Phoenix Rising BBS/phoenixrising.zip/phoenixrising/tele-dig/td14-013.txt

Text File | 1994-01-07 | 29KB | 622 lines

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 6 Jan 94 09:13:20 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 13

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    MCI's ATM Communications Response (Dan L. Dale)
    A Tale of Two Dialtones (Paul Robinson)
    Surcharge for Tone Dialing to be Dropped (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Fax Services Wanted (Arlington Hewes)
    Re: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers (Robert L. Ullmann)
    Cable Channels and Satellites (Miles Thomas)

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.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** 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 gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. 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: Wed, 5 Jan 94 22:55 EST
From: Dan L. Dale <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI's ATM Communications Response


SUBJECT ARTICLE:        Setting the record straight on the Communications Week
                        article "User's Want Data Details for MCI" (12/20/93)

DATE:                   January 4, 1993

On December 20, 1993, Communications Week published a front-page
article entitled "Users Want Data Details From MCI".  This article
criticized MCI for not publicly disclosing detailed plans for ATM
service offerings.

Customers may ask about the article and MCI's overall strategic data
direction related to emerging technologies such as ATM.

Communications Week extensively quoted Paul Weichselbaum, MCI's vice
president of data marketing, along with many telecommunications
managers from a variety of companies.  Mr. Weichselbaum has written to
Communications Week regarding their news coverage.  His letter to the
editor seeks to place his comments in the appropriate context and
accurately explain MCI's approach to ATM. The complete text of the
Communications Week article and MCI's response is included below.

The article began by stating MCI "will renege on a promise to detail
its ATM plans by year's end, frustrating users who are trying to
understand the carrier's data strategy".  The article continued to
criticize our lack of an ATM switch vendor and the lack of service and
pricing details.

It is important that MCI assist customers in placing emerging
technologies in the proper perspective.

Switched Multimegabit Data Service (SMDS) and Asynchronous Transfer
Mode (ATM) are two emerging technologies that will play an important
role in the next generation of data service offerings from MCI.

ATM employs fixed-length cells to carry data, voice, and video at
speeds suitable for wide area connections.  This technology has the
potential to support new applications and consolidate traffic.  ATM
will obviate the need, at least technically, for the multiple separate
networks (such as data, voice, and video-conference) most companies
maintain.  This technology could allow corporations to build a single
enterprise wide area network carrying all their communications
traffic.

For better or worse, ATM is often looked upon as a networking panacea.
The reality is that ATM is one of several solutions that may or may
not be appropriate for a customer at this time or in the near future.

The following are key points to remember when discussing MCI's view of
ATM technology:

     MCI believes ATM, in its current state, is more of a technology than a
     service;

     MCI has found that most of our customer's current application can be
     served with existing data services.  ATM's full potential and value will
     be realized through the implementation of future applications;

     ATM technology must mature; standards must be developed and finalized.

     The technology is quickly maturing; product and hardware life cycles
     are short. The first generation switches are not adequate to offer a
     robust central office based service offering. MCI continues to actively
     work with switch vendors to influence second generation technology.

As noted above, experience has shown that the vast majority of
customer applications do not require transport rates in excess of
1.544 Mbps.  ATM is traditionally associated with transport speeds in
excess of 45 Mbps.  Although potential standards are being evaluated
for ATM below 45 Mbps speeds, other issues must be resolved before ATM
becomes a truly viable service offering.  MCI understands these issues
and is working with manufacturers and standards bodies to arrive at
solutions that will allow carriers to offer interoperable, network
based ATM service offerings.

Various trade publications have echoed MCI's concerns.  John
McQuillan's recent article in Business Communications Review ("Where
are the ATM Applications?", pp 12-14, November 1993) noted that
"...there are simpler and less expensive alternatives to ATM".  He
continued to state that "...while the ATM community has been focused
on ATM at 45 Mbps rates and up, customers spend most of their money at
T1 rates and below".  Mr. McQuillan is widely recognized as a leading
industry expert on ATM technology.

Readers of the Communications Week article may form the impression
that MCI is behind everyone else since we have not publicly disclosed
specific ATM service plans.  MCI has chosen not to tell our ATM story
via the media.  There are two primary reasons for this.  MCI cannot
control the media and their spin to a story.  In addition, our
discussions with vendors and end users impact the formulation of ideas
and thinking about what our ATM service directions should be; we want
to keep that information away from the competition for the time being.

