Phoenix Rising BBS/phoenixrising.zip/phoenixrising/tele-dig/td14-084.txt

Text File | 1994-02-14 | 24KB | 549 lines

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 14 Feb 94 12:22:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 84

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Is NYNEX Tinkering With 411 Yet Again (Barton F. Bruce)
    200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers (Randy Finder)
    AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin (Eric De Mund)
    Re: AT&T Tape-less Answering Machine (Hui Lin LIM)
    Re: V&H Report - 15 January 1994 (Fred Heald)
    Re: Telephone Number History (Ed Ellers)
    Re: A Small Town in Wyoming (Paul Buder)
    Re: CLASS/Caller-ID/Bellcore/CCITT/ANSI Documents Sought (Al Varney)
    Four-Digit Dialing (was Re: A Small Town in Wyoming) (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: Internet Costs and Software Are Free (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area (Scot E. Wilcoxon)
    Re: Dispelling a Myth From the Past (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Digital Cellular Phones ([e-mail])
    Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company (Gregory S. Lauer)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Is NYNEX Tinkering With 411 Yet Again
Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society
Date: 14 Feb 94 02:25:37 -0500
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


A hotel using DHL/ANI-7 screening to ensure 0+ calls are NOT billed to
them now has a problem with 411 being intercepted and the operator is
asking for a credit card for LOCAL 411 access! She claims it is
screening code 69.

Apparently nothing has been changed on the Hotel's phone lines, and it
is something NYNEX is in the midst of implementing to 'fix' the 411
automatic call completion problems of recent months.

When NYNEX originally allowed 411 callers (for 35 cents more + the
cost of the call) to complete the call to the requested number, Boston
Hotels were caught unprepared, and the NyNEX product manager flew in
from White Plains to 'chat' with an unhappy room of Hotel folks.
Guests were getting more service than they were paying for.

Her suggestion for a quick fix at that time was to route all 411
traffic to the screened trunks many already had for 10xxx compliance.
That worked.

Maybe four days ago, any 411 calls on these screened trunks now are
NOT ALLOWED and route you to an operator who demands a calling card!
Note well that 1+ calls still go right through, as they should. The
Hotel SMDR/Call-Accounting can deal with 1+ and 411 calls. It is only
the 0+ where you can't control what the operator is asked to do that
*MUST* be billed elsewhere.

Moving 411 traffic to UNSCREENED trunks now seems to be ok, and they
no longer give the caller the option of automatic completion. OTOH,
MOST of the trunks are now screened and the few that are not are
primarily for staff use and are NOT adequate to handle a large amount
of guest 411 traffic.

So what is happening? Repair finally allowed as how some changes were
in the works to further automate 411 and 411 with credit card use. But
again NYNEX has done something unannounced that trashes service and
then denys any knowledge until one digs and digs to get info.

Does anyone know anything further about this? This happened starting
last week in Cambridge, and rumor has it that folks in Dorchester have
been hit, too, and that from a repair person saying "you might like to
know, but PLEASE don't say I said so".

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

From: [e-mail] (Randy Finder)
Subject: 200 "Exchange" Within 1-900 Numbers
Date: 14 Feb 94 11:39:24 -0400
Organization: Carnegie Mellon Computer Club


I was watching a show one late night and saw  a TV ad for a product
with a 1-900 number. What made me notice was that the number
was 1-900-200-QQQQ.
          ^^^
I know that "normal" area codes can not have phone numbers with an X00
in them, but how wide are the available seven digit combinations for
1-900 (and 1-800) numbers. I presume that 1-900-555-QQQQ is going to
get you 900 number information/ available for movies and TV to use as
fakes, but is for instance 1-900-000-0000 available?


Randy Finder

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

Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 23:31:19 -0800
From: Eric De Mund <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Says That They Can't Resolve my Calls' Origin
Reply-To: Eric De Mund <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communication Services


People,

AT&T calling card calls from my office in California to my parents in
New York results in a telephone number other than that of my desk
phone appearing on my AT&T calling card bill as the calls' origin.
When I telephone that number, I get an internal recording telling me
that that number isn't in service. (I work for a DOE/UC laboratory in
Berkeley.)

