable to locate a source for comparision with other
countries.  I'd info on how others handle these things, especially in
developing/Asian countries. Here's how the DoT monopoly runs the show:

                             In India (prices in US$, = 31.50 Rupees)
1. local call                0.03/5 mins
2. long-distance             0.50/min (delhi to bombay peak)
                             0.06/min (nowhere to backwater, midnight)
3. international             1.00/min (south Asia)
                             1.75/min (Europe, Arabia, SE-Asia)
                             2.10/min (America)
4. cellular local            0.30/min (for proposed private duopoly,big
cities)

Datacom:
5. leased line, intra-city   50/km p.a.
   long-distance             30 - 10 /km p.a., depending on distance
   (these are voice-quality lines, officially 9.6kbps, can often do 
28.8)
6. 64kbps digital circuits   5,000 (50 kms) to 30,000 (900 kms) p.a.
7. 2mbps                     50,000 (50kms) to 230,000 (1000 kms) p.a.
(for 5-7, if you build your own network with switching, you pay 2.5 the
amount, as DoT is terrified that you may use these 'private data 
networks'
instead of its volume-based lines!)

8. I-NET (DoT X.25 net)     0.30 (local, off-peak) to 7.50 
(international)
                            per 32k data transmitted
9. ISDN                     n.a. (technically feasible, but not offered)
                            
Licensing:
10. BBSes                    max(50,000 p.a , 40 * subscribers)
   (nobody's paid)
11. e-mail                  max(80,000 p.a. , 50 * subscribers)
    (Sprint, BIIT, others have paid)
12. Internet (full-service) "not permitted"
    (ERNET is an academic network; NICNET is the government's own; both
     are connected to the Net. VSNL, the public sector monopoly on all
     international comms, is happy to grant connectivity to net 
providers,
     and even asked for franchisees last year, though the DoT (which
     presumably controls VSNL) claims such things are not permitted)

Licenses do not provide benefits, only the right to operate.  Data
comms users get no advantages at all, leased line maintenance is poor,
and indeed is charged for in addition (along with the 'conditioning'
of long-distance analogue leased lines).

DoT PR repeats that (local) call charges are among the lowest in the
world, that it needs to charge more for 'premium' services to pay for
connecting villages etc. However DoT's companies make huge profits, of
about 35%, which are among the highest in the world. While such
profits may be spent on wiring remote areas, money for such purposes
is better generated openly from investors who are aware of the risks
and share the profits, rather than unsuspecting consumers.


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


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

From: 70262.2741@compuserve.com (Elizabeth Gardner)
Subject: Europe Postal Services and Datacom
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 15:16:25 GMT


I am researching an article about how postal services are coping with
the increasing obsolescence of paper mail.  I am trying to find out
which European countries have postal services that also offer
"information highway" services (for example, e-mail, Internet
connections, EDI).  Any information most welcome.  You may post here
or e-mail me at 70262.2741@compuserve.com.  If anyone's interested,
I'll be happy to post a compendium of replies here.


TIA.   

Elizabeth Gardner

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

From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein)
Subject: Problems Accessing '500' With "Other" Carriers
Date: 5 Mar 1995 20:55:17 -0500


A -major- problem (some called it a feature) with the "700" area code 
(actually it's a service access code) was that it was carrier dependent. 
So you could have an AT&T subscriber with the -same- number as an RTI 
customer, and the person calling them would have to know which carrier 
code to prepend.

Very confusing.

This was kind-of addressed with the introduction of the "500" service 
access code, which, like more traditional numbers, did not depend on any 
carrier identification. (Well, for the moment the prefixes are specific 
to a carrier, but portability is supposed to be phased in just like with 
the earlier '800' SAC)

However, I just discovered a potential problem. It's not the end of the 
world, but it caused me some difficulty.

My personal phone line has -all- IEC, and most intra-lata long distance, 
service blocked (1).  So to make such calls, I have a no-surcharge 
calling 
card with <deleted>. I punch in the (free) 950-xxxx access number, my 
id, 
then the destination digits. 

Only problem previously was that, for fraud prevention reasons, one of 
the international destinations I would occassionally call was blocked. 
(No, not the sex lines. Well, they're blocked also ...)

Now you may have noticed that our esteemed moderator recently got a 
'500' 
number. So I tried calling him. My carrier would -not- complete the 
call.