MCI is not at a competitive disadvantage related to the understanding
of ATM technology.  MCI is actively participating in the ATM Forum and
other standards bodies.  We actively participate in the development of
standards and applications related to ATM.  MCI is also investigating
current ATM research and technical design issues.

We have implemented a trial ATM network to study ATM.  Our trial
network has allowed the engineering lab to study flow control
interactions between higher layer protocols and ATM switches.  We have
also found that the high speed access lines and bursty nature of
today's high performance applications such as file transfer and
distributed database applications can easily overrun small buffers
that are often found in ATM switches.  These detailed simulations have
allowed us to understand the impact of existing buffer management
schemes on TCP flow control mechanics and the resulting useful
throughput that can be achieved.

Although MCI has not announced an ATM switch vendor, switches from
leading ATM vendors have undergone evaluation in MCI's Network
Engineering Laboratory.  Testing continues on second generation
switches.  We have found that ATM technology is quickly maturing and
switch hardware life cycles are short.  To further the development of
ATM, MCI has provided feedback to ATM switch manufacturers on the key
issues we have learned.  Our methodical approach will allow us to
influence the technology changes in the next generation of switches.
This approach will ultimately be advantageous to our customers.

More than a dozen ATM products have been announced in 1993 - and more
will be available in 1994.  Hardware vendors interested in ATM
technologies include Cabletron, Cisco Systems, Motorola Codex,
Newbridge, Northern Telecom, StrataCom, and Wellfleet to name a few.
At the present time, most switch vendors only provide a partial set of
service characteristics associated with ATM (e.g. access classes and
the timing, bit rate and connection mode attributes, etc.).  Industry
analysts generally agree with MCI's view that ATM standards must be
further developed to address additional areas of concern to a
perspective end user such as the lack of flow control between
switches, no LAN bridging specifications, and a lack of quality of
service definition.  In addition, many service features offered by
vendors are proprietary in nature.  Only when these issues are
addressed, will the full potential of ATM be realized.

Once again, other industry analysts and periodicals mirror MCI
viewpoint. For instance, an article in Data Communications magazine
("ATM at Your Service?", pp 85-88, November 1993) noted that "without
standard service definitions, carriers may end up developing their own
approaches, a scenario that could lead to the same troubles that have
plagued ISDN: lack of interoperability and spotty geographic
coverage."

The press and general public is often unaware of the work MCI has
undertaken with ATM.  Our focus is on driving service related issues
with standards bodies and vendors; not to engage in public debates,
create unfulfilled service expectations, pre-announce products, or
provide proprietary service solutions in the absence of industry
standards.

The above is not meant to provide you with all the details on MCI's
strategic data direction or our work with ATM.  It is meant to inform
you that MCI is actively undertaking initiatives to develop expertise
with the technology.  MCI's pragmatic approach will allow us to
effectively develop, market and support the existing and emerging
services required by our customers.  These considerations will
ultimately prove to be in the customers' best interest.


COMMUNICATIONS WEEK  ARTICLE:

  Communications Week via First! : WASHINGTON MCI Communications Corp.
will renege on a promise to detail its ATM service plans by year's
end, frustrating users who are trying to understand the carrier's data
strategy.

  "I just wish I knew what its data strategy is," said Thomas O'Toole,
director of communications systems for Westinghouse Electric Corp.,
Pittsburgh. "MCI always, for some reason, has struggled with a data
strategy."

  In briefings delivered several times during the year, MCI has
glossed over its plans to offer asynchronous transfer mode services.
MCI officials have said the company will provide ATM services, but
they have given no details on prices, operating speeds, network
management capabilities, switching platform or classes of service.
That kind of information is already available from AT&T, Sprint and
WilTel-MCI's main competitors.

  "We clearly have a different approach," said Paul Weichselbaum,
MCI's vice president of data marketing.

  In May, Weichselbaum said that by the end of this year, MCI would
select an ATM switch vendor, begin field trials and provide service
details (Communications Week, May 31). It is clear that MCI will not
meet those goals.

  MCI now expects to select its ATM switch vendor during the first
half of next year and roll out a service late next year, Weichselbaum
said in an interview with Communications Week. He would not discuss
service characteristics or say when such information would be
available.

  Weichselbaum explained the delay by saying that MCI has tested ATM
switches, but found that they did not measure up to its expectations.