I called AT&T and asked them about it. Front line and second line
customer service tell me that there's nothing that can be done to
resolve the calls' origin. Is this true?


Thanks,

Eric De Mund <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Hui Lin LIM)
Subject: Re: AT&T Tape-less Answering Machine
Date: 14 Feb 1994 08:33:06 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard


Tan Ken Hwee ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I was wondering if someone would be so kind as to let me know how much
> (ballpark) the AT&T Tape-less Answering Machine costs?  The one that
> uses RAM?  It sells for about SIN$220 or about US$130.  Is this an ok
> price or should I wait until I go to America to buy one?  I'm aware of
> the voltage difference and will get a transformer for that.

The last time I checked prices at Fry's Electronics in Palo Alto they
were similar, but you would have to pay taxes there.  OTH you will
have to pay taxes here soon.  The major difference is that over there
you get a wider choice of machines (including at least two from
Sony) ...


Hui-Lin Lim - Singapore Networks Operation, Hewlett Packard Singapore
    telnet: 520 8763    phone: [phone]    fax: [phone]
      mail: [e-mail]
      DESK: Hui-Lin Lim/HPSGIT
     X.400: S=Lim G=Hui-Lin OU1=corp OU2=unix OU3=x400
            O=HP C=US A=ATTMAIL P=HP
            DDA-Type1=HPMEXT1 DDA-Value1=[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Heald)
Subject: Re: V&H Report - 15 January 1994
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 09:34:05 GMT


[e-mail] wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Esan) writes:

>>    You may wish to obtain certain NANP documents from the current
>> Administration, Bellcore.  In particular, the newest information in
>> IL-94/01-001 and IL-94/01-002 would be useful.  The former is "Status
>> of Numbering in the NANP Served Area" -- the latter is "Opening of 710
>> Numbering Plan Area (NPA) Code".

Whoa -- since when did they come up with NPA = Numbering Plan Area?  And
are they going to fabricate an equally ridiculous (actually, it's pretty
clever) meaning for NXX?


Fred Heald    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well actually Fred, I've heard NPA used
as an abbreviation for 'Numbering Plan Area' for many years. It is used
that way in this Digest all the time; always has been.   PAT]

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

From: Ed Ellers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Number History
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 94 05:57:53 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Sheldon W. Hoenig <hoenigs@
gsimail.ddn.mil>:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There were some exchange names which seemed
> to be common everywhere, while others were unique to some community. Many
> places had PLAza, and we had a WABash here in Chicago. But some we had here
> I have never heard of in other places: GRAceland, MULberry, TUXedo,
> INTerocean, VICtory, EDGewater and IRVing are a few which come to mind. PAT]

We used to have one in Louisville (home of Churchill Downs) called
DErby, and it was actually in the area including the racecourse.
Unfortunately this was at a time when we had 2-4 numbering; when AT&T
started its mass conversion to 2-5 in the 1950s they wouldn't allow a
prefix to be kept in this way, so the DErby numbers were all changed
to MElrose.  A few years ago we got some new NNXs in the 33x series,
but too far across town to do Churchill Downs any good.


Ed Ellers, KD4AWQ

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Buder)
Subject: Re: A Small Town in Wyoming
Date: 14 Feb 1994 02:58:41 -0800
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


[e-mail] (carlene lanham) writes:

> My question is this: is it possible to configure these new digital
> switches for four-digit dialing?  We're a small town where we occupy
> only the 848-2xxx, 3xxx, and 41xx's.  It would make things easier for
> everyone.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sure it is possible. The switch is just
> told to expect four digits only if the first digit is 2 through 9; to
> expect eleven digits if the first digit is 1 and some variable number of

I lived in Acton, Massachussetts back in the late 70's.  They had five
digit dialing there.  The adjacent towns were local calls.  The
calling pattern was 5 digits for Acton, 7 for adjacent towns, 8 (1+)
for the rest of 617 and 11 for everywhere else.  This was possible
with Acton as 263 and Concord as 369 for example because there were no
numbers in Acton of the form 263-69XX.  I may have the prefixes wrong,
it's been a long time.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 14 Feb 94 09:56:42 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: CLASS/Caller-ID/Bellcore/CCITT/ANSI Documents Sought
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]  writes:


> I am an undergraduate in Computer & Information Sciences at University
> of California, Santa Cruz.  I am studying CLASS services and would
> appreciate it if anyone could direct me to the following documents:

>       + Bellcore specs for CLASS services.

