TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 May 94 14:11:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 197

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: NANP and Switches (James Slupsky)
    Re: NANP and Switches (Carl Moore)
    Re: X.25 Networks (Doug Gurich)
    X.21 Testing (Gabor Fencsik)
    Sun and X25 (James Slupsky)
    Information on X.25 and Other CCITT Documents (Emmet Hikory)
    Re: Demise of Newsgroups Feared (Barry Mishkind)
    Re: More Information Needed on Motorola 550 Programming (John Barcomb)
    Re: DunsNet (Thrivikrama Shenoy)
    Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (George Beuselinck)
    Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone? (Sean Donelan)
    Re: Equal Access in Canada (Carl Moore)
    Re: Equal Access in Canada (Matthew Stone)
    Re: Phoning Cuba (John R. Levine)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 (Emmet Hikory)
    Re: CO's and Disasters (Tom Watson)
    Computer Information Systems (Terri M. Kouba)
    Re: Telco MUX to Home? (David Kiviat)
    Re: GSM and Airbags (John Lundgren)
    Re: DID, PBX and University Phones, SL-100 (John Lundgren)

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

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 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: 708-329-0571
                        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.

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: Tue, 3 May 1994 11:39:00 +0700
From: jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca (James Slupsky)
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches


> In article <telecom14.182.5@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:

>> We currently have a Northern Telecom Meridian Option 61 (software
>> relase 17) with 44 DID trunks, a T1 for long distance, and about 1300
>> active phones.  We have been told by Ameritech that, in order for us
>> to be able to comply with the implementation of the new North American
>> Numbering Plan (NANP) on January 1, 1995, we must upgrade our switch
>> with an additional memory card, another ROM board and software release
>> 19.  My questions are (1) is this really necessary and (2) can we wait
>> until the middle of 1995 before doing this and still provide access
>> via NANP?  Any help out there would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks.

In answer to question one, no.  Firstly, if you are using an access
code to dial outside calls (such as "9"), then your software will not
care what digits are dialed after that.  An exception is if your
local area gets an NXX (that's the first three digits of your seven
digit phone number) that has a "1" or a "0" as the second digit.  In
that case, if you have assigned a COS which restricts toll calls to
that local, the call will be blocked.  This is not a very large
possibility, since it will take time for telco's to introduce these
NXX's.  For Toll calls, you would not have this problem.  Just tell
all the users that Toll calls MUST be 10 digits, and you MUST use a
"1" in front of the 10 digits.  (so a typical toll call might look
like -assuming you access outgoing trunks using "9"- "9 1 520 447
5003".  Your switch will cheerfully pass "1 520 447 5003" to the
serving CO.

In answer to two, yes.  It is unlikely that you will run into NXX
codes using a "1" or "0" as the second digit for some time to come.
One small problem with CDR however.  You should change your CDR
collection options from OTL (Only Toll Calls) to OAL (All calls).  The
presence of the "1" or "0" as part of the NXX may cause problems for
the OTL option.


Regards,

James Slupsky, P.Eng.  (jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca)  (403)427-0896

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

Date: Tue, 3 May 94 06:50:33 EDT
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches


Just my idea: be wary of companies taking advantage of the change
(area codes being generalized) to push across expensive new equipment.

Perhaps dust off anecdotes about people on the east coast in the 1970s
trying to reach prefixes of N0X/N1X form in southern California?  No
other area codes had such prefixes until New York City around the end
of 1980.

On further thought: the old equipment (along with the old area codes)
is useable until you start reaching full cutover for the NNX area
codes.  But it's been known (certainly in the Digest) for years that
NNX area codes were coming.

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

Date: Tue, 03 May 94 11:39:51 CST
From: Doug_Gurich@fcircus.sat.tx.us (Doug Gurich)
Subject: Re: X.25 Networks


> I'm looking for data connectivity between Chicago and Milan Italy.
> I'm guessing that X.25 will be cheaper than a leased line, but I'm
> having a heck of a time finding anyone to quote me a price.  Does
> anyone have any thoughts about relative pricing?  I assume Telenet and
> Tymnet are still around.  Anyone know where?
 