  SMDS Late Too

  MCI also has vacillated on its plans to offer a switched
multimegabit data service, which it announced in October 1992 for
general availability in mid-1993.

  During the May briefing, Weichselbaum said MCI was postponing SMDS
availability because of software delays. MCI canceled an SMDS beta
test that had been planned with Rockwell International Corp., Seal
Beach, Calif. MCI was supposed to reschedule the test, but has yet to
do so, according to Chuck Ramey, Rockwell's manager of network
hardware-telecommunications services.

  Weichselbaum said this month that SMDS will be generally available
in the first half of next year. He said users are trying the service
now, but he declined to name them.

  Users said MCI's failure to provide details on its ATM plans or roll
out SMDS indicates that the carrier's data strategy is in disarray.

  "If they want to be seen as a leader in the industry, they need to
provide information on [ATM] pricing and service levels pretty
quickly," said Blair Sanders, senior member of the technical staff at
Texas Instruments Inc., Dallas.

  During a recent interview, MCI chairman and CEO Bert Roberts
insisted that MCI has a strong data strategy. If there's confusion, he
said, MCI may not be doing a good job of communicating its plans.

  "Sometimes it's a market perception, but in this case, I think it's
a real issue," said Rosemary Cochran, principal with Vertical Systems
Group, Dedham, Mass.

  Details, Details

  The information on data services MCI recently supplied Domino's
Pizza in response to a request for proposals was "far less detailed"
than that received from AT&T and Sprint, said Daniel Gonos,
telecommunications manager at the Ann Arbor, Mich.-based pizza
company.

  "I'm not sure whether it's a learning curve with MCI, or that it's
just trying to be careful," Gonos said. "But it's clear, for whatever
reason, that MCI is behind everyone else."

  Jeffrey Marshall, director of communications for Bear, Stearns & Co.
Inc., New York, said MCI has done a good job articulating a broad data
strategy, but that the details are missing.

  Other MCI users said they are satisfied with the information they have
received from MCI.

  "I think it's been up-front since the beginning with ATM," said
William Johnson, director of communications at Woolworth Corp., New
York. "It wanted to make sure it had its act together before
implementing a program. I don't think it's at that point yet. We need
more details, but we can wait."

  Donald Moore, communications technology manager at Aldus Corp., a
Seattle-based software maker, said ATM is still far enough in the
future that his company can wait for details. Moore said, however,
that he was told that MCI already has selected its switch vendor but
won't publicly disclose its choice.

  Apparently, confusion over the switch vendor extends to Roberts, who
said earlier this month that MCI has selected an ATM switch vendor.
MCI representatives later denied that Roberts made that statement.

  Weichselbaum argued that MCI has a solid data portfolio, and that
the carrier has yet to find an application that can't be handled by
its existing services.  He said ATM is not necessary today because
frame-relay, SMDS and other switched data services offer users what
they need.

  MCI tries to encourage companies to consider data services like
frame-relay or SMDS, rather than ATM, Weichselbaum said. But MCI will
bid on request for proposals in cases where users insist on ATM. "We
would have to install switches if the bid were approved," he said.

  This approach bothers some users, who said they would prefer to use
an established network.

  "We don't mind being a test pilot, but if it's a matter of getting
into an airplane that's never been made before, we're a little shy
about that," said Marshall of Bear, Stearns.

  MFS Datanet Inc., Sprint and WilTel already offer ATM-based
services. AT&T has detailed its service, which will be available in
mid-1994.

  "There's no compelling application that absolutely requires ATM
today," Weichselbaum said. "We don't want to do it because everyone
else is doing it."

  Industry analysts said MCI is too wrapped up in its purchase of BT
North America Inc., San Jose, Calif., to focus adequate attention on
its data strategy. Roberts confirmed that the company was preoccupied
for at least two months working out the details of their joint
arrangement.

[12-22-93 at 14:59 EST, Copyright 1993, CMP Publications, Inc., File:
c1222056.2mp]

MCI RESPONSE TO THE COMMUNICATION WEEK ARTICLE:

MCI's Paul Wiechselbaum, vice-president data marketing, wrote the
following letter to the editors of Communications Week.  The letter
will probably be published in the 1/10/94 issue.

     MCI takes great exception to the tone and content of your
December 20, 1993 article, "Users Want Data Details From MCI."  You
quote me as saying "we clearly have a different approach [to ATM],"
without giving your readers the opportunity to understand or evaluate
that approach.

