DP Tool Club 15/CD_ASCQ_15_070894.iso/vrac/tc14_226.zip/TC14-226.TXT

Text File | 1994-05-18 | 24KB | 646 lines

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 14 May 94 01:15:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 226

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Privacy (Matt Metzinger)
    Re: Cellular Privacy (Mike Borsetti)
    Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts? (Ari M.
Footlik)
    Re: NANP and Switches (David Esan)
    Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip (John R. Covert)
    Re: Wireless Data Services (Pete Farmer)
    Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Caller ID With Serial Port - Where? (Dan Lanciani)
    Re: Cell One/NY Rates for DC and Boston (Brent Whitlock)
    Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (John R. Levine)
    Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Re: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack ([e-mail])
    Re: Direct Billing by AT&T (Brent Whitlock)
    Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers? (Eric Pearce)
    Cordless Phone Suggestions Wanted (Anand Gupta)
    Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book (Ken Thompson)
    Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate (Carl Moore)
    Caller ID Gets Me Jealous (Joseph Romero)
    Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary? (Christian Weisgerber)
    Re: Call Screening Device (Leroy Casterline)
    Re: History of Underseas Cables (Tony Harminc)

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:

                 * [e-mail] *

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: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** Article submission address only: [e-mail] **

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: [e-mail] (Matt Metzinger)
Date: 14 May 94 02:30:54 GMT
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy?
Organization: Fidonet: The Tranquility Grille (1:147/3038)


Friday May 06 1994 09:58, [e-mail] wrote:

> Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 changed all of this.

Does anyone know where the full text of this can be picked up in
electronic format, preferably by FTPmail?  I have no direct FTP
access.


Matt Metzinger     [e-mail]
[e-mail]
1:147/[e-mail]   405-755-6136 The Tranquility Grille BBS

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 20:19:05 PDT
From: Mike Borsetti, Cellular One/San Francisco <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Privacy


Let me add to the discussion that digital cellular provides much
higher privacy, as there are no publicly available scanners that can
descramble the "buzzing" generated by a digital conversation.

Additionally, the TDMA digital standard supports encription, which
will be available sometime in the near future.  Today's phones will
only need a simple reprogramming to take advantage of encryption.


[e-mail]     Cellular One/San Francisco

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:31:43 EDT
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Let Your Fingers do the Walking on the Internet
Organization: Penn State University


Many universities are running a mail re-director at their domain name
e.g. @PSU.EDU which allows the user to always specify that as their
e-mail address, yet have it forwarded to their preferred e-mail
system.  In fact, there may be no mail reading capability at the x.EDU
server.

Also, mail to that address, which specifies a non-unique name, will
usually produce a list of userids/names that are close matches (some
limitations do apply).  Likewise, FINGER access, as well as Gopher and
PH will usually be found at such institutions.

Our gopher can be found at info.psu.edu which has a link to our PH
database.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ari Micah Footlik)
Subject: Re: Government Regulates Number of Modem Redial Atttempts?
Date: 14 May 1994 05:22:56 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


[e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth) writes:

> Or the modem should detect voice and put out a AT-command like
> response ("VOICE") which would cause the comm software to cease, just
> like a "NO ANSWER" timeout. Shouldn't be hard for the DSP to detect
> voice.  Do common modems provide any such voice indication?

  Actually, I know that my old modem, a PPI 2400 internal, used to be
able to distinguish voice answers from data or no connections, but, I
don't remember how I got it to do that.  A number of comm programs I
have used have "VOICE" as a no-connect message option, though I don't
know if it is implemented.


Till Later!

Ari Micah Footlik    University Of Illinois
Champaign-Urbana, Illionis    E-Mail To: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: NANP and Switches
Date: 13 May 94 19:52:26 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(James Slupsky) writes:

> Mr. Lee also writes:

>> CO codes in the N0/1X range have been around for some time, especially
>> in dense metropolitan NPAs, such as 212, 213, 312, 415, 202, etc..

> I don't believe this.  The whole purpose of the new NANP was to change
> from NNX to NXX, and to allow NXX type NPA's.  All switch routing
> software was designed to recognize that an NPA was N0X or N1X, and the
> CO code was NNX.

