DP Tool Club 15/CD_ASCQ_15_070894.iso/vrac/tc14_269.zip/TC14-269.TXT

Text File | 1994-06-07 | 27KB | 661 lines

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 3 Jun 94 13:35:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 269

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 800 Number Billback (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Re: 800 Number Billback (Jonathan Loo)
    Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number (Jack Brand)
    Re: Help With Northern Telecom Meridian System ([e-mail])
    Re: Name and Address -> Long Distance Companies (Jonathan Loo)
    Re: Announcing New FCC BBS - FCC World (James Holland)
    Re: Box to Add Digits When Dialing (Russell Nelson)
    Largest Calling Areas (was Re: Itemized Billing in UK) (Brendan Jones)
    Re: Internet Through Local Cable TV Provider (Mike Perry)
    Re: S-s-s-stuttering Dial Tone Detection (John Costello)
    Re: Does MCI Transmit CNID? (Glen Roberts)
    Re: Help Needed: Fax/Answering Machine/Phone (Kathy Vincent)
    Re: Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range (Les Reeves)
    Re: Internet Access at Home (Noel Moss)
    Re: British Call Forwarding in 1960s (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: Performance of L.A. Cellular System (Gerald Serviss)
    Seeking Bellcore CID Specifications ([e-mail])
    Re: Need Site Name for Bellcore Standards (Marty Lawlor)
    Re: Cellular Billing (Gregory Youngblood)
    Re: 716 Now Split Between 7D and 1 + 716 + 7D (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:

                 * [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] (Paul S. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback
Date: 2 Jun 1994 15:49:29 GMT
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, another solution [...]

> [...] If you have some way to insure that calls
> to 800 numbers get routed over some minimum number of trunks, and always
> the same trunks then get some el-cheapo call restrictors and add them to
> those outgoing lines. [...]   Load them with the dozen or two dozen
> most commonly (ab)used 800 numbers, as noted in your personal copy of
> {Rolling Stone} and/or {Penthouse} magazine. [...]

> The best part of all will be the nitwits who come to you to report that
> their phone (or your lines) must be 'out of order'. <grin> ... you will
> innocently ask them what number they were attempting to reach so that
> you can investigate the problem ... they'll tell you (or if they have
> a few brains they will try to avoid telling you the exact number) and
> you'll clean them out right on the spot. <grin> ...  PAT]

This is almost exactly how we operate, except that our switch handles
the restrictions directly.  New numbers keep appearing, though ...

By the way, when someone calls one of these numbers belonging to an IP
that HAS restricted our numbers (as we ask all of them), the message
says something like "BECAUSE OF NON PAYMENT (or at your request) the
number you have dialed can not be connected.  Please try again from
another phone".


Paul S. Sawyer    - University of New Hampshire CIS -  [e-mail]
Telecommunications and Network Services                VOX: [phone]
50 College Road                                        FAX: [phone]
Durham, New Hampshire  03824-3523

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

Date: Thu, 02 Jun 1994 20:42:57 -0400
From: Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Number Billback


If you call an 800 number with billback from a pay phone, then either
the local telephone company or the owner of the property on which the
telephone is located will have to pay for the call.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is generally correct. In cases of
'Genuine Bell' payphones, if the phone is installed on a 'semi-public'
basis (meaning the proprietor of the establishment pays a fee for the
phone to be there and gets no commission on calls made) then he is the
subscriber; he gets stuck with those billback charges. On the other hand
if the phone is 'public' (rather than 'semi-') the person on whose
premises the phone is located receives a commission on usage and pays
nothing for it to be there. In those cases, telco itself is technically
the 'subscriber', and yes, they get the billback charges. But this only
happens if somehow the phone was not listed in the database. When telco
as the 'subscriber' in this instance refuses to pay the billback (and
they always refuse to pay), then the phone is quickly added to the OAS's
list of phones to which service is to be refused.   PAT]

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

From: uswnvg![e-mail] (Jack Brand)
Subject: Re: Need Criteria for Choosing a Phone Number
Date: 02 Jun 94 23:46:46 GMT
Organization: US West NewVector, Inc., Bellevue, WA


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Barry S.
Rein) writes:

> I'm looking for criteria on what makes a telephone number easy to
> remember.  Restaurants are supposedly willing to kill for a memorable
> phone number, so I wonder if there is any research or recommendations
> on how to select one, ie what combinations are remembered; what
> combinations are most often mis-dialed, etc.

