TELECOM Digest     Fri, 27 May 94 02:22:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 256

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "NetWare for Dummies" by Tittel (Rob Slade)
    Need Information on "Microcel" Technology/Products/Company (Jeff Miller)
    Lower Domestic Telephone Rates (National Information Systems)
    Average Data Speed of Wire Telegraphy Wanted (Steve Chafe)
    DTMF Decoding via SoundBlaster Card? (Eric L. Hinson)
    Two Line/LED 'In Use' Mod (Eric L. Hinson)
    NYNEX Announces Mandatory 1+NPA (Stan Schwartz)
    Reverse Directory FAQ Wanted (Lloyd Matthews)
    Un*x Based SS7 Decoders (Mark Gallion)
    NH E911 (was Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns) (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Name and Address -> Long Distance Companies (Jonathan Loo)
    FCC World BBS Now Distributes TELECOM Digest (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    National BBS Numbers Available (David Smith)
    Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts (Paul Lee)
    Re: Internet Access at Home? (Dave Mausner)
    Re: Internet Access at Home? (K. M. Peterson)
    Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Carl Moore)
    Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns (Jonathan)
    What Did You Have For Dinner Today? (was Re: Solomon Islands) (Carl Moore)

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: Thu, 26 May 1994 13:23:48 MDT
From: Rob Slade <roberts@decus.ca>
Subject: Book Review: "NetWare for Dummies" by Tittel


BKNTWDUM.RVW  940208
 
IDG Books Worldwide, Inc.
155 Bovet Road, Suite 310
San Mateo, CA  94402
 
"Netware for Dummies", Tittel, 1993, 1-56884-003-9, U$19.95/C$26.95
 
Dummies are not supposed to run networks.
 
This was probably not a terribly good concept.  A computer network is
a complicated object.  There are many factors to consider in planning,
building and running a network.  Given the complexity, the topic is
not a good candidate for an easy reading manual.  In addition, the
network operating system chosen is Novell NetWare, which is not only
complex in terms of the feature set, but also in terms of incompatible
versions.
 
The "... For Dummies" breezy and light-minded style does not suit the
topic.  Too many topics are opened simply to be discarded when the
going gets tough.  An example is security rights, one of the areas
that many administrators have problems with.  Combinations of
attribute rights, trustee rights, and rights masks contribute to
effective rights.  All of the various rights and attributes are
mentioned, but no formula is given for calculating effective rights
and there is only a single example.
 
The content is presented in an organized and amusing manner.  If you
are faced with getting up a Novell network and are terrified of the
prospect, you may find this easier to read through than the NetWare
documentation.  It will also help you consider some aspects, such as
cabling (although there is not much detail here, either).  This may,
therefore be a helpful starting guide -- but no more.
 
copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKNTWDUM.RVW  940208. Distribution is
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. 


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 17:26:09 -0700
From: cornhead@netcom.com (Jeff Miller)
Subject: Need Information on "Microcel" Technology/Products/Company


Hi, a surplus dealer friend of mine has stumbled onto some "Microcel"
equipment and I'd like to know if it would be usefull to me. If it
simply can be used as a decent cordless phone I'd be happy!

The system consists of three rechargeable handsets that seem at least
as fancy as the typical cellular phone, an ~15 pound "control unit"
and another plastic unit which I would guess is an antenna/receiver
unit. The control and "antenna" are joined by an ~25 conductor DIN
cable. A photocopy stuffed in with the antenna indicates minimum
clearance figures.

A quick glance at the owner's manual for the handset (the only manual
available) indicates the handsets can intercom to each other and what
not.  A modular cord is boxed with the control unit, so I guess you
can plug it into a standard telephone outlet. With luck it has modest
PBX funtionality, too.

Pawing over the system, I remembered a press release I read about a
year ago about a "new" type of cellular phone with 1/4 mile radius
blah blah blah ... I wonder if this system might be related.

This surplus dealer friend suggested the system might not work out of
the box, that the phones might somehow be (hmmm, what's the phrase?)
node locked or some such. I myself wondered if the whole affair might
have been a test-bed or demo system and might not have proper FCC
approval at this point.

So I am looking for any hints or information on this system. If you
are familiar with these systems, deos it sound complete? Will it work
out of the box, and is it feasible for me to get it working without
any technical docs?  What is its status in the eyes of the FCC?