On speaking to them they explained that since the call was "actually" 
going over an AT&T link, they had no provision to charge me for it and 
hand the money to their competitor.

Kind of like the situation with '900' codes.

Which suggests (and maybe someone with the calling card of another
company can check on this) that unless you have an AT&T card, you
-won't- be able to call 700 numbers from, for example, a coin phone.

(Or, in the future, as the other companies put in their 700 numbers, 
you'll need their cards as well).

Hopefully the different companies will, in fact, work out some mutual 
charge agreement. But for now the confusion is still there.

*1: I wanted for years to get a restricted line with these blocks, but 
NY 
Tel told me it was either impossible or highly expensive. Then I fell 
behind on my phone bill payments and could only kick in enough to 
"maintain" local service.

So they've blocked just about all calls outside my immediate calling 
area 
(all of NYC). And, for good measure, cut off access to the 'enhanced 
service' numbers as well.  Fine by me ...


dannyb@panix.com (or dburstein@mcimail.com)

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

From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM
Date: 05 Mar 1995 18:38:00 GMT   
Subject: Phone Lines Aren't Transitive!


Pat, I saw this in R.H.F

  Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 2:14 pm PST (22:14:46 UT)
  Subject: Phone lines aren't transitive!
  From: Steve Goldman <sgoldman@encore.com>

  I'm building a new house in Pittsboro NC (served by GTE) and I wanted
to get a leased line to run to my office in Cary (served by Southern 
Bell).
I called Southern Bell and had this conversation.

me: I'd like to find out the cost of getting a leased line that runs 
from
    my home in Pittsboro to my office in Cary.
sb: I'm sorry sir but you will have to speak with GTE about this.
me: Why is that?
sb: Pittsboro is served by GTE and since the service originates in 
Pittsboro
    you must talk to them.
me: Ok. I want the line to run from Cary to Pittsboro.
sb: Ok then I can help you ...


Steve Goldman, Encore Computer Corp          (919) 481-3730
901 Kildaire Farm Rd., bldg D  Cary, NC  27511       USA
internet: sgoldman@encore.com

Selected by Maddi Hausmann Sojourner.  MAIL your joke to 
funny@clarinet.com.

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

Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 09:27:22 MST
From: K Phanich <K.Phanich@m.cc.utah.edu>
Subject: Thailand's Internet Information Requseted


I am a graduate student doing my master thesis on current development
of Thai Internet. If you have info, comments or suggestions please
email me.

Thank you for your generous and constructive opinion.


Krairut Phanich   M. A. student
Brigham Young University

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

From: fg8578@onr.com (Fred Goodwin)
Subject: Re: BA Files Waiver to Prevent Higher ISDN Costs
Date: 5 Mar 1995 01:06:50 GMT
Organization: Onramp Access, Inc.


In article <telecom15.129.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, lars@spectrum.RNS.COM
(Lars Poulsen) says:

>(1) The definition of a telephone line must have been discussed before;
>    after all, delivery of local loops on T-spans predates the MFJ.
>    Surely, you pay the SLC PER CHANNEL on a T-span, no?

>(2) Since the SLC goes directly to the LEC, the cost to the customer
>    (base subscription plus SLC) should be the same regardless of the
>    amount of the SLC, shouldn't it?

>    If the monthly amount is $10 per line plus $6 SLC, the customer 
pays
>    $16. If the SLC goes away, the LEC loses the SLC-funded subsidy, so
>    they will have to charge $16 per line per month. The difference is
>    entirely in the bookkeeping of amortization and depreciation
>    allocations.

>(3) If the SLC is mandated by FCC, I would think that the amount would
>    be standardized across the country. How can it vary with the Bell
>    Atlantic Service Area ?

> What is going on? Is my point two above completely wrong?

In reverse order:

(3)  Yes, the FCC mandates the maximum allowable SLC, but LECs are not
     required to set their tariffed SLC at the maximum level.

(2)  Because the SLC is an FCC charge, whereas ISDN rates are primarily
     established by state PUCs/PCSs, a reduction in one will not
     automatically result in an increase of the other.  The states are
     typically very careful to ensure that the FCC does not shift costs
     to the state jurisdiction.

(1)  Yes, I believe the SLC is assessed per channel on a digital loop
     carrier or other pair-gain system.  The difference is that in pair-
     gain, the channels are provided to different customers.  In ISDN, 
     the chanels are all provided to the same customer.