Chris, 
 
I believe GlobalCom International can help you with your data
connectivity problems.  We routinely provide quotes for international
leased lines and other services such as X.25, ISDN, etc.  It is
difficult to say whether X.25 would be cheaper than a leased line in
your situation, without knowing more detail.  However, in the interim
I can provide you with a rough measure as to what costs a leased line
would entail.  Just a few days ago, we quoted a 56/64 Kbps line for a
customer wishing to connect New York City with Rome, Italy.  Because
of the difference in US termination points, I will leave off the US
local loop costs.  However, the longhaul portion would be the same in
your case.  We quoted a price of $6,690/month for both the US 1/2
circuit and the Italy 1/2 circuit combined.
 
Without knowing your expected usage volume, I cannot say whether this
cost would be justified.  You would be able to use the circuit 24
hours a day and could even mux the line into 4-6 distinct channels
which you could use for data or voice (with the appropriate
equipment), but it still may be more than you are willing to pay if
your usage is relatively low.

 
Doug Gurich   GlobalCom International

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

Date: Tue, 03 May 94 12:32:08 PDT
From: gabor@sbei.com (Gabor Fencsik)
Subject: X.21 Testing


I am looking for equipment to test/simulate X.21 interfaces (both DTE
and DCE).  I would appreciate any pointers, including vendor
recommendations and/or war stories from past product testing efforts.
Thanks.


Gabor Fencsik             VOX:   (510)355-7725
Manager, Comm Software    FAX:   (510)355-2020
SBE, Inc.                 Email: gabor@sbei.com

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

Date: Tue, 03 May 1994 14:26:48 +0700
From: jim@isnpo1.pwss.gov.ab.ca (James Slupsky)
Subject: Sun and X25


I run X25 connections on a Sparc 10 myself, using Brixton's BrxX25
software.  I have developed my own applications using their API.  I
don't have many connections open simultaneously (currently three,
sometimes 4), but the programs work fine, and I haven't noticed any
effect on performance.


Regards,

James Slupsky, P.Eng.    (send replies to: jslupsky@pwss.gov.ab.ca)
(403)427-0896

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

Subject: Information on X.25 and Other CCITT Documents
Date: Tue, 03 May 1994 22:38:46 EDT
From: Emmet Hikory <ehikory@lynx.dac.neu.edu>


 The ITU maintains a document store that includes the CCITT
standard definitions.  Information about this service can be obtained
by sending a message to itudoc@itu.ch with HELP in the message body.
If I remember correctly CCITT has changed their name to the ITU
Telecommunications Standardization Sector.  More useful information is
available from ITU directly.


Emmet Hikory   ehikory@lynx.dac.neu.edu


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would like to remind readers that this
Digest is funded in part by a grant from the ITU, and the Digest is
available for retrieval from that organization's public ftp directory.
I'm quite thankful for their valuable assistance, and hope that if you
have not yet sent a note of approval to them you will do so today.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 03 May 94 11:03 MST
From: barry@coyote.datalog.com (barry mishkind)
Subject: Re: Demise of Newsgroups Feared
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ


 You raise some excellent points. 

In an interview printed in the {Arizona Daily Star}, Canter claims
that not only will he do it again, but he is going to write a book
telling others how to advertise on the net. He sure is getting his
full value of publicity.

A post in another newsgroup suggested asking for information, and at
least making them mail out material. Phoning them, or flaming them may
simply encourage them to do more ...

Of greater import, as Pat pointed out, the entire structure of the net
is threatened as the growing cyberchildren each try their hand at
abusing the 5000 or so newsgroups with more and more garbage. I
wouldn't be surprised to find somewhere a little program designed,
with the data already entered, to hit every newsgroup with a message.

That, the gB of porno moved around the globe each day, and the recent
reports that some radio stations are planning to "feed" their programs
into the net seem to me to be likely cataylsts for some bureaucrat to
try to get a law passed for a "Net Czar" would will administer (for a
user fee, payable to the government, assessed like the long distancs
access fee) the whole pie, and decide what can and can't be used.