I'm suspicious of the whole thing because I've never heard of anything
quite like it being generally available. But it sure deos seem cool
and I can probably get it cheap so I'd like to know.

The only model number I gleaned from the system was "2400". 

I'd be glad for any information via e-mail. Thanks!


cornhead@netcom.com

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

From: nis@netcom.com (National Information Systems)
Subject: Lower Domestic Telephone Rates
Organization: NIS, San Jose CA
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 21:44:02 GMT


Does anyone know of a company that shops for low telephone rates for
you?

For the last five years, we've changed phone companies every year.
Each time we sign up for low rates in one area we're calling to but
the other areas are very expensive.

We use the telephones for tele-sales and heavy outgoing FAXes.  I've
heard there are small, independent telephone consultants that can mix
and match the best rates into a coherent package deal.  We're looking
for something customized to us.

Has anyone ever heard of this?

Please respond in this group -- don't email me, ok?


dave   (dave@nis.com)

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

From: itstevec@rocky.ucdavis.edu (Steve Chafe)
Subject: Average Data Speed of Wire Telegraphy Wanted
Organization: Information Resources, UC Davis
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 21:58:45 GMT


Hello,

Does anyone know what the average speed (in characters per minute, or
whatever is appropriate) of a professional telegrapher would have been
when wire telegraphy was the main mode of electronic communication?
I'm trying to do a comparison of data communication speed then and
now, so I'd love to hear any thoughts that people can offer.


Thanks,

Steve Chafe     itstevec@hamlet.ucdavis.edu

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

From: ehinson@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Eric L. Hinson)
Subject: DTMF Decoding via SoundBlaster Card?
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 20:42:47 MDT


I would like to be able to call up my computer from a remote phone,
dial in a code and then have the system transfer me to various places.
For this I would need a line controlling device of some sort (could
just use a modem) and a way to link the SoundBlaster to the phone
line.  Any information/suggestions on this will be greatly
appreciated.


Eric L. Hinson (kb4rzf) / 'finger -l ehinson@satelnet.org' for PGP Public Key
Internet: ehinson@nyx.cs.du.edu  (finger this address for more info about me)
Snail Mail: 69 Sanford St, St. Augustine, FL 32084 USA / Phone: (904)823-8668
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above may not be those of the sys admin(s)

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

From: ehinson@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Eric L. Hinson)
Subject: Two Line/LED 'In Use' Mod?
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 20:51:07 MDT


I have an old Western Electric desk phone that I would like to modify
for two-line use.  If possible I would like to have the ability to
determine which lines are in use before picking up the phone.  Does
such a modification exist already?  If so, how is it done?

 
Thanks,
 
Eric L. Hinson (kb4rzf) / 'finger -l ehinson@satelnet.org' for PGP Public Key
Internet: ehinson@nyx.cs.du.edu  (finger this address for more info about me)
Snail Mail: 69 Sanford St, St. Augustine, FL 32084 USA / Phone: (904)823-8668
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above may not be those of the sys admin(s)

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

From: stans@panix.com (Stan Schwartz)
Subject: NYNEX Announces Mandatory 1+NPA
Date: 27 May 1994 00:54:32 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


NYNEX announced yesterday that they will close the last gap and make
1+NPA dialing mandatory for inter-NPA calls from the 516 and 914 area
codes, effective 9/24/94.  Until now (as far as 516 was concerned), we
were able to use the old-style ten-digit dialing method.

In related news, the new Suffolk County (516) phone book instructs
callers to dial 0+516+XXX+XXXX for INTRA-NPA operator-assisted/calling
card calls.  I assume this will also be mandatory on 9/24/94.


Stan

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

From: lloyd@pebbles.esl.com (Lloyd Matthews)
Subject: Reverse Directory FAQ Wanted
Date: 26 May 1994 21:21:57 GMT
Organization: TTC - ESL, Inc.


Is there a Reverse Directory FAQ available? From the comments in the
Digest, it seems that a Reverse Directory with consistently up-to-date
telco databases would be welcomed. I am new to commercial telecom
applications, and have found this group fascinating and educational. I
would welcome any information that would help me put one together.
(And also whether I could actually make any money operating one!)

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

From: bellcore!iscp.bellcore.com!gark@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Gallion)
Subject: Un*x Based SS7 Decoders?
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 19:23:08 GMT


Does anyone know of any Un*x based software that might convert binary
SS7 data to a "pretty print" format.