Although I've not followed BA's filing at the FCC, I assume the case
they tried to make was that the SLC was intended to apply on a per
wire-pair basis (it takes only one pair for a typical POTs line), and
that since it takes only 2 pairs to derive 24 ISDN channels, the SLC
should not be applied 24 times.

Hope this helps.


Fred Goodwin   Southwestern Bell    Austin, TX 

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

From: stevef@mcs.com (steve friedlander)
Subject: Re: MCI Cashes AT&T Checks
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 19:08:47 CST
Organization: MCSNet


In article <telecom15.128.3@eecs.nwu.edu> gryphon@j51.com (Scott 
Lorditch) 
writes:

> Over the past few months I've gotten several solicitations in the mail
> to switch to AT&T. One of them was in the form of a check for $40. We
> currently use MCI, so I called their customer service number. While
> they don't publicize it, MCI will redeem these checks for their face
> value in an "MCI Certificate of Savings". And further, for each month
> that I hold the certificate before cashing it, it's value increases by
> another $5, for up to 12 months. So, the useless $40 check from AT&T
> will save me $100 on my MCI bill this time next year!


Scott, be careful, those AT&T check have a short life span!


Steve Friedlander  e-mail:  stevef@mcs.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is correct. Often times the checks
sent out by carriers as an incentive to change carriers have a sixty
or ninety day expiration on them. After that point, they are worthless.
It would be quite silly of MCI to redeem them after that point.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Mar 95 11:29 EST
From: bellaire@iquest.net (James Bellaire)
Subject: Kevin Mitnick - Advertising


I just saw a TV ad bragging that 'the best security is Digital', with
a punchline of 'for more information contact inmate (number given)
Leavenworth Kansas' It was one of those 'flashing picture' ads, so the
convict was not on on the screen too long.

Congratulations Pat!  Looks like Digital Computers filled your 
prediction 
of Kevin's new job, even if just as a joke in an advertisement.  :-)


bellaire@iquest.net     James E. Bellaire
bellaire@tk.com   (Soon? My stationary is waiting...)

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

From: richgr@netcom.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Area Code, Country Code Lists
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 04:03:11 GMT


One of the frequent topics that comes up on *.telecom.* is what area


code is which or country code etc etc.  I found the following on an
ezine (a very interesting one BTW which you may wish to subscribe to).

Reproduced with permission from:                                       

Chaos Corner V05 N01 27 February 1995

> Copyright 1995 by Robert D. Cowles; Ithaca, NY 14850.  Permission is 
> hereby granted to republish complete issues in unaltered form.  
> Republication of partial issues must reference the source and state 
that 
> subscriptions to Chaos Corner are available (free) by sending 
electronic 
> mail to chaos-request@pelican.cit.cornell.edu.
 
[....]

> A document that is on its way to Internet RFC status is something you 
> might be interested in taking a look at.  The document contains all US 
> and international area codes, telex codes, country codes, etc.  The 
name 
> of the document is /internet-draft/draft-robinson-newtelex-01.txt and 
it 
> can be obtained by anonymous ftp from the following sites:

} Africa:        ftp.is.co.za    (196.4.160.2)   
} Europe:        nic.nordu.net   (192.36.148.17) 
} Pacific Rim:   munnari.oz.au   (128.250.1.21)  
} US East Coast: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10)  
} US West Coast: ftp.isi.edu     (128.9.0.32)


Rich Greenberg            Work: TBA.  Know anybody needing a VM guru?
N6LRT   TinselTown, USA   Play: richgr@netcom.com               310-649-
0238
Pacific time.    I speak for myself & my dogs only.
Canines: Val(Chinook,CGC), Red(Husky,(RIP)), Shasta(Husky)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Telecom Archives Email Information
Service now offers something similar: the command AREACODE xxx will
return information about that areacode. Still another new command 
available
is CARRIERS xxx where 'xxx' is the three digits in 10xxx. For example,
CARRIERS 288 would return the information that 10288 is assigned to 
AT&T.
Try these out and let me know what you think.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Mar 95 23:09 CST
From: synapse@mcs.com (Stuart Brainerd)
Subject: Question on ISDN


With regard to the submission from Gregory Hicks on ISDN, I would
recommend that he contact Pacific Bell's ISDN group at 1-800-4PB-ISDN
(1-800-472-4736), and request a copy of their excellent publication,
"ISDN: A User's Guide to Services, Applications & Resources in
California".  It does a good job of explaining the concept of ISDN,
its primary applications, and even has a (partial) list of vendors and
equipment available.