One idea that works nicely is if your street address happens to be
four digits long, get your last four digits of your phone number to
match.  Very convenient, especially for small children in the
household who need to memorize their address/phone number.  (We did,
however, have to straighten them out when we realized they thought
*everyone's* phone number was their address :-} ).


jb

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Help With Northern Telecom Meridian System
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 94 08:34:19 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Lance Ware <[e-mail]> writes:

> 800 number into our system. Currently the line terminates at one
> phone, and goes unanswered if the desk where the phone sits is vacant.

Just input the CO line that goes to that phone into an unused if you
have one CO port on your meridian systgem. You need to program that
line to ring at the answering position. I'd be glad to help, how far
are you from Baltimore, MD?

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 15:33:45 -0400
From: Jonathan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Name and Address -> Long Distance Companies


The editor of the TELECOM Digest wrote a note to the effect that my
proposal to make customer name and address information confidential
would prevent the publishing and use of telephone directories.

I would like to clarify my point.  I want to prohibit the publication
of the names and addresses of customers with non-published numbers,
and the addresses of customers with unlisted addresses.  If the name
and address are in the telephone book, then anybody can have access to
them.  I hope that people will also respect (and enforce) existing
privacy laws.

This should make my point clearer.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it does make it clearer, however you
must bear in mind that the criss-cross directory publishers rarely have
non-pub numbers listed anyway. All they have to work with is what appears
in the regular phone book, plus whatever they are able to pick up from
other sources.  Generally if you have a non-pub number you need not worry
about being listed in a criss-cross book. Of course your neighbors *will*
be listed, and it is the easiest thing in the world for someone to call
your neighbors, claim to have an important reason to get in touch with you
and have the neighbors inadvertently spill the beans by giving out your
number to whoever asks on the phone. It happens all the time.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mr. James Holland)
Subject: Re: Announcing New FCC BBS - FCC World
Date: 2 Jun 1994 19:26:04 -0500
Organization: Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (FCC World) writes:

> The Washington, DC telecommunications law firm of Smithwick &
> Belendiuk proudly announces the launch of a new BBS -- FCC WORLD --
> featuring information on the Federal Communications Commission.  We
> feature FCC documents on-line (many you cannot find on Internet),
> texts of important FCC Reports and decisions (IVDS, PCS Auction info --
> on-line now!), Forums on hot FCC issues, free Classified ads and more!
> The best thing -- its free and without a daily time limit.  Give it a
> try at 202-887-5718 (14.4 baud)!

Is there not a (modem reachable) service ran by the FCC where you can
punch up a FCC ID number from a FCC Class B item and find out some
info about it.  I'd like to check on some off-shore PC's that I
suspect aren't quite legit as far FCC Class B is concerned ...


Thanks,

James Holland   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 94 23:10 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Russell Nelson)
Subject: Re: Box to Add Digits When Dialing


[e-mail] (Marco A. Pinones) wrote:

> I am looking for a box that could detect when digits are being dialed
> and add some digits at the very beginning.

You want a Mitel PAV+.  You can call Mitel at [phone] and ask
for the list of dialer distributors, or buy it from Dale Waton at
404-978-3426 with Hollis Group, cost me about $130.


russ <[e-mail]>  ftp.msen.com:pub/vendor/crynwr/crynwr.wav
Crynwr Software   11 Grant St.   [phone] (9201 FAX)
Potsdam, NY 13676

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

From: [e-mail] (Brendan Jones)
Subject: Largest Calling Areas (was Re: Itemized Billing in UK)
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 15:35:57 EST


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (John Slater)
wrote:

> I believe Greater London is the largest geographic calling area in the
world.