The old notion of being a good neighbor has broken down in the world.
We can see it in the rude, abusive way people treat each other in
public, on the road, and especially in poor sections of town. The
children who discovered the Net have been extremely good at screaming
about their "first amendment rights" to use any language they wish,
send any file they wish, and generally fill the Net with their
"scrawlings".

Total anarchy brings control. Control will change the net ... and it
will cost us all.


Regards,

Barry Mishkind     barry@coyote.datalog.com     Tucson, Arizona


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That First Amendment always has been a
troublesome thing ... all the Bill of Rights was written under the
mistaken assumption that citizens in the USA would take *responsibilty*
for their actions and words; under the mistaken assumption that people
would know the difference between *freedom* on the one hand and *license*
on the other. Sadly, that is becoming less and less the case. The Bill
of Rights will cause the ultimate demise of the United States. Not today,
not this month, but over the next hundred years or so, maybe less. At 
nearly 218 years of age, our country and government is one of the oldest
in the world. Very few last as long as our has, and ours is definitly
showing signs of old age and decay. The gradual decay of Usenet is just
one small part of the picture. Violent crime is epidemic in the USA. All
the prisons in the world are not going to contain it or slow it down,
and anyway, prisons only are able to operate when they have the cooperation
of the prisoners; witness Attica two decades ago or New Mexico several
years ago. Enjoy the Bill of Rights while it lasts! Lots of things that
fifty years ago were unthinkable are starting to become more and more
'thinkable' where the government is concerned. Enjoy Usenet!   PAT] 

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

From: uswnvg!uswnvg.com!jbarcom@uunet.UU.NET (John Barcomb)
Subject: Re: More Information Needed on Motorola 550 Programming
Date: 03 May 94 17:56:10 GMT


Lance Ware (lware@voxel.com) wrote:

> Earlier I requested general programming info on the Motorola 550.  I
> am now looking for more info on the 61#, 66#, and 69# functions
> pertaining to ESN and identity transfer. If anyone can assist me I
> would appreciate it greatly. Specifically I wish to place the ESN from
> my already registered Fujitsu Mobile phone into my handheld motorola.

> This is a legitimate use and is not illegal.
         
Sounds pretty strange to me.  Those #xx# functions you talk about are
for a Motorola Universal Loaner phone program.  There is a special box
used to transfer the identity from your phone into a phone that is set
to all zeros.  After the transfer, the ESN in your original phone is
set to "FFFFFFFF".  The phone goes to Motorola, where they reset it
and then send it back to the shop to do the reverse transfer after a
repair is completed.


John

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

From: vikram@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Thrivikrama Shenoy)
Subject: Re: DunsNet
Reply-To: vikram@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Thrivikrama Shenoy)
Organization: Motorola Codex, Canton, MA
Date: Tue, 03 May 1994 18:49:04 GMT


DunsNet is a corporate packet switching network of Dun & Bradstreet
Corporation. It is a X.25 packet switching network spanning U.S,
Europe, Australia. Recently I heard it reached India too.

The network is used mainly to deliver Information services offered by
subsidiaries of Dun & Bradstreet Corporation. The subsidiaries offer
variety of services; most popular is the corporate credit report
services. In addition the network carries services of OAG, McCormick &
Dodge (?), Donnelly Directory, A.C. Neilsen Co etc.

As far as I know, only user contact with the network as one of
customers using the services offered -- using a Async dial-in connection.


Vikram Shenoy

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

From: cexer@csbh.com (George Beuselinck)
Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone
Organization: Performance Systems Int'l
Date: Tue, 03 May 1994 11:52:32 GMT


What you are trying to do can't be too tough.  After all, Hertz and
Avis do it all the time.  Perhaps the easiest way would be to rent a
car with the cellular phone installed ...