  Call Bellcore on 1-800-521-2673 (or 908-699-5800) from a DTMF phone,
wade through the Menu Monster to order a publication and ask for a
Catalog of Technical Information.  It will list TRs/SRs associated
with CLASS and their prices.  There are probably 50 documents dealing
with CLASS services, including some that deal with CLASS just via
ISDN.  There are paragraphs describing the documents, so you can
select just those of interest.  Typical prices are $30 (Calling Number
Delivery) through $75 (Automatic Callback).

   Those interfacing with what is commonly called CallerID over
loop-start lines should have SR-TSV-002476, "CPE Compatibility
Considerations ..."  (don't know the price, but should be about $25).
This is an update of the obsolete SR-NWT-002024.

>       + CCITT "Recommendations" regarding CCITT Common-Channel
>               Signaling System No. 7.  (Especially those relating
>               to the above -- is caller-ID info. transmitted as
>               part of a TUP or an ISUP?  If the former, is it
>               transmitted as part of an IAM or something else?)

   TUP is covered in Q.721-Q.724, ISUP is Q.761-Q.764.  Both support
sending Calling Party information.

     TUP messages:
   IAM with Additional Information (different than a plain IAM)
   General Forward Setup Information (typically response to Backward
        Setup Request)

     ISUP messages:
   IAM
   Information (typically response to Information Request)
   Pass-Along (containing an Information message)
   SCCP protocol could, in theory, also carry this information

   DUP (Data User Part, X.61) messages can also carry this information
in a wide variety of messages, both in "connections" and the facility
registration messages.

>       + ANSI specifications regarding Signaling System 7.

   American National Standards Institute, Inc.
   11 West 42nd Street
   New York, New York  10036

   The ISUP documents are in T1.113-1992.  A new version should be
available in early 1995(?), after 1994 approvals.  This document
discusses how Calling Party Number is carried, and how "privacy" is
indicated.  T1.112 and T1.114 cover the SCCP and TCAP protocols used
to implement some CLASS services (such as Auto Call-Back).  T1.401
covers the analog line interface.  Services such as CLASS are covered
int the T1.6xx series.


Al Varney

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

Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 10:35:59 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Four-Digit Dialing (was Re: A Small Town in Wyoming)


The ability to dial four-digit (or five-digit) numbers was
characteristic of step-by-step exchanges.  There are a few left in the
country, though NYNEX reports that they are finally rid of theirs.
Many small-town independents, and possibly some Bells, still have
them.  They last forever if taken care of, unlike, say, Crossbar which
wears out after 40 or so years.

In my book "ISDN In Perspective", I put in a diagram showing how
numbering plans were done in the olden days of electromechanical
circuit switching.  It shows an exchange, prefix 924, whose local
extension (line) numbers were in the 3xxx and 7xxx range.  The
exchange had 5-digit dialing for local numbers.  It could also make
local calls to adjacent exchanges 858, 385, 492 and 879.

It was all done by wiring the switch train correctly.  If you dialed
"43" or "47", it continued down its own numbers.  If you dialed "85",
it went to the 858 switch, which only received the last five digits.
If you dialed "87", the 879 switch got five digits.  If you dialed
"3", the 385 switch got six digits.  If you dialed "49", the 492
switch got five digits.

This type of plan places some restrictions on prefix assignments. The
dialed-digit string has to be unambiguous.  So the 924 exchange
couldn't open numbers in the 92 series, or "492xx" would route to the
492 exchange rather than 924-92xx numbers.  It is however generally
legal to dial the whole locall number (924-3xxx) since the switch
would absorb the initial digits.