Then you believe mistakenly!  Australia has many calling areas larger
than this.  Much *much* larger!

The largest calling area in Australia is the (089) zone which covers
all of the Northern Territory and then some.  It is about 1700 km N-S
and about 900 km E-W in size, and has an area of approximately 1.55
*million* square kilometres, hence is about 6.5 times the size of the
entire United Kingdom.

The next largest is the (091) calling area in Western Australia,
centred on Derby and occupying the northern 40% of that State.  It has
an area just over one million square kilometres.

Despite these impressive sizes, they still may not be the largest in
the World.  If Greenland is one calling area, it would be larger still
at about 2.2 million square kilometres.  And what about possibly huge
calling areas in the north of Canada?  However, Australia should beat
all of these by 1997.

The current dialing plan reorganization in Australia will introduce eight
digit local numbers and reduce the number of area codes from 54 to 4.
These new area codes will dwarf the old ones in size.

A new calling area will be created covering all of Western Australia,
South Australia and the Northern Territory, an area of 4.9 million
square kilometres.  *20* times the area of the United Kingdom or
nearly 60% of the area of the United States.


Brendan Jones (PhD Student) Email: [e-mail]
Electronics Department      Voice: [phone]
School of MPC&E             Fax  : [phone]
Macquarie University        Snail: +NSW 2109 AUSTRALIA

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Perry)
Subject: Re: Internet Through Local Cable TV Provider
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 1994 08:11:40 -0900
Organization: Discovery Institute, Seattle


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Lin)
wrote:

> Is it possible to get Internet connectivity through a local cable TV
> provider? Has any cable TV provider around the country started (or
> planned) this kind of service?

> If this is possible, how does the bandwidth privided by a typical
> local cable TV media compare with T1 and other media types?

Technically, it's easy if the cable is two-way. Just use a chunk of
unused spectrum. I believe there is a cable company on the east coast
that has been providing HP employees with an ethernet connection to
work this way.  Intel and several other companies are also in the
process of developing cable-tv modems that initially sell for about
$500 but should quickly drop to under $200. That could give you an up
to 10 megahertz connection.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: S-s-s-stuttering Dial Tone Detection
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 94 11:32:43 PDT
Organization: The Internet Access Company


> Stretching my one phone line ever further, I'm considering getting
> voicemail from our local telco.

> My problem: I don't want to have to lift the handset to find out if I
> have messages.  Has someone come up with a box to sit on one's line
> and detect this (and flash a lamp or something)?

I believe the BelTronics Caller-ID unit also has a "MSG" display on
the unit.  You can get this unit at Lechmere.


John Costello   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen Roberts)
Subject: Re: Does MCI Transmit CNID?
Organization: RCI, Chicago, IL
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 16:16:54 GMT


Eric R Sandeen ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does MCI transmit CNID?

> I call from Champaign (IL) to Austin via MCI, and in Austin it says
> "out of area."  Anyone else have this problem?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is not just MCI. I don't think any long
> distance carrier at the present time would provide the CLID between those
> points.   PAT]

I get CNID from Los Angeles and Beverly Hills, from people who, in
those locations use WilTel as their long distance carrier. I am in
Northern Illinois. (Remember, California is not even a caller-id
state). Also, *67 before the number, does not block it from appearing
on my box.

I have get CNID from numerous other locations, but have not tracked it
down as to carrier specifics. Dialing to Michigan from here, via
WilTel, DOES NOT pass CNID.


Glen L. Roberts, Publisher, Directory of Elect Surv Equip Suppliers
Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,810 khz - Sundays 7pm central)
Box 734, Antioch, Illinois 60002      Fax: [phone]
Surveillance Hotline: [phone]  Bust the Bureaucrats: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kathy Vincent)
Subject: Re: Help Needed: Fax/Answering Machine/Phone
Date: 3 Jun 1994 16:36:47 GMT
Organization: Wake Forest University


Steve Cogorno ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Said by: Kathy Vincent

>> 2.  Can anyone recommend integrated equipment -- a three-in-one
>>     combination in which all THREE elements are quality?