George Beuselinck    Porsche 944 Ecology  georgeb@csbh.com

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

From: Sean Donelan <SEAN@SDG.DRA.COM>
Subject: Re: Connect a Card Reader to a Cell Phone?
Date: 03 May 94 04:17:17 CDT
Organization: Data Research Associates, St. Louis MO


In article <telecom14.177.4@eecs.nwu.edu>, Andrew C. Green <ACG@dlogics.
com> writes:

> My father is exploring ways of setting up a credit card authorization
> terminal for one afternoon's use at an outdoor concert. He has the use

You might want to contact Verifone, Inc.  They have been advertising a
card authorization system that uses cellular telephones for use in
taxi cabs.  It might be useful in your application.  A lot of banks
also resell/lease Verifone equipment (at rather massive markups), so
you might ask your local bank.  Yes, I know more than likely the bank
will be clueless, but that is the drill.

Supposedly Verifone was working with the cellular telephone companies
on getting a special air rate for these calls.  I don't know if they
had any success.  Most "mobile" merchants seem to have found it too
expensive though.  Some just chance it, and don't get any on-line
authorization batching them up till later.  Others use a cellular
telephone for voice authorizations.  No one seems terribly concerned
about broadcasting credit card numbers in the clear.  After all, its
illegal for unauthorized people to listen to cellular frequencies,
isn't it?  


Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis,
MO Domain: sean@dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is illegal, and yes people listen
illegally to cellular calls. However there is very little risk of fraud
by passing credit card numbers in this way. One, there has to be someone
listening to a scanner which is in the proximity of the tower from which
the message is being transmitted. Two, they have to have their scanner
land on the channel (out of 832 such channels) during the five seconds
or so that the card number is being read. Third, credit card verification
involves reading the number, the expiration date and the amount of the
sale -- not the name and address of the card holder. Fourth, without having
physical possession of the card they cannot make purchases in stores.
Fifth, with only the number but no name or address to go with it they
cannot very easily engage in mail order fraud. Sixth, without having actual
possession of the card they cannot see who the issuer of it was -- unless 
they have the list of four digit (starting with three for AMEX, four for VISA,
five for MC or six for DISCOVER) codes telling which bank (or credit grantor)
issued the card -- thus no calls can be made to customer service putting
in bogus inquiries or name/address changes.  In short, a non-issue here.

If I were going to rip off credit card numbers, PINS and related data, I
would find it far easier to tap the phone line used by an ATM machine
and put some kind of data capture device on that instead ... yet people
use ATMs quite willingly. So what's the beef about cellular phones and
credit card numbers?  On the one in a million chance someone *might* 
happen to hear your credit card number read, what is it gonna get them?  PAT] 

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

Date: Tue, 03 May 94 05:38:15 EDT
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Subject: Re: Equal Access in Canada


Back in January, I went to Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. before turning
around back into the U.S.  I got to a pay phone on 705-759 there, and
10288 didn't work (I then omitted it, got the "boing" for Bell Canada,
then punched in my AT&T card number and the call, going to the U.S.,
went through).  The call didn't make it to my phone bill until March,
and it was in the AT&T part of the bill.  So there are no 10xxx codes
currently useable in Canada?

The Orange Card did work from there.  That went through as being from
"800" as happens in many places in the U.S.

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

From: mstone@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Matthew Stone)
Subject: Re: Equal Access in Canada
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 3 May 94 00:39:13 GMT


Does anyone know what companies will be offering equal access when it
comes into service July 1st?  And the access codes to access the
different LD companies?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have been told it will by and large
follow the USA numbering scheme; i.e. 10288 for Mother, 10222 for MCI,
etc. with Canadian-only carriers getting a few numbers as well.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 03 May 94 11:56 EDT
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Phoning Cuba
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> Does anyone know how to phone Cuba for a reasonable amount of money
> from the U.S.?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Calls to most areas of Cuba ... 
> must be placed through the AT&T International Operator.

Recent news reports say that Wiltel and MCI have arranged to
re-establish cable service to Cuba.  Apparently the head of Wiltel was
born in Cuba and used informal contacts to get the arrangements made.
AT&T was not real pleased and may have filed regulatory complaints
that could delay the start of service.


