TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Jun 94 01:45:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 291

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Problem Reaching Emergency Services in UK (Jonathan Haruni)
    Motorola and Grupo Protexa (Alex Cena)
    Cell Service on Long Beach Island NJ (Gerry Moersdorf)
    Voice Mail Vendors Wanted (Paul S. Malone)
    Telephony Interfaces (Sean McLinden)
    Question About SMDS (Matthias Plass)
    Digital to Analog Converters (Gary Merinstein)
    International Long Distance Carrier Information Wanted (Umar M. Badeges)
    Mobile Phones and the Cancer Scare (Craig OShannessy)
    Re: My Company's Phone System Lets Me Use "Wrong" Lines (Paul Lee)
    Re: My Company's Phone System Lets Me Use "Wrong" Lines (John Navitsky)
    Where to Buy Telephone Line Simulators? (Mervyn Quah)
    Re: International Callback Services (Leroy Casterline)
    Re: International Callback Services (Ron Wright)
    Re: Calling Card Suggestion (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Personal 800 Number Availability (Rick Brown)
    Re: Information Wanted on GSM in US (David S. Rose)

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

From: jharuni@london.micrognosis.com (Jonathan Haruni)
Subject: Problem reaching emergency services in UK
Date: 15 Jun 1994 13:31:44 GMT
Organization: Micrognosis International, London


A couple of weeks ago I came home to find my house had been robbed.  I
tried calling 999 (emergency), but got a continuous tone (number
unobtainable or system error).  I checked to make sure I had a normal
dial tone, and tried again. Then I tried 150 (operator), but got the
same result.  Then I looked up the number of the police station in the
phone book, and tried them -- no problem.  Afterwards I also called 155
(repair service) to report the problem with 999 and 150, and I got
through to the repair service -- no problem.

They phoned me back a day later and told me that the problem had been
rectified.

But I was not satisfied.  Apparently normal phone service was
available, with all my normal calls completed and no trouble with
incoming calls.  Only two numbers didn't work, and one of them was the
emergency number!  How am I supposed to have any faith in my ability
to reach 999 if necessary?  If I hear smoke alarms or intruders in
the middle of the night, I'm not going to go searching for the phone
book!

It turns out that 150 and 999 are one and the same service in the UK.
The British Telecom operator answers emergency calls, takes the
details, and puts them through to the appropriate emergency service,
along with the calling number ID.  So I was assured by BT that if I
could reach 150, I could also reach 999.  But I wanted to make sure.
I wanted to test a call to the emergency number.  They said I could
arrange this by dialing 150 and warning them.  So I did, but the
operators said they could not arrange such a call.  I should just
trust them, that if I could reach 150, I could reach 999.  But I
persisted, and finally, after many consultations with managers and
their managers, they told me that they could not arrange anything, but
if I just called 999 and explained the situation, it would be ok.  So
I did, and it was.

But I was still not satisfied.  I want to know, with full certainty,
that as long as I have phone service, I can reach the emergency
number.  I want to know that whatever problem existed in my exchange
which prevented me calling 999/150, was not just "cleared" but that
the cause of the problem was removed.  I doubt that is the case, but I
have had no joy in pursuing this issue with BT.  I suspect that the
exchange technicians merely reset something or other which had gone
wrong, but that the same thing could go wrong again and I would never
know.

Any advice on how to pursue this problem would be greatly appreciated.


Jonathan Haruni

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

From: Alex Cena <acena@lehman.com>
Subject: Motorola and Grupo Protexa
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 94 00:09:34 EST


A Rueters news article indicated that Motorola and Grupo Protexa have
signed an agreement to create a $6 billion telecommunications firm
that will offer a variety of services, including cellular, long
distance, PCN, data transmission and rural telephony, subject to
Mexican government approval.

Does anyone know what role if any Motorola's WiLL or fixed wireless
applications will play in this deployment?


Thanks in advance,

Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers, acena@lehman.com

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

From: gerry@aisun.aiinet.com (Gerry Moersdorf)
Subject: Cell Service on Long Beach Island NJ?
Date: 15 Jun 1994 10:45:07 -0400
Organization: Applied Innovation, Inc.
Reply-To: gerry@aiinet.com


Does anyone know if there is cellular telephone service on Long Beach
Island, NJ?