There are 2910 NXXs that have the format NPA (N[0|1]A) in 62 NPAs.  I will
not include the NXXs here but the NPAs that have them are:

201   210   303   313 410   506   602   615 706   718   818   909
202   212   305   404 415   510   604   619 707   805   903   910
204   213   306   405 416   512   606   702 708   808   904   916
205   214   310   407 501   513   609   703 713   810   905   917
206   215   312   408 503   514   610   704 714   813   908   919
209   301


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 18:33:24 EDT
From: John R. Covert  13-May-1994 1836 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Handy Money Saving Cellular Tip


[e-mail] (John R Levine) wrote:

> If you use an LD carrier who bills through your cell carrier (notably
> AT&T), the LD times are all the same as the cellular times, meaning
> that you're paying for LD minutes you didn't actually use.

Well, we have the same cellular carrier -- NYNEX, and I have noticed
that this is _not_ true.  NYNEX only prints one time on the bill, the
air time, but the LD charge is correctly calculated for the number of
supervised minutes, on both roamer LD charges and local AT&T charges
billed by NYNEX.


john

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Farmer)
Subject: Re: Wireless Data Services
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 16:22:53 -0800
Organization: Tetherless Access Ltd.


In article <[e-mail]>, I wrote that I had noticed
very little posted to this list regarding wireless *data* services,
and asked if I was looking in the wrong place.

I have since received a couple of e-maiols pointing me to
comp.std.wireless, where I do find postings regarding wireless
services.


Thanks,

Peter J. Farmer             Internet: [e-mail]
Vice President, Marketing   Voice:    415-321-5968
Tetherless Access Ltd.      Fax:      [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers for Radio Shows
Date: 13 May 1994 16:27:39 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access


In article <[e-mail]>, Mark W. Schumann wrote:

> What Do You Know gives its number as 1-800-WHA-KNOW.  As in "One,
> eight hundred, wah-no.  Or whack now."

In the SF Bay Area, the local sports station provides a toll free
number (*SPORTS) if you are calling from a cellular phone via GTE.
And then the nationally syndicated computer talk show On Computers
(Sunday 10:00PDT) has a toll-free number.


Laurence Chiu             Walnut Creek, California
Tel: [phone] (work)  Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 21:31:43 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Lanciani)
Subject: Re: Caller ID with Serial Port - Where?


[e-mail] (John Harris) wrote:

> Try contacting  Vive Synergies Inc.,
>                 30 West Beaver Creek Road, Unit 2,
>                 Richmond Hill, Ontario  L4B 3K1
>                 [phone]   Fax [phone]

> This manufacturer advertises in the local paper as having a "CALL
> EDITOR II" for $199.00

Beware of this device.  The design is seriously flawed and Vive isn't
interested in fixing it.  Here is something I wrote about it a while
back when I (foolishly) bought one from HAL.  (HAL sells Vive's Call
Editor II, obviously ...)

The HAL box also has a fairly severe bug.  When a call comes in, you
see a lot of garbage characters on the RS-232 interface before the
actual CNID string.  Worse, what you are seeing is the box's echo
of garbage characters that it thinks came in over the RS-232 interface.
Sometimes it gets enough garbage to generate an ``Unknown Command''
response.  Chances are, sooner or laater, it will think it saw a
dial command ...

Details for those who care:

The Call Editor II (made by Vive) attempts to share the single serial
input of its 8031 microcontroller between the CNID chip and the external
RS-232 port.  It uses 1/4 of a 4053 (a rather odd choice given that the
other 3/4s appear unused!) for this purpose.  When the CNID chip detects
``interesting'' stuff on the line the 8031 switches the 4053 with one
of the P3 output bits (I forget which one) so it can look at the CNID
data.  When it is done, it switches back to listening to the RS-232
port.  Unfortunately, they are forgetting to clear their serial buffer
(or, at least, forgetting to wait a character time to account for garbage
in transit during the switch) so the command interpreter gets to see
random bytes.  The command interpreter echos these bytes to the RS-232
port and, of course, acts on them.  (The details here could be off
as they are based on a fairly cursory inspection of the circuit and
some of the ICs have their part numbers obscured...)