     First, MCI approaches ATM not as a high technology company, but
rather as a service company; we employ high tech products in the
provisioning of our services.  We want to offer data services to the
marketplace that will help customers compete more effectively.  In our
opinion, ATM in its current state is more a technology than a service;
it's a fast-bit pipe using ATM multiplexing.  CommWeek editors seemed
to agree with this point, given the November 22, 1993 editorial,
"Bridging the Gap of ATM Theory and Reality." Our market research
shows that it will be a couple of years before the multimedia promise
of ATM can be fully deployed as a broadly available, economically
compelling and completely standards-based service.

     We've found that most of our customers' current applications can
be served with existing services.  In other words, ATM's full
potential is required for future market applications and much less so
for current ones.  At the same time, our discussions with ATM switch
vendors over the past three years have convinced us that the
technology is maturing quickly and product life cycles are short.
With first generation switch technology only a pale imitation of what
ATM could be and the market still immature, we are taking the time to
try to influence second generation technological changes to our
customers' advantage.

    We believe we can enter the market with a much richer ATM service
well before it gains much momentum and the longer we can wait before
making this investment, the more likely it is that a particular vendor
of ATM technology will have something better to offer than we've seen
to date.

     Our experience with frame relay reflects the merits of such an
approach.  While we were among the last to offer a commercial frame
relay service, the fact that our HyperStream Frame Relay continues to
be unique in the marketplace a full 18 months after introduction -- with
its sustained burst capabilities, usage and mileage sensitive pricing,
and asymmetrical provisioning -- is telling.  Such capabilities give our
customers greater control and ultimately, save money over competitive
offerings.  HyperStream's success has convinced us that our market
strategy is on target.  Given this experience, we don't feel compelled
to mimic other carriers in the ATM arena; our focus is on the market.

     Your broad generalization that "users want data details from MCI"
is misleading.  CommWeek knows very well that MCI's data strategy is
much broader than just ATM.  And we are certainly telling customers
what our ATM directions are and how these fit with our overall data
plans.  However, to date we've chosen to do this in private customer
briefings. These briefings serve to validate our current conclusions
on ATM services while enabling us to protect competitive advantages we
gain as a result of those discussions.

     MCI clearly does have a different approach to ATM.  We believe
it's a methodical, realistic, customer-oriented and responsible one.
It reflects the market window available to us as well as the
technology cycles we're seeing and shaping. The feedback from our
customers has been both positive and constructive.  It's unfortunate
that our rationale for pursuing this different strategy was not fully
represented in the story.


Paul J. Weichselbaum
Vice President    Data Marketing

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

Date: Thu, 6 Jan 1994 01:00:49 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Tale of Two Dialtones
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


It was the best of dials, it was the worst of dials ...

I originally had four phone lines coming into my house.  The family
member who needed the fourth line didn't need it any longer, so I had
it shut off.

Recently, another relative had to move in with us and wanted their own
phone line.  Since I had a circuit left I called the phone company to
have them turn that on ($47.00) from the office instead of their
paying another $65.00 to have another circuit installed (when the new
wire was installed, the old wire, which the installer discovered was
spliced, was pulled and replaced with a six-pair cable; see "Dial Tone
is No Extra Charge" printed last year.)

I do my own wiring so I had put in the wire and turn on was scheduled
for the 5th.  Earlier in the day I had made a call from my computer
line.  I went to work and called home to check up on my mother who is
recovering from Cancer.

The phone doesn't answer.  This is unusual.  Over several hours I
tried it, off and on, and got no answer.  Tried calling the special
number in the hall (it's used for my 800 number) no answer.  I was
worried a little, so when I got home I discovered nothing unusual.  I
picked up the phone and got dial tone.  I did, however, discover later
that the hall phone / answering machine's power had become unplugged,
which meant it wouldn't even allow me to dial out.  Plugged back in it
gave me dial tone.  Note this is the electrical plug, in addition to
the telephone line.

I went down to the basement demarc and finished wiring the new phone
line.  No problem and I get a dial tone.  I dialed my home number and
it was busy.  Dialed the special number that runs to the hall phone
and it just rang (as stated above).  I must have, in running the 50 or
so feet of wire down to the basement, miswired the phone onto my line.
But since each circuit goes through its own gas fuse, I thought I had
done it correctly.

I left the phone on a busy signal and went to the other phone.  Dial
tone.  All I did was hook up the new phone.  This doesn't make sense.
Then it hit me.  I hung up the new phone, went back to the regular
phone, and dialed the regular number.  The new phone rang.