Regards,

John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com

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

Subject: Re:  AT&T Public Phone 2000 
Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 13:45:44 EDT
From: Emmet Hikory <ehikory@lynx.dac.neu.edu>


 I called AT&T about the data communications potential of the
Public Phone 2000 about eight months ago, and after being referred to
many departments, was told that the FCC had told AT&T they couldn't
have public access data terminals for unspecified reasons.  Due to the
time involved, my memory is a little vague on all of this, but I seem
to remember that AT&T was pursuing the possiblilty.


Emmet Hikory    ehikory@lynx.dac.neu.edu

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

From: tsw@cypher.apple.com (Tom Watson)
Subject: Re: CO's and Disasters
Date: Tue, 03 May 1994 09:02:53 -0800
Organization: Apple Computer (more or less)


In article <telecom14.172.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, Thomas Tengdin <teto@mbari.org>
wrote:

> The telephone company computers will connect some customers
> at a higher priority that others.  

> Is there something in CO Class of Service? or other programming that
> gives "priority" service to a select class of lines?

Yes, they DO exist.  Will the local operating company tell you if you are
one of the selected few, NO!

The reason for this is that they want some traffic to get through.  In
addition, they will usually pick out one house in a block and give it
the "good" treatment.  The object here is to at least let some people
get out.  This load-leveling (there is a snazzy term for it, but I
don't remember) usually relates to the priorities in getting dial
tone.  In addition, they can deny dial tone to the "unfornatate", but
when I talked to the head of the CO (admititally a few years ago) he
said that "turning the switch" requires a MOUND of paper work, and
justification, and they will avoid doing at ALL cost.  The capability
exists though.  


Tom Watson   Not much simpler!!   tsw@cypher.apple.com

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

From: kouba@uclink.berkeley.edu (Terri M Kouba)
Subject: Computer Information Systems
Date: 03 May 1994 15:41:18 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


Hello.  My name is Terri Kouba.  I work in the Telecommunications
Department at the University of California at Berkeley.  I have been
assigned a project to bring in a new Telecommunications Management
Information System for the department.  This system includes, but is
not limited to: order processing, billing, call costing, call routing,
directory services, equipment inventory, cable management, and
management information systems.  This system can either be purchased
software packages or written in-house.

The Telecommunications Department provides voice and data service to
over 18,000 sites.  The campus phone systems are connected to and
served by a dedicated Pacific Bell Centrex switch.  In addition to
voice communications and modem services, the department also provides
data circuits for point-to-point data connections, ISDN lines,
wireless services, and alarm circuits.

As part of my analysis, I need to get a feel for what kinds of
computer information systems are currently out there.  I would
appreciate it if you could spare a few minutes and answer some
questions and/or offer some advice.  I want to thank you in advance,
for your time and information.

What kind of order processing, billing, reporting, telecommunications
information system(s) do you currently use?  On what hardware
platform(s)?  Are you satisfied with the system?

Is it integrated with other systems (i.e., campus general ledger,
directory services, network traffic analyzers, etc)?

Can customers look at their ordering/billing information on-line?

How are you getting the SMDR information?

What software are you using to do your cost-a-call processing?

Do you know of any software vendors who may have a system which could
handle all or some of the above-listed items?  If so, could you please
pass their name and number on to me?

Do you know of anyone tackling the same sort of project?  If so, could
you please pass their name and number on to me?

Any software/hardware vendors reading this are free to call me and/or
send me information.  At this point I am requesting information and am
open to all solutions.

Thank you for your time.


Terri M. Kouba    University of California at Berkeley
Telecommunications   2168 Shattuck Ave., Suite 310
Berkeley, CA   94720   (510) 642-3724

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

From: davidk@netcom.com (David Kiviat)
Subject: Re: Telco MUX to Home?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 01:12:28 GMT


Kendall Willis (kowillis@umr.edu) wrote:

> Roger Marquis (marquis@netcom.com) wrote:

> When Pac Bell recently installed a second line into my (1940s) apartment 
> building they didn't run any new wire but instead installed a new demark/
> junction box.  When I opened this box to connect my second line I was
> surprised to find only the one original line going in, and _two_ lines
> coming out!  Could it be my lines are MUXed to the local switch?