I tried to explain the problem to technical support at Vive but I
don't really expect much.  The first person didn't know what I
was talking about.  The second person denied the problem and added
the usual line that nobody else had ever reported anything similar.
The third person said that it is the fault of the CNID chip that they
use and cannot be fixed.  He insisted that all I needed to do was write
a ``software filter'' to ignore the garbage.  He did not seem to understand
that their command interpreter was seeing the garbage and could generate
spurious dial commands (or who knows what else).  He also said that
this isn't a problem with telephones in Canada (where they are).  An
``engineer'' is supposed to get back to me sometime so I can tell him
how to fix the firmware...

(Needless to say, the engineer never called back.)


Dan Lanciani    ddl@harvard.*

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Cell One/NY Rates For DC and Boston
Date: 14 May 94 02:09:18 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)


Does anyone know if there are any arrangements for roaming between
Ameritech (Central IL in particular, although Ameritech also operates
a cellular system in the Chicago area) and the systems in the
Westchester County, NY area (between NYC and Poughkeepsie)?
Hopefully, there is something besides the $3.00 per day/$0.99 per
minute deals...


Brent Whitlock  Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology
[e-mail] Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering
   University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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

Date: Fri, 14 May 94 01:25:00 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


I have bought stuff from The Wholesale House, 33852 Del Obispo, #45,
Dana Point CA, [phone], [e-mail].  They seem
mostly to handle electronics closeouts and overstocks.  Orders must be
prepaid by check or COD, no plastic.

For cellular phones, they have chargers, battery eliminators, cases,
and spare batteries, mostly in the $20 to $30 range.  For $120 they
have hands-free car mount kits.

I haven't bought any cellular stuff from them, since my phone is
permanenty mounted in the car and doesn't need any accessories, but
other stuff I've gotten has been good.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: Mail Order Source for Cell Phone Accessories
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 18:38:54 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

>     Hutton Communications
>     4112 Billy Mitchell Drive
>     Dallas, TX  75244-2315
>     214-239-0580  Fax-214-239-5264
>     800-442-3811

> They had quite a few cellular accessories.

I called, and the salesperson told me they were strictly wholesale and
would not sell to individuals.


Shawn Gordhamer  [e-mail]   Rochester, Minnesota USA

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

From: [e-mail]@cc.usu.edu
Subject: Re: Phone Line in Use Indicator From Radio Shack
Date: Fri, 13 May 94 19:22:00 PST
Organization: Mt. San Antonio College


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But a quick stock check at the local
> 'shack' on the computer there priced it at $12.99. It is just a little
> plastic box with a short modular cord on the end. It plugs into any
> phone outlet and sits wherever you place it. When a phone on that line
> goes off hook, the LED lights up. Simple as they come.

Well, how would I go about making one?  Should be simple parts?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Check out the file in the Telecom
Archives. Your question is one quite commonly asked around here.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Direct Billing by AT&T
Date: 14 May 94 02:22:39 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)


Jeffrey C Honig <[e-mail]> writes:

> Also, my wife just received a $20 check offer from MCI.  Is AT&T still
> countering these offers?

MCI recently sent me a check for $50 if I would switch back to them.
I called AT&T and asked if they would match it.  I was told that AT&T
does not do that any more.  They don't want to play that game anymore.

The LD phone company wars have been good to me recently.  MCI convinced
me to switch with some incentives such as $100 free calling on
weekends in one month.  I was convinced to take their offer and let
them switch me.  Then AT&T called me to ask who authorized my long
distance company to be changed.  I felt like I was a kid being
reprimanded by my Mom.  I think the sales rep could have been a bit
more tactful.  But at any rate, she offered me $45 cash and a promise
of 20% discount on all phone calls for six months to switch back.  So,
since I'm not really all that fond of MCI, I took it.  Now, I'm being
offered $50 cash to switch back to MCI in addition to the incentives
they offered me before.  I don't know ... I think I would rather stay
with AT&T.


Brent Whitlock  Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology
[e-mail] Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering
   University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 21:10:17 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Eric Pearce)
Subject: Used Telco/Test Equipment Suppliers?


Are there dealers for used telco and test equipment in the Bay Area
(or by mail order catalog)?

I'm looking for stuff like test sets, digit grabbers, T-BERDs, etc.


Thanks,

Eric Pearce | [e-mail] | O'Reilly & Associates
Publishers of Nutshell Series Handbooks and X Window System Guides
103 Morris St, Sebastopol, CA 95472  1-800-998-9938 or 707-829-0515

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

From: Anand Gupta <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cordless Phone Suggestions Wanted
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 03:56:24 GMT
Organization: Lafayette College


I am in the market for cordless phones.