I'm trying to find something that isn't unlike a protocol analyzer,
but would just format and display the binary data that I already have
access to and not be a separate hardware device.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.


Mark S. Gallion    Bell Communications Research
Piscataway, NJ     gark@iscp.bellcore.com

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

From: paul@senex.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer)
Subject: NH E911 (was Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns)
Date: 26 May 1994 20:13:05 GMT
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services


In article <telecom14.250.14@eecs.nwu.edu> rlvd_cif@uhura.cc.rochester.
edu (Rob Levandowski) writes:

> [article about child drowning because parents dialed '911' in an area
> with no '911' service deleted]

> In any case, I'm sure the following bit of information is as true in
> other rural non-911 areas as it is in Cheshire County: If you can't
> get through to 911, you should try dialing 0 for the operator. The
> operator can connect you more quickly than it would take you to look
> up the number in a phone book or try to dredge it out of memory when
> you're in a panic.

Most N.H. towns, especially the non-911 ones, have nice fluorescent
stickers which they hand out so that the number can be handy on each
of your phones.  A few years ago, my town, on the other side of the
state, had six or seven numbers on that sticker under "to report a
fire ..."  These were the home numbers of the volunteer firefighters
which would likely have someone there to answer most of the time.  If
the first one did not answer, just go down the list until someone
answers (or the fire burns itself out ... :-) Of course, we have just
one number (not 911) now, and that is to a 24-hour dispatch center;
and soon,

> The gossip I've heard is that Cheshire County will jump directly to
> Enhanced 911 once all of the local offices install modern switches.
> Since virtually all emergency calls are handled out of the Mutual Aid
> center in Keene as it is, the political-boundaries question Pat
> mentioned is already resolved.

The statewide E911 system is more than gossip.  At this point, it is a
"done deal" with NYNEX, to be up and running mid-1995.  This of course
cuts through the petty bureaucracies by imposing a much larger one and
adds a level of complexety or more.  Your parents, and all the rest of
us are already paying for it through a monthly charge on our phone
bills.

By the way, the center you speak of (S.W.N.H.) has been operating for
many years as a good example of a coordinated regional dispatch
center, thanks in a large part to its first chief/coordinator, Bob
Callahan.


Paul S. Sawyer    - University of New Hampshire CIS -  Paul.Sawyer@UNH.Edu
Telecommunications and Network Services                VOX: +1 603 862 3262
50 College Road                                        FAX: +1 603 862 2030
Durham, New Hampshire  03824-3523

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 20:39:06 -0400
From: Jonathan <jdl@wam.umd.edu>
Subject: Name and Address -> Long Distance Companies


In a recent TELECOM Digest Editor's Note, Pat Townson wrote:

> the rules currently say that local telcos may not withhold
> name and address information from long distance carriers -- even if
> the number is otherwise non-published -- for billing purposes.

This is a security problem.  Customers should be allowed to block the
delivery of their name and address information if they have non-published 
telephone numbers or non-listed addresses.  If a customer does this,
then the telephone company should either act as billing agent for the
long distance companies, or billing-block all calls placed through
long-distance companies that the customer doesn't want.  This won't
affect COCOT equal access; users should still be able to place calls
from the COCOT over whatever company that they choose; but the customer 
may request a BILLING block for all companies except those designated
by the customer.  This would prevent excessive dissemination of customer 
name and address information.

Also, the customer name and address information should be confidential
by law.


Jonathan D. Loo


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Fancy that; customer name and address
information should be confidential by law; I guess under such a law
only criminals would publish, distribute or possess telephone directories.
Jonathan, how do you suppose R.L. Polk, Haines, and the other directory
publishers all did business back in the 1920's? (Yes, they have been
around that long compiling their 'criss-cross' books ...)  They had
dozens of women sitting at the machines of those days each with pages
taken from local telephone books, sitting there keying in the data by
hand. When punch cards became the norm, the same women sat at keypunch
machines and punched cards with the data right off the pages of the
phone book. They'd then take those cards to the IBM machine (was it
a 1401 that sorted cards out to the ten pockets based on the punches
in each column?) and sort them by phone number, then by street number
and name, etc ... off it went to the printer. Until you outlaw phone
books you will not be able to outlaw the dissemination of customer
names and addresses. And there is *already* a law in place which says
long distance companies can use CNA for one purpose, and one purpose
only: billing for calls. Already, they are unable to get the names of
subscribers who are not their customers. Why add another layer?   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 18:30:58 CDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
Subject: FCC World BBS Now Distributes TELECOM Digest


I am pleased to welcome FCC World, a new BBS operating in Washington,
DC to the network of independent systems on which this Digest is
distributed on a regular basis.