As for recommendations for terminal equipment, the best bet would be
to check with a reputable equipment reseller or Pacific Bell
authorized distributor.  I believe it is important for any individual
or company venturing into ISDN to work with a reseller with a
reputation for providing technical support, and who is willing to act
as a liaison with the local telephone company (Pacific Bell, in this
case) AND long-distance carrier in the event of technical problems.
It is not uncommon to have problems with missed installation dates,
circuit problems (incorrect line provisioning, for example), and
trunking problems.  I have experienced a rash of trunking problems
recently, mostly with MCI -- primarily due to incorrect routing of the
data calls over voice trunks.  This is a major aspect of what my
company, Synapse, does in addition to selling ISDN equipment.  Even
with local telephone companies experienced with ISDN installations,
such as Ameritech, these types of problems are frequent.  It was
amusing to read the recent article in Boardwatch Magazine (March 1995)
describing the experiences of a hardly unsophisticated user with his
residential ISDN installation.

> What equipment is required at the customer's site?  Any recommended 
sources?
> Or, for that matter, *any* sources? (PacBell didn't want to provide 
info
> on this other than "We do have some 'associated' vendors")

> What are benefits to me?  I want to have high speed access (I'm going
> to get *almost* full time access to the net after I get a house).  I'd
> like to be able to get incoming/outgoing calls when online (I know! I
> know! get a second line!)

Perhaps the best value today for equipment supporting Internet access,
with an analog phone port, is the QuickAccess Remote Internet from
AccessWorks!  Communications.  There is a Macintosh and PC version
available.  We sell this unit, with the phone port and async to sync
PPP firmware, for $499.


SYNAPSE USA       ISDN Products and Solutions                   
Stuart Brainerd   Tech. Info. : 312-871-1466
synapse@mcs.com   Fax         : 312-871-2083   
                  Orders      : 800-454-ISDN

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

Date: Sun, 5 Mar 95 23:09 CST
From: synapse@mcs.com (Stuart Brainerd)
Subject: Northern Telecom POTS phones


Reference a posting in a recent TELECOM Digest:

> I have in mind a Northern Telcom model QT200 (NT2N17AA332) but can not
> locate where I bought it or where to get it now. Any help would be
> greatly appreciated!

> About 30 of the phones will be needed!

Here are a couple of sources worth checking out:

Northern Telecom
Fulfillment Dept.
Telephone Products and ISDN
Tel: 800-842-7439

Electronic Market Data, Inc.
1650 Elm Hill Pike   Suite 8
Nashville, TN 37210
Autoquote: 1-800-260-8830
Voice: 615-885-2123
FAX: 615-885-9454

Bell Atlantic Teleproducts
West Building, Suite 150
50 E. Swedesford Rd
Frazer Pa,  19355
Tel:  800-221-0845 or 215-695-2300


SYNAPSE USA       ISDN Products and Solutions                   
Stuart Brainerd   Tech. Info. : 312-871-1466
synapse@mcs.com   Fax         : 312-871-2083   
                  Orders      : 800-454-ISDN

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

From: schween@uclink2.berkeley.edu (Sven)
Subject: FTP Transfer Rate Using PPP
Date: 6 Mar 1995 08:29:22 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Reply-To: schween@uclink2.berkeley.edu


At a 14.4k dialup, binary rates hover around 1100, text from 1200-2400.  
Seems a little slow to me. Any comments/suggestions would be 
appreciated.  
Setup: Mac PB 165, GC Gold, MacTCP 2.0.4, sys 7.1, MacPPP.

Please email me, I don't hang out here much.


Thanks,

Sven

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

From: schween@uclink2.berkeley.edu (Sven)
Subject: Modem Monitor Wanted
Date: 6 Mar 1995 08:33:21 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Reply-To: schween@uclink2.berkeley.edu


I am running MacPPP on my powerbook, using a GV Gold. The status bar
seems not to work in that configuration. Anybody know of a ctrl
panel/extension that would enable me to watch rate/compr/error corr?

Please email me directly.


Thanks a bunch,

Sven

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #135
******************************

            