> Does she have a computer?  I have a modem that is made by Promethus
> Products, called the Ultima Home Office.  It integrates 14,400 bps

Alas, the computer is otherwise occupied in another room in the house.
She's been thinking about getting a computer of her own, though, so
that's one approach to consider.


Thanks,

Kathy

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

From: [e-mail] (Les Reeves)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range
Date: 2 Jun 1994 09:53:26 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [login: guest]


Tawfig Al-Rabiah ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Do you know who sells this type of phones?  I need to get one to use
> overseas.

If you really are going to use it overseas, you should get in touch
with TeleDynamics in Austin, TX.  800 847 5629 or 512 928 1533

They carry the SuperFone long range cordless by Tamagawa.

They show various models with ranges of 4 km to 70 km.

BTW, the TeleDynamics catalog has lots of really cool stuff, at very
good prices.


Les     [e-mail]       Atlanta,GA      404.874.7806

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Internet Access at Home
Organization: SLACC STACK BBS - St. Louis, Missouri
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 94 11:58:38 CST


In V14, #263, Laurence Chiu wrote about his cost for SLIP access at
14.4 Kbps dialup. He estimates a cost of about $90/month for 7x24
service.  This is realistic. Washington University in St. Louis has
7X24 dialup SLIP access in the $1200 - $1500 per year range, if I
recall their rate schedule correctly. The system on which I access
Internet uses the university's 7x24 dialup UUCP access at $360 per
year.


Best regards,

Noel Moss

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 12:24:22 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: British Call Forwarding in 1960s


Randall Gellens ([e-mail]) writes:

> He picks up his phone [...] and dials three digits.  He says
> "Operator?  This is WHitehall xxxx.  My name is John Steed.  I will
> be away for the next three weeks.  Please forward my calls to the
> usual number."

> What sort of call-forwarding was offered by British Telecom in the
> 1960s?

At the risk of over-analyzing a fictional scene, I get the impression
he wasn't speaking to the telephone company operator, but to some sort
of government operator at the other end of a private line. I base this
conclusion on the fact that he dialed only three digits (I would have
expected contemporary numbers in the London area to be at least five),
and referred to his own number as "Whitehall", an inspired (if not
fictitious) choice for a British government phone network prefix. Had
he called whatever the local equivalent of 611 was (for repair or some
other service), I don't think he would have addressed the other party
as "Operator".

Just my tuppence, of course ...


Andrew C. Green           [phone]
Datalogics, Inc.          Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron
Chicago, IL  60610-3498   FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Serviss)
Subject: Re: Performance of L.A. Cellular System
Date: 3 Jun 1994 17:35:12 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


In article <[e-mail]> (John Nagle) writes:

> Er, cell sites are typically linked by land line to a central
> site that controls the system.  Only the last hop to the mobile phone
> is radio.  If you lose the link to the central site, even two phones
> in the same cell can't talk.  It's not a distributed system at all.

Some of what you say is true but, we have many customers that
exclusively use microwave systems to haul the cell to switch traffic.
In addition we have customers that use a combination of microwave and
leased land circuits to haul the traffic. Both of these methods can
provide improved reliability in the event of an outage and are fairly
common.  It is of course possible for an earthquake to take out the
microwave towers and then you are sunk.

Most cellular systems are distributed computing systems, there are
processors and databases in the cells and the switches. This is my
definition of a distributed system You are correct in the assertion
that two mobiles in the same cell do not make a path connect thru the
cell. That is what the switch is for :). I am not aware of any
commercial cellular system that has a distributed switching architecture.


Jerry Serviss     Motorola Inc    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bellcore CID Specifications Wanted
Date: 3 Jun 1994 17:47:18 GMT
Organization: Technet, Singapore


Can anyone tell me the document number for the specs. for Caller ID
protocol and how I can obtain them from Bellcore (Fax/Tel and Address
please).