Effective in the next few days, each issue of the Digest will be made
available to read or download in a section of the Library files on
FCC World, and our readers in the Washington, DC metro area may find
it more convenient to use this new service than reading through Usenet
and comp.dcom.telecom. The choice of course is yours, and I hope you
will join me in thanking attorney Shaun A. Maher (sysop of FCC World)
for making this option available.

They are also inviting TELECOM Digest readers to open a user account
on the BBS if you want up-to-date news from the Federal Communications
Commission as it occurs.  In addition to the email address 'avb@cais.com'
you can contact these folks as follows:

Shaun A. Maher, Esq.
Smithwick & Belendiuk, P.C.
Sysop of FCC WORLD
Voice - 202-785-2800
Fax - 202-785-2804
BBS - 202-887-5718

The BBS is multi-line, but I am told it has been quite busy in the past
week with new subscribers coming on board, so be patient in trying to
get in.  Thanks again to Shaun Maher for agreeing to make TELECOM Digest
available on a regular basis to the FCC World subscribers.  


Patrick Townson

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

From: David Smith <davidjsmith@delphi.com>
Subject: National BBS Numbers
Date: Thu, 26 May 94 23:15:45 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)


This is an invitation to join DJSA Bulletin Board.
 
You can call DJSA BBS in one of two ways. You can either call us
direct at (305) 749-6458 or you can call your local Tymenet or Telenet
number and connect through Global Access.
 
DJSA Bulletin Board has been online since April 21, 1989.  We are a
multi-node BBS specializing in SHAREWARE and PUBLIC DOMAIN software.
 
We publish the National BBS Directory which contains a list of over
2,000 BBS numbers throughout the USA. The directory is released
quarterly in March, June, September and December.
 
You can gain immediate membership to DJSA BBS by calling our Telephone
Access Billing System (TABS).  TABS will allow you to call our 1-900
numbers from any touch tone telephone, 24 hours per day.  This phone
call is not made with your computer modem, it is made by voice.  A
computer automated voice will ask you to input the number of our BBS.
You enter the following phone number ... <749-6458>.
 
Have a pen handy so that you can write down the access code that you
are given by the computer automated voice. You need this access code
to gain entry to DJSA BBS.  Then, call DJSA Bulletin Board and enter
the access code when you log in.
 
You have two choices of subscriptions at DJSA BBS.
 
You can pay $10.00 for one month of access by calling TABS at
(900) 622-8227.
 
You can pay $25.00 for four months of access by calling TABS at
(900) 622-5225.
 
The cost of this call will be on your next telephone bill.  Customers
under the age of 18 must get their parents permission before they call
TABS.  TABS is a service of True Media Inc.
 
If you would like more information,then please call customer service
toll free number at (800) 889-DJSA.

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 23:30:00 CDT
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Modem Redial Attempts


In TELECOM Digest Volume 14 Issue 250, Steven Bradley <steven@sgb.oau.
org> wrote:
 
> if you are a developer, do NOT use the internal redial option in the
> faxmodem, use the BUSY, VOICE, NO ANSWER result codes to re-dial it using
> the software command to ... allow unlimited and unregulated re-dialing
 
Indeed, most of the communications software I've encountered uses the
modem result (either numeric code or verbose text string) to determine
the result of a dial attempt. The software can keep track of "BUSY"
results and redial up to a preset number of attempts.
 
Why, though, would one want to redial upon encountering a "VOICE" or a
"NO ANSWER" result? A "VOICE" result would typically indicate that the
modem's dial attempt has reached either an intercept message or a live
body at the dialed number, indicating that a wrong number is being
dialed (for legitimate purposes, at least). A "NO ANSWER" result on a
valid number typically results from a problem with the modem or fax
machine that should have answered at the other end.
 
I can understand making numerous redial attempts on a "BUSY"
condition, but what would be the purpose of redialing on a "VOICE" or
"NO ANSWER" result, other than to harass (whether innocently,
ignorantly, or maliciously) the recipient of the call?  
 