I definately have one of these installed. I have a four conductor
cable coming in to my house and have three phone lines now. Apparently
they started installing these around six months ago. I believe they
started using these to avoid having to dig lots of trenches as a Pac
Bell employee told me that if you need a trench dug now they WILL do
the work.  This is a change from their policy of a year ago where I
was told that since my phone line had been direct buried with no pipe
around it I would have to dig a conforming trench to get a third line
installed. Perhaps the PUC cuased this change because of people
electrocuting themselves while trying to dig trenches to add phone
lines.

The audio quality using the 'DAML', which is the installer's name for
this device is not noticeably affected by the unit.  I can't say
anything about its effect on computer modems because my PC is on the
non-muxed line. However I recently discovered to my distress that
there is a sort of 'bug' to these systems. If there is ever any
trouble on your phone line the unit will shut down and STAY down till
a repairperson comes by and 'shorts' the inside of the device. This
has already caused a 24 hour shutdown when some sort of ground fault
on one of my phone lines during a storm shut off the entire unit (2
phone lines) till someone could come and fix it.

The unit I have is made by Raychem.


dk

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

From: jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: GSM and Airbags
Date: 03 May 94 09:01:59 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Pregnant from using a cellular phone ... happens all the time, just
ask any escort service.

The problem is that the inertial sensor that detects the excessive
G-force of a crash has some wires from the contacts to the trigger
circuit.  If the sires are about the length of a 1/4 wave at the
cellular feequency, or a multiple thereof, then they will act as an
antenna.  The trigger circuit rectifies the signal, and thinks it's a
valid contact closure.  Ka-Boom.  Instant airbag.

My own thoughts were that the airbag system would be much more
susceptible to CB and Ham radio, because they are so much higher power
than a phone.  But the airbag system could have short wires, and not
pick them up since they are lower frequency and longer wavelength.

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

From: jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: DID, PBX and University Phones, SL-100
Date: 03 May 94 17:39:13 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


We are currently being serviced by Pac Bell Centrex, at our local
Community College, where I work.  We have all of the (714)564-4xxx,
5xxx, and 6xxx numbers, but we have about 1500 of them used.  No
wonder that the telcos need more area codes ...

The rate for a local line is $17.25 per month for the line, which
isn't a lot more than a 1MB measured business line.  But that's just
in our local exchange CO.  Our other campus is in an adjacent Foreign
Exchange, and it costs us another $25 a month for each line, total
$42.25.  Ouch.  Well, when the budget crunch hit a year or two ago, we
cut back on as many FX lines as we could.  So, the other post says
that a Centrex isn't a good deal.  WE are using a David Systems
manager to give us the features that we had with our old 1A2 Key
system.  But the phones cost $300+ each, and a lousy wall bracket
costs $45.  But we're stuck with the managers because our network runs
through them.

WE will be rewiring our buildings with 10baseT in the near future, so
I'm thinking that that would remove the network from the managers, and
allow us to go with whatever PBX we wanted.  Trouble is that it won't
ever happen because of politics, so just a thought.

WEll, it sounds like the cheaper way to go is having your own PBX, but
there are a lot of IFs, like who supports them, since they're just
like a mainframe computer.  Our managers have had to be relocated
because of problems with air conditioning, etc.  and we've had to put
in air ducts.  I wonder what would happen to a PBX.  Our phone bill
used to run around $30K a month before the cutbacks.  There seems to
be some room for saving money.  One of my suggestions was to upgrade
our links to other campuses from 56KB to a microwave.  But it looks
like the choice will be T1 or a fractional T1.  We may be getting
bridges that do compression, so that should help.  Who knows what the
future will bring.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #197
******************************


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