Went upstairs, got the paper with the new phone number C&P supplied me
when I placed the order.  Dialed that number and my old phone rang! I
never touched my original connection, so the problem is with the phone
company.

This is what happened: in ordering the new service, the phone company
put the new service on the original number, and put our old service on
the new line!

Well, tomorrow morning I'll call and make a stink about it.  There are
at least six or more outlets running wires into the original
connection for me to change them all, so I'll complain and insist they
fix it.  Beyond that, for all I know they may charge me for moving my
phone service to a different pair!

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

Date: Thu, 6 Jan 94 07:54:38 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Surcharge for Tone Dialing to be Dropped


It was announced yesterday that Southern Bell has agreed to drop the
U$1.00/line/month surcharge for tone dialing in the Orlando area that
had been in effect since the introduction of touch-tone dialing
service.

It is not known exactly when this change will take place other than it
is expected "within 60 days".


Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: Arlington Hewes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Fax Services Wanted
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 1994 19:48:15 -0800


> Greetings, I am looking for a low cost service which I can use to send
> faxes around the world. I have prime requirements to send fax to NA
> and the Asia Pacific regions.

Send a note to [e-mail] and check out the TPC.INT project.


mtr

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 1994 04:03:45 GMT


[e-mail] (Toby Nixon) writes:

> right.  A "+" and the country code, a space, the city code (optionally
> enclosed within parenthesis to indicate that it is optionally dialed
> if you're within the same city code), then another space, and the

No, not exactly. Numbers in parens should not appear in the + form.
If they do, they mean _do_not_ dial this to the international caller:
a London number might be [phone].

BTW: IMHO, BT does a disservice to the UK consumer by always listing
city codes with the leading "0"; the consumer is going to have trouble
understanding that the "0" is an access code, not part of the city
code.

I think the +1 code for the NANP being the same as the 1- access code
for long distance within the NANP isn't a coincidence. ATT invented
the international plan ...

When I first saw country codes in the telephone book years ago, I
wondered why the USA code wasn't listed. (Some droid figured: "but you
don't NEED that from the USA". Never mind businesses trying to figure
out how to list themselves.) To this day the phone books list places
like Izmir, Turkey (+851 according to NYNEX Boston 1993) but omit the
USA and Canada.  No wonder most ordinary people don't *understand* the
system!

Back then I called the operator: "What is the country code for the USA?"

Oper: "Sir, you don't NEED the country code to dial the USA."

Me: "sigh, can I have the overseas operator?"

Overseas op: "Sir, you don't NEED ..."

Me: "may I have your supervisor please?"

Super: "hmmm, I don't know that. Why would you need it?"

Me: "suppose I want to place an ad in an international magazine?"

Super: "hmmm"

Me: "can we ask the overseas operator in, say, London?"

Super: "sure!"

London: "It is ONE. But why would YOU need it? ..."


Robert Ullmann          [e-mail]     [phone]

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

Date: 05 Jan 94 23:07:02 EST
From: Miles Thomas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cable Channels and Satellites


[e-mail] (Lars Poulsen) wrote

> The largest satellite operator (German ASTRA which has a near monopoly
> on service to Germany, Scandinavia and I think Be-ne-lux as well) has
> two birds in the same nominal slot (and a third one planned) so that
> you can get 24 channels without re-aiming the dish. This has allowed
> the sale of very inexpensive receiver systems (I have seen a low end
> system with 18" dish on sale for USD 155 including 25% VAT!! A normal
> price is about twice that for a system with built-in descrambler with
> 2 "smart card" slots). This kind of pricing for "wireless cable" led
> to sharp reductions on cable service prices.

The ASTRA sats also broadcast to the UK, Spain etc etc.  Its actually
owned by a company in Luxembourg, SES.  The two birds are actually
0.25 of a degree apart, which is close enough for a dish toi see both
(it has to be within 1 degree to see it).  I understand that they plan
to add a third, ie one at 0.25, one at 0.5 and one a 0.75.

The only reason that they aren't spaced any closer is that it would
require constant manoeuvering to stop the sats hitting each other as
they wiggle slightly in orbit.

Just for you info, the Marcopolo high power sat used for BSB with the
infamous dinner plate or sqarial antennae has been retargeted onto
Scandanavia for their DBS services.


Miles Thomas

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #13
*****************************