And our esteemed and unflappable editor admonishes Mr. Bradley:
 
> I hope you are the next victim of someone's 'unregulated and
> unlimited redialing' rather than me. And no, I do not think 'it is
> about time we fired the FCC ...'. I think it is time we gave the
> agency even greater enforcement powers in a few instances that I will
> not go into here at this minute.
 
If I may presume to interpret and amplify Mr. Townson's sentiment:
 
Much of the basis for the existence of the FCC and most government
regulatory agencies is the trouble and frustration brought about by
careless, thoughtless, malicious, or brazenly stupid actions taken by
a relatively small percentage of society. The irony in this, of
course, is that many actions taken by those very agencies (that is,
the people who constitute those agencies) are, themselves, careless,
thoughtless, malicious, or brazenly stupid.
 
I cannot determine which of those four categories might describe Mr.
Bradley's desire to provide for "unregulated and unlimited redialing",
but I would like to point out to him, and to others who might engage
in such a practice, that they and their actions comprise a part of the
*reason* for the existence of the FCC and other regulators of
telephone equipment and services. Bearing that in mind, Mr. Bradley's
sentiment concerning it being "about time we fired the FCC" seems
disturbingly hypocritical, self-righteous, and irresponsible.
 
The irresponsibility is manifested by proposing the demise of an
agency, while promoting practices that serve to justify the existence
of that same agency.  That's like an organized crime boss proposing to
do away with the FBI, or a drug lord advocating the demise of the DEA.
It smacks of thugism, and it annihilates credibility. It's an argument
that proves itself false.

 
Paul A. Lee                           Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst              FAX  414 357-1450
Woolworth Corporation            CompuServe  70353,566
INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com

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

From: dmausner@brauntech (Dave Mausner)
Subject: Re: Internet Access at Home?
Organization: Braun Technology Group
Date: Thu, 26 May 94 14:51:27 PST


In article <telecom14.249.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, WOLVERINE@ASU.Edu says:

> I am interested in getting a internet link to my home. I'm not
> talking about a call up service, but am referring to an actual link to
> my house. I am thinking of setting up a server. I need to know where
> to start. How does one go about getting a line set up and what
> hardware is required? Any response will be appreciated.

Start here:

1. Contact the system or network manager at the nearest college or
university, either by phone, or by mail. Engage this person in the
above discussion. By offering a bottle of booze or other spiffs, you
might obtain help in connecting to the backbone; if not, at least you
will have a new friend. You will have to pay for your telco line.

2. Obtain a list of internet service providers near you (the guys who 
offer dialup access).  One example I can think of is PSI, Inc. 
(Telephone 1-800-82-PSI-82). They usually offer higher-cost direct-line
services, such as ISDN connections to their routers. 

3. There are often bedroom sysops running public unix systems who
already have net connections, and they will either offer you a feed,
or put you in touch with their upstream connection. Continue swimming
upstream until the costs are beyond your reach.

Warning: Don't be surprised by costs starting at several hundred bucks
per month. the faster your connection, the more you will pay for
termination gear and phone charges. Still think the internet is free?

Suggestion: let the group know how your quest progresses.


Dave Mausner, Sr Consultant, Braun Technology Group, Chicago.

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

From: kmp@tiac.net (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Re: Internet Access at Home?
Date: 26 May 1994 21:01:42 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


In article <telecom14.249.5@eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Editor noted
in response to an WOLVERINE@ASU.Edu and articles by others:

> They're very typical of what I get in the mail, and hopefully
> answers from readers will be seen by many others who are asking the
> same thing.  PAT

1) Monitor alt.internet.access.wanted to find out what questions are
currently being posed and how they are being answered.

2)  Purchase the book "Connecting to the Internet" ($15.95 from
O'Reilly & Associates 800-889-8969, ISBN 1-56592-061-9).

3) Call the network support people at ASU and ask _them_.  Ask them
who their regional provider is.  Ask them about whether they would
sell you the service.

A pointer: getting a dedicated line is probably going to be _very_
expensive, depending on the provider that you settle on and the
distance to their point of presence (POP).  You really may not need
that kind of access ... try finding a provider who can provide dialup
PPP and try that first.