Gerry Moersdorf   --- Applied Innovation Inc  gerry@aiinet.com
614-798-2000        Dublin, Ohio 43017    The datacom pbx guys

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

From: Paul S Malone <pmalone@mason1.gmu.edu>
Reply-To: Paul S Malone <pmalone@mason1.gmu.edu>
Subject: Voice Mail Vendors Wanted
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 1994 13:37:36 EDT


I am trying to find a list of voice mail providers out in the
industry.  The types of vendors I am looking for are like Tigon.
Tigon is a voice mail vendor which sells messaging products, like
voice mail and fax mail, to anyone who wants to buy them.  They are
switch independant meaning you don't need a PBX or a CO which supports
them.  If anyone knows of a vendor like this please forward there name
to me, thanks.


Paul Malone    pmalone@gmu.edu

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

From: Sean McLinden <sean+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Telephony Interfaces
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 10:47:49 -0400
Organization: Sponsored account, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


I am looking for interface card which supports multiline (8-16-32)
voice interface to a PC or Mac-based system and which has an API for
programming (basically a digital dictation system). There are
commercial systems out there but they are ridiculously expensive and
programmatically poor.

Help is appreciated.


Thanks,

Sean McLinden

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

From: plass@morisot.uni-paderborn.de (Matthias Plass)
Subject: Question About SMDS
Date: 14 Jun 1994 13:55:33 GMT
Organization: Uni-GH Paderborn, Germany


Hello!

I have a question about SMDS (over DQDB).

With DS3 you have a busbitrate of 44.736 MBit/s on BOTH busses.  As I
understand it, SMDS uses only ONE time 44.736 MBit/s for selling to
it's subscribers.  The reason for this is that else it might be, that
congestion would occur, if stations with a sum of credit > 45 MBit
would send in one destination.

Am I right?  If here is anyone, who can help me, please e-mail me!  (I
am not reading this group regularly.)


Thanks in advance!

Matthias Plass (plass@uni-paderborn.de)

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

From: gmerin@panix.com (Gary Merinstein)
Subject: Digital to Analog Converters
Date: 14 Jun 1994 23:26:46 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


I used to install a device called a "dees box" to connect analog
devices (modems, answering machines, etc.) to digital pbx systems (eg.
Northern Telecom). I now need a new source.

Does anyone know of vendors (or the manufacturer's phone number) for
this device?


gmerin@panix.com      mci:  489-6979      ci$ 74035,1232

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

From: ubadeges@mason1.gmu.edu (Umar M Badeges)
Subject: International Long Distance Carrier Information Wanted
Date: 15 Jun 1994 14:50:02 GMT
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA


I am new to the Internet and I need information on long distance
international carriers.

The questions I have:

1 How big is the industry in terms of revenue, and connect time?

2 Who are the players?  Domestic and international, what are their
share of the revenue and connect time.  Who are the management team of
these players?  Company profile such as history, growth, their strength
and weaknesses, and how do they meet challenges and opportunities in
this industry.

3 What are the marketing strategy these players, such as what
product or service is offered, promotion and advertisement policy,
pricing, etc.

4 What is the customer profile of this industry?

5 What is the key success factor, what factors needed to be
extremely well.

6 I am trying to look at the industry from the management's point
of view.

7 If anybody can suggest book or mail me article in this
subject, I will appreciate it.  Please response by e-mail to
ubadeges@mason1.gmu.edu.

Thank you in anticipation of your response.

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

From: craigo@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Craig OShannessy)
Subject: Mobile Phones and the Cancer Scare
Date: 16 Jun 1994 00:24:03 +1000
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.42bis


Whatever happened to the scare about mobile phones and the intense
microwaves giving you cancer?

 This was in the Australian news some time back for a few days,
then it just dissapeared.

 Does anyone know what the latest is on this?


Craig O'Shannessy >>>==================> craigo@kralizec.zeta.org.au []

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

From: Paul A. Lee  <DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Subject: Re: My Company's Phone System Lets Me Use "Wrong" Lines
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994  23:50:00 CDT
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In {TELECOM Digest} Volume 14 Issue 284, Robert Casey wrote:

> Today, in a meeting, he mentions about phone call procedure. "Use the '8'
> lines for long distance, '9' for local". I had been doing it the other way
> around, because other places I've worked used "9" for LD, "8" for local.

In my own experience, I've seen the "9" for local and "8" for LD
arrangement more often. Of course, that's experience from ten or
fifteen years ago. Anymore, the common pattern seems to be "9" for
outside, off-network, and "8" (or "8x") for (virtual) private network
calls.

> ... why did the PBX here let me complete LD calls on the wrong lines?

Sloppy programming and/or an obsolescent switch.