Thanks,

Ivan

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

From: [e-mail] (Marty Lawlor)
Subject: Re: Need Site Name for Bellcore Standards
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc., NAS
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 16:21:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Kevin Hanson
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Does anyone know if there is an ftp site where I can find Bellcore
> documents?  Specifically I am looking for the Common Language Code set
> (CLLI, CLFI, etc) plus any TL-1 documentation that may be available.

Bellcore does not offer an ftp site of fulltext documents; they do
allow telnet access to a database of document abstracts.  Once you
find the documents, you need to order them from Bellcore.

To access the abstracts database, telnet to "info.bellcore.com" and
login as "cat10".

To order docs, call 800-521-CORE.


Marty Lawlor   Northern Telecom   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Subject: Re: Cellular Billing
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 1994 08:20:00 PST
Organization: The Complete Solution


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However John, why aren't cellular carriers
> treated like any other telco or long distance carrier for the purpose of
> intercompany billings and settlements. When we call between a telco one
> place and some other telco elsewhere via a long distance carrier, the
> whole thing is very transparent to the caller/called party. As we have
> discussed in the 'combined billing' thread recently, you can write one
> check to the telco and be done with it for all anyone cares. Why are
> the cellular companies not part of the process as a routine thing?   PAT]

Specifically because the cellular carriers are not connected with the
telcos in such a way to allow that to happen.  For the most part, each
cellular carrier has their own switch, which ties into a telco at some
point to process calls into the landline phone system.  There is no
data communication between cellular switches and telco switches.
There is work being done on connecting cellular switches together
nationwide, and it is coming, and from what I understand some are also
working on connecting into the landline phone system in a similar way.

The problem stems from how calls are processed.  For instance,
incoming calls might come over a T1 span, a circuit is selected, the
appropriate signalling starts and MF or DTMF (usually MF) tones are
sent down the circuit with the terminating number (in this case, a
cellular phone).  The originating number (the land line) is never
identified.  _IF_ the billing were setup to allow for this, an
agreement was reached with landline telco to work this way, and the
originating party were identified, then it would seem possible to run
off a billing tape for the telco for incoming calls, much the same way
that tapes are run off for roaming partners ... but that's a lot of IFs.

As to why ... the cellular carrier (in its infancy) was making money
on airtime.  It was easier to set up and maintain the system so that
the cellular user paid for his airtime, whether incoming or outgoing.
Some carriers have various programs where calls to certain numbers are
free, or calls forwarded to another number don't receive charges, or
calls to voice mail aren't charged.  Some don't.  It depends on where
you're located.  I know at one place, Omaha I believe it was, they had
a great deal (expensive, for it could have been a great deal ... it
was for the taxi driver).  $239 for as much airtime as you wanted ...
no per minute charges.  He had one number ... his cellular, and
forwarded it to wherever he was.  I know of other people that do
similar things because forwarded calls are not charged (except for LD
if they are LD).  Have the phone in the car (or in the shirt pocket)
when they got to the office, they'd forward it to their office.  When
they got home, they'd forward it to home.  Since forwarded calls were
not charged any incoming/outgoing minutes it didn't cost them any
extra, and their business cards were much simpler.  Phone and Fax.  :)

By the same token, I know of some carriers that used to (I don't know
if they still do) charge forwarded calls double.  Incoming AND
outgoing minutes.


Greg

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

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 94 20:57:42 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 716 Now Split Between 7D and 1 + 716 + 7D


I have been assuming statewide uniformity in these dialing changes,
and this is the first I have heard of a split of this nature.  Before
there were N0X/N1X prefixes or NNX area codes to consider, there were
indeed some splits in dialing methods, including in Maryland, where I
am now.  A Maryland motel I stayed in even had a card on the telephone
stand saying that all of Maryland now (it was referring to late 1987
and afterwards) was dialing its long distance the same way; N0X/N1X
prefixes had become necessary due to DC area shortage.

The idea does indeed exist that 1 + NPA + 7D should be useable for any
call within country code 1.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #269
******************************