I am planning to purchase around four or five phones for home use. I
would like some recommendations on brands. I am looking to buy
soemthing less than $ 100 each and need only minimal features. What
matters most is range, speech quality and reliability.

Brands that I am seriously considering: AT&T, Panasonic and Sony and
also Southwestern Bell.

I would like personal opinions preferably with model numbers etc.

Thanks a lot for your help. If somebody has any phones that he would
like to sell then contact me also.


Thanks,

Guptaa     [e-mail]

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

From: Ken Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest Readers
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 10:02:38
Organization: AT&T Global Information Solutions


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Terry Hardie) writes:

> From: [e-mail] (Terry Hardie)
> Subject: Re: Black Magic! Telecom Design Tricks - Free Book For Digest
> Readers

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You would write to Dr. Race to receive
> your copy of the book. I am reprinting this as a reminder since several
> people have written *me* asking for a copy. I can't help you!  Write
> to the author at the address shown for him at the top of this message.  PAT]


I did and my message bounced.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well then, I suggest you try Terry Hardie,
the person who sent the original message, per his address above.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 12:27:05 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 'NNX' Area Codes? I Think 'NXX' is More Appropriate


Actually, the history file does refer to area codes being generalized
from N0X/N1X to NXX.

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

Subject: Caller ID Gets Me Jealous
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 14 May 94 10:00:24 PST
Organization: Mt. San Antonio College


I hear of caller ID and I get jealous ... it is not offered here in
Los Angles, CA.  However, we do offer the services of call return and
call block.  Here is my theory ... if they offer these two services,
then the _phone numbers_ must be there.  Further more, they must be in
the phone bandwidth of 300-3kHz ... so the, if I had a scope, I could
check out the ring and notice patterns if I know who's calling ...
right??  I could then build a decoder ... am i just dreaming? They set
up the system, I'm just trying to use it.


Joseph Romero   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually yes, you are just dreaming.
Caller-ID has nothing to do with the ring you receive on your phone
at all. It is transmitted as data between the first and second rings.
No matter what kind of fancy equipment you wish to install at your
end of the line, the Caller-ID data will not be available to you until/
unless the central office sends it down the line ... an unlikely state
of affairs in California at this time.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 14 May 1994 00:55:00 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber)
Subject: Re: ZMODEM - Proprietary?


In comp.dcom.telecom William J Rehm writes:

> As I understand the situation, zmodem is indeed a proprietary
> protocol.

No. The ZModem *protocol* is public domain.  Note there's an updated
version ZModem-90 which indeed is proprietary to Omen Technology.

ZModem implementations follow various schemes, e.g. Chuck Forsberg's
Unix rz/sz are somewhere between shareware and crippleware.

> I have admittedly limited knowledge of this situation, but this is how
> it was explained to me when I contacted the author's company.

I think you misunderstood Omen's/Chuck's response.


Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber, Germany  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 17:43:32 -0600
From: Leroy Casterline <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Call Screening Device


> I am interested in purchasing a low cost ($30-$60) Call screener
> which connects to my phone.  Typically I expect it to block the
> ringing of the incoming call on my phone unless the caller presses in
> a security code using his/her DTMF phones.  I know somebody makes
> them. I will appreciate any information on it.

I have such a device, called 'Friends Only', which a client purchased
for me to evaluate.  The device seems to work as promised, and does
what was specified above.  According to the last page of the small
manual, the manufacturer is:

  KES Communications
  2029 S. Loop 250
  Midland, Texas 79703

They neglected to list their telephone number, a curious omission for
a communciations company.

One thing to consider before placing such a device on your line is
emergency calls.  These devices block ALL calls for which the caller
does not have the proper ID.  If the caller is calling to tell you
that a loved one was in an accident or to request permission to
perform emergency surgery on a dependant, you may regret your decision
to install the device.


Leroy Casterline

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

Date: Fri, 13 May 94 16:08:03 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: History of Underseas Cables


Some apparent anomalies in all three of these great stories may be
resolved by noting that Newfoundland did not join Canada until 1949.


Tony Harminc

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #226
******************************