> "Didn't they tell you at new employee orientation?" "They told us tons
> of stuff, like 401K's, and stock options, medical plans and a lot of
> other crap".

Phone use instructions -- when they differ from the most common "'9'
for outside, extension number for inside, '0' for operator" -- should
be *printed* on a phone system reference card, in a company directory,
or in an office procedures manual.

The writer described, but did not name, a Fortune 500 firm with 9000
employees. If all 9000 are served by the PBX being described, then I
think they have a problem. They apparently do not publish a phone use
guide. They also appear not to have any LCR (least-cost routing) or
ARS (automatic route selection) in their switch. That could be because
of an obsolescent switch, or because of poor programming due to
ignorance of the features available, or because the "feature" was not
"purchased" from a switch vendor that has the gall to charge an
exorbitant extra cost for it.

They evidently have a call accounting system, since the boss can learn
how much billing accrued from a given phone. Call accounting is only
one tool in telecommunications management, though. It sounds like more
attention needs to be paid to other areas, like routing and carrier
optimization, ARS/LCR configurations, and maybe management of the
vendor/provider of the system.

Of course, there's another possible explanation for the call
accounting and costing capabilities coupled with the separate dialing
access codes: Maybe your site has Centrex (Centranet/Centracom/Essex)
service, instead of a PBX.  If that's how your firm is handling a
single geographic location with 9000 employees (my inference), then
you really *do* have some telecommunications management problems!


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: johnn@eskimo.com (John Navitsky)
Subject: Re: My Company's Phone System Lets Me Use "Wrong" Lines
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 16:47:16 GMT


Sometimes a company will have more than one long distance carrier.
Typically they prefer one but have the other to access services/
numbers not available, or just in case.


John Navitsky   johnn@eskimo.com

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

From: mervyn@hk.net (Mervyn Quah)
Subject: Where to Buy Telephone Line Simulators?
Date: 15 Jun 1994 13:39:57 GMT
Organization: Hong Kong Internet & Gateway Services, Wanchai, Hong Kong


Hi everyone,

Does anybody know where I can get equipment that will simulate regular
phone connections (ie, dial tones and ring/busy signals)? We need
about a dozen lines to run a suite of configuration tests on our
multi-line fax server, but don't want to install 'real' phone lines
just for this.  Advanced features like introducing line noise and
echoes would be a plus (although not necessary).

Thanks in advance!


Merv   mervyn@hk.net

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

From: casterli@csn.org (Leroy Casterline)
Subject: Re: International Callback Services
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 1994 18:02:00 -0600
Organization: Cahill Casterline Limited
Reply-To: casterli@csn.org


In article <telecom14.283.15@eecs.nwu.edu>, is written:

> I had a friend ask me recently about a service I think I've seen
> discussed here before -- international callback services that take

> Ed

Ed,

One of my clients, Logotronix Communications, offers a callback
service called GeoTel.  Call 800/442-4887 and ask for Bill Taylor for
more information.  As to the legality, see my response to Pat below ...

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The legality of the callback services
> is a gray-area. Maybe, maybe not. In any event, what Telepassport

Actually, I believe that the FCC has ruled in favor of callback (or so
the folks at Logotronix tell me).  If you're interested, I can provide
the text of the ruling, two pages in length.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought Logotronix sold and serviced
the callback devices. I did not know they also offered a callback
service. I got some literature from them at one point showing the
devices they had for sale.  Regards the FCC ruling on callback signals,
yes, I would be interested in seeing it and I suspect other readers would
be as well.  Please send it along for publication here.   PAT]

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

From: rwright@netcom.com (Ron Wright)
Subject: Re: International Callback Services
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 13:43:00 PDT


edswen@netcom.com (Ed Swenson) wrote:

> .....  I'm mainly interested in finding out how to subscribe,
> who offers such services, how they work, what they charge, etc. 
> They are legal, right? Although I'm sure some PTT's don't like them 
> too much ;-).  .....

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The legality of the callback services
> is a gray-area. Maybe, maybe not.  .....

I am a sales affiliate of MTC, a provider of telecommunication services
which include international callback.

First, to the legal question.  Pat's correct.  Until very recently the
legallity of such services was considered by some to be questionable.
However the May/June issue of {Computer TELEPHONY} carries an article
by Tom Crowe which cites a recent FCC ruling -- three rulings actually
 -- that specifically granted applications of companies to provide
"code calling" callback services.