You didn't say much about what kind of setup you want and why.  You
may be under the (mistaken) impression that the only dialup access is
to a Un*x box, and running Un*x commands in a shell.  This isn't true:
running PPP on my Mac, InterNews, Eudora (for mail), and a collection
of other utilities gives me _identical_ access as if I were connected
to an Ethernet connected to the 'Net, except for the speed of the
connection.  And you pay for speed, eh PAT?


K. M. Peterson    email: KMP@TIAC.NET
phone: +1 617 731 6177 voice   +1 617 730 5969 fax


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You sure do ... then you pay some more. PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 94 17:18:15 EDT
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.MIL>
Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns


There are lots of cases where a phone prefix crosses county lines.
Near me:

1. Extreme southern New Castle County (Delaware) is served by the
Smyrna CO, whose service is mostly in Kent County.

2. A tiny portion of eastern Baltimore County (Md.) is served by
the Edgewood exchange, in Harford County.

3. A tiny portion of the 610-388 Mendenhall exchange (Chester County,
Pa.) is across the Brandywine creek in Delaware County.

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 21:16:51 -0400
From: Jonathan <jdl@wam.umd.edu>
Subject: Re: No 911 Available as Tot Drowns


The Editor wrote:

> The trouble is, no one seems willing to let some other town
> handle their emergency calls.

I think that it would be a good idea to coordinate 911 so that each
911 center can transfer calls to any emergency agency that serves
nearby areas; and 911 centers within each state should be able to
handle calls throughout the state.  This would allow the telephone
company to re-route calls more flexibly around network congestion, and
also would keep people from being bounced from agency to agency or
being told to call a seven-digit number.

In addition, many areas have several emergency response agencies
serving them; for example, some places are served by state, county and
city police at the same time.  911 should be able to dispatch the
nearest available unit, regardless of agency.

If E911 is not available then 911 should route calls to some nearby
emergency agency, such as the state police, or to the operator, or
somebody who can provide emergency dispatch.

People who call the emergency number should get intercept only when
the system is hopelessly malfunctioning.

Just my suggestions, for the record.


Jonathan D. Loo

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

Date: Thu, 26 May 94 16:25:56 EDT
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.MIL>
Subject: What Did You Have For Dinner Today? (was Re: Solomon Islands) 


<chuckle> How could you write about cannibalism and forget Alfred E.
Packer?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Alfred Packer is probably the most
famous (or infamous) cannibal in the history of these United States,
or at least he was until Mr. Dahmer's naughty behavior became known to
the police officers who opened the door of his refrigerator and looked
inside.

Packer, a resident of Colorado in the middle to late 19th century found
himself stuck in the Rocky Mountains one cold, very extreme winter with
nothing to eat but his associates in the party of six persons who were
on the expedition. So he did just that ... killed the other five and ate
them. With the warm spring weather, a rescue party was able to traipse
up the mountain to bring all concerned back to safety. Shocked at finding
a healthy and well-fed Mr. Packer and but the bones and unedible remains
of the others they arrested Alfred and held him over for trial on charges
of cannibalism. (Oops, pardon me, there goes my politcal incorrectness
again, I mean 'human recycling'.)  

At his trial, he was found guilty and sentenced to the peniteniary for
the remainder of his natural life to be served at hard labor. At the
time of his sentencing, a furious judge remarked, "there were only
seven Republicans in the entire county, and you, you son of a bitch,
you had to kill and eat five of them!" 

To honor his memory after his death in the late 1800's, a university
there (I believe in Boulder but I am not certain) named its student
dining hall after him. The Alfred E. Packer Memorial Cafeteria in the
Student Union Building at the university served nutricious and
delicious meals to students for many years. For all I know it may
still be in operation.  Seriously ... some historians contend that
naming the student dining hall after Packer was not done to glorify
his cannibalism but rather to remember him as an individual persecuted
by the government for doing, well, what he had to do under the circum-
stances in order to survive all winter in the rugged mountains. 

In other correctional industry news, the {World Weekly News}, one of
the few journals which Tells the Truth About Things -- other than this
Digest of course -- reported in a recent issue that Jeff Dahmer has
been placed in solitary confinement at the maximum security mental
hospital where he is being cared for after he killed five other inmates
in their sleep and was caught eating them. 

My thanks to Carl Moore for reminding me of Alfred Packer and suggesting
this commentary which many of you will read during your breakfast on
Friday!  <smile> ...  PAT]   

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #256
******************************


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