With "code calling" the customer direct dials a US number, lets it ring, 
then hangs up before the call is answered.  The system then initiates 
a callback in one of two ways.  Some systems assign a specific DID to
each customer.  Any call received on that line generates a callback to
a specified number.  Other systems capture the incoming ANI and return
the call accordingly.

"Code calling" systems were more vigorously opposed by AT&T than the
other type of service, "completed-call" callback.  The latter service
actually answers the customer's call, prompts her to enter an account
number and the number to be called back.  This type service was not as
offensive because someone was paying for the initial call.  Usually
the service provides for access through a toll-free number.

How does one subscribe?  There are frequent postings in the various
forums related to telecom.  And also an occasional posting to "biz.misc".  
Here are some questions you will want to ask:

Rates, obviously.  Ask for the specific rates for the countries you
call.  The rate for country A can be cheaper than the rate for country
B for one service and less for another.  Are the rates good 24 hours a
day; if not what are the pricing periods, and are they governed by US
or foreign time?

Account Set Up Fees.  Some services impose a fee.  Others do not.  And
still others leave it up to the sales agent.  As an example, I never
charge a customer set up fees; some MTC sales reps do.

Minimum Service Period.  What are the limits on cancelling the service
if you are displeased or if your need for that type service no longer
exists?

Billing Increments.  Don't accept full minute billing increments.  The
norm these days is "six second increment" billing.  This means that
your charges will much more closely reflect the length of your call.
You won't be billed for three minutes for a call of two minutes fifteen
seconds.

Detailed Statements.  Most service providers bill your credit card
periodically for the calls made in the billing period.  They should
also provide you with a detailed statement showing the particulars of
each call made, date, time, number called, call duration, charges,
etc.

Activation Leadtime.  I have seen references to some services
requiring a customer to wait as long as a month to activate service.
Activation should take place in days, not weeks.  If a service
provider does not have sufficient excess capacity to add new customers
quickly, then I question whether it has sufficient capacity to handle
the load of its existing customer base for peak loads.


Ron Wright
Technology Export                           Voice:  +1 408 438 6076
An Authorized MTC Sales Affiliate           Fax:    +1 408 438 5827
113 San Augustine Way                       E-mail:  rwright@netcom.com
Scotts Valley, CA 95066 USA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One problem that Telepassport (a division
of US Fibercom and a big player in the international callback industry)
had to deal with was the *huge* number of 'wrong number' and telemarketing
'blind calls' made to its DID numbers. People in the USA would call those 
numbers by accident and trigger a callback to an unsuspecting subscriber 
in Europe, sometimes in the middle of the night in Europe. Then there were
the telemarketers, out to sell whatever they could to whoever they could
using sequential dialing devices to ring one number after another. Maybe
they were selling subscriptions to the San Jose newspaper for all I know.
(John Higdon is probably grinning at that!) ... again, calls were being
made to Telepassport subscribers at all sorts of odd times, and of course
many subscribers blamed Telepassport for it all. 

Finally Telepassport tried to refine the way things were done. Since
their switch generates the ringing tone heard by people calling their
DID numbers, they told their subscribers to be certain to hang up
during the first ring under the assumption that telemarketers and/or
wrong number callers would at least let the line ring three or four times 
or more before giving up. That way, if it rang one time and no more,
it was treated as a callback request; if it rang more than that the
switch simply ignored it and forgot about it once the intruder
disconnected. They also delayed the ringing tone long enough to give
their subscribers a chance to disconnect as soon as they heard a couple
of 'clicks' on the line, figuring most wrong number callers would be
still hanging around when the ringing started. By golly, *even that was 
not enough* ... the number of idiots out there who dial, realize in a
second or two that they dialed incorrectly and hang up -- but still
generating that slight bit of one ring -- is immense. Then Telepassport 
tried using real obscure numbers from a very poor inner city neighborhood 
in a town in New Jersey (brought in to Manhattan by FX via Nynex). The
assumption was probably there would be fewer wrong number calls to a
201 number, and most likely the telemarketers would have the neighborhood 
redlined against calls anyway. The last I heard, that approach had cut
back on the spurious callbacks somewhat. Lower and central Manhattan
must be a real bummer where wrong numbers are concerned. Are the other 
international callback providers having the same kinds of problems?  PAT]

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

From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Calling Card Suggestion
Organization: Surf City Software/TBFW Project
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 1994 01:17:51 GMT


On 07 Jun 1994 05:47:37 PST, d92-sam@misfits.nada.kth.se (Sam Spens
Clason) said:

> In <telecom14.274.1@eecs.nwu.edu> Bob Maccione <bmaccion@promus.com>
> writes:

>> With all of the calling card fraud going on out there I'm curious as
>> to why the card companies don't issue cards that can't be used for
>> international calls.  It should be easy enough and if the user really
>> needs to have access to international numbers they can add a level of
>> country restrictions.  So since all I call is the US I wouldn't have
>> to worry about someone abusing my card (at least from the international 
>> level of abuse).

A genuinely lame idea.  Gee, you mean that I have to arrange -- in
advance -- with my phone company to call Mexico?  How about Canada?
The UK?  Minnesota?  (Just kidding, Gopher State residents, just kidding ...)

> How big a part of all calling card frauds could be avoided if the PIN
> wasn't actually printed on the card?!

A lot.  But then, why bother with the card if you can't use it to make
calls?  I could understand not printing the number if we all had magnetic 
stripe readers built in to most phones, but that's not the case.

> The calling card business is rather new here in Sweden (two years),
> but still, we haven't had any frauds worth mentioning.  I think it's
> because of better security.

It's probably because you have few immigrantes from El Salvador, Russia, 
and God-knows-where (a small island off Tierra Del Fuego :-)  Seriously, 
this is why the telephone companies block international calling card
calls: the 'call-sellers' who use stolen calling cards until they
phone company gets wise and shuts down the card number and/or payphone
the 'sellers' operate from.


Robert L. McMillin  | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com
Surf City Software  | Purveying superior SCSI backup/utilities for the Mac
       Contact chris@surfcty.com for sales info.

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

From: rick@onramp.net (Rick Brown)
Subject: Re: Personal 800 Number Availability
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 22:23:25 GMT
Organization: Project Nemesis


In article <telecom14.281.11@eecs.nwu.edu> oppedahl@panix.com (Carl
Oppedahl) writes:

(Original conversation on how AT&T demands a physical address for 800
service snipped.)

> I think what one must not overlook is that what AT&T (and Sprint, in
> my experience) is very particular about is (1) asking the question,
> (2) getting some sort of answer and (3) entering the answer into their
> computer system.

> I don't think that there is anything about how the 800 service works
> that actually requires the customer to give a correct answer. 

Er, unless you consider billing you in a correct, legal manner as part
of making the service work.

The IXC wants to get a service address so they can calculate the
state/local/etc. taxes on your bill correctly, or at least as best
they can.  To do the taxing correctly, you cannot assume that the
billing address is the same as the service address, hence the
questions.

Now, if a customer wants to claim a particular place is the service
address, it is not AT&T or Sprint's job to check whether you are
lying. They will simply calculate the taxes based on the address you
give and remit the money to the appropriate authorities. (If you say
the service address is in New York, New York gets the tax money.)

You could use one of the terminating physical telephone numbers the
800 number maps to do some kind of sanity checking, but even at that
you are simply guessing. NPAs can cross states in border situations,
and exchanges can be in multiple local jurisdictions. Not to mention
"foreign exchange" lines which could conceivably be dropped anywhere.

Even with your physical address, the IXC may still have to ask which
county you live in since some zip codes cross county lines.

I think it is fair to say that this business of determining a service
address for taxing purposes is a messy one for an IXC, but it has to
at least try to do it. (Otherwise auditors start asking uncomfortable
questions.)


Rick Brown   rick@onramp.net

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

From: dsr@delphi.com
Subject: Re: Inormation Wanted on GSM in US
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 94 23:06:09 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)


<zareh@netcom.com> writes:
 
> Does anybody know if there is any activities in GSM for US? Is
> anyone working on implementing GSM or any Deviations of GSM in US?
 
The US equivalent of GSM is MIRS/ESMR, the Enhanced Specialized Mobile
Radio service just beginning to be rolled out by some of the major SMR
carriers.  The networks are based on the MIRS system by Motorola, and
are to some extent interoperable with GSM.  The network features
include the interconnect (aka 'cellular') point to point voice, Short
Message Service alphanumeric text messaging and binary packet data of
GSM, plus a push-to-talk private voice service (similar to traditional
SMR) for the US market.
 
There has been an _enormous_ amount of activity in this area, with the
three largest carriers covering something like 98% of the entire US.
The largest of them, Nextel, just got a $1.3 billion infusion from
MCI, on top of many hundreds of millions from Motorola, Northern Telcom 
and others.

 
David S. Rose   Ex Machina, Inc.
(Developers of wireless communications software)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #291
******************************