When these switches were replaced, the phone company generally forced
seven-digit dialing, much to the chagrin of some locals who felt that
their small-town charm was dwindling.


Fred R. Goldstein   k1io  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 10:36:04 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Internet Costs and Software Are Free


Brian Behlendorf ([e-mail]) writes:

> ...I'd be more worried about email users subscribing to high-volume
> mailing lists than getting unsolicited email ads, which don't happen
> much anyways and probably won't.

Indeed. I think when unwanted correspondence arrives, the degree of
negative reaction varies according to the communication used and the
degree of personal contact involved.

With unsolicited postal junk mail, people usually toss it out without
further thought. Telemarketing phone calls are more intrusive, but
with a live person on the other end, one is usually a bit restrained
when telling them to get lost (at least initially). But heaven help
the person who posts inappropriate advertising on the Net; the
response from readers is downright vicious. The mind boggles at what
people will say in reply to unsolicited personal E-mail sales pitches;
the physical and psychological buffer provided by the keyboard, as
opposed to having a live person on the other end listening to what you
say, can make for the kind of remarks usually generated when someone
cuts you off in traffic.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.          NOTE! Ignore any "From" headers above
441 W. Huron              Direct all replies to [e-mail]
Chicago, IL  60610-3498   FAX: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards the viciousness of email (and
in this regard, many Usenetters are as vicious as they come) I think
a few large organizations which are discussing the possibility (well,
the eventual probability) of commercial email blitzes on the net have
already been tipped off about the (to put it mildly) 'negative' reaction
which some netters will generate, and that a relatively limited number
of netters will generate a disproportionate amount of hate mail as a
result. Consequently, they will probably employ DRDR, that is, 'do not
read, do not respond' techniques. Negative mail will go to dev/null
unanswered to avoid the need to use up *their* resources in attempting
to reply to people they assume won't purchase whatever is being sold
anyway. They'll only answer positive mail received, the thinking being
that sooner or later the vicious ones will get tired and go away.  PAT]

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

From: fieldday![e-mail]
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 94 00:06 CST
Subject: Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area
Organization: Esix Test Unit 1


John Galloway ([e-mail]) wrote:

> The dispatcher, even with Enhanced 9-1-1 could never know where your
> cell-phone is without asking.  Maybe what cell-site you are using, but
> in the fringe those sites can cover a large area.

The smallest cellular cell is too large, as the calls have to be
processed by very sharp lines.  An urban freeway is only a block or
two wide, and minor problems may be passed to your state highway
patrol or a county sheriff.  This depends on whether that freeway is a
federal or county highway (or private toll road?) and what the
agreements are between such agencies in your area.

No present cellular system can deal with the narrow division between
areas such as an urban freeway and an adjoining city street, much less
where the middle of a city street is the dividing line and how far
from your location you are looking.  That call will be handled by
someone who has been woven into the web of agencies who deal with such
boundaries for each call.  Indeed, even the right agency may have to
dispatch according to internal divisions such as precincts, dispatch
regions, or current location of special equipment.


Scot E. Wilcoxon  [e-mail] [phone]

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

From: Ed Ellers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Dispelling a Myth From the Past
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 94 06:04:49 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


David A. Kaye <[e-mail]> writes:

> Pre-divestiture there were numerous situations where the local BOCs
> were only partly owned by AT&T, such as Pacific Telephone (now Pacific
> Bell).  It was 90% owned by AT&T and publicly traded on the NYSE.  If
> any revenues had been mixed between AT&T Long Lines and the local BOC
> you can *bet* that the other 10% stockholders would have *screamed* to
> the Securities and Exchange Commission over it.

And don't forget Southern New England Telephone and Cincinnati Bell
Inc., both of which had a minority of shares owned by AT&T.

But didn't all the LECs -- both independent and Bell System -- get to
keep part of the billed charges for long distance calls?

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones
Date: 14 Feb 1994 08:26:25 -0500
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


Digital cellular phones digitize your voice in the phone itself, then
compress the signal by a factor of 3-20 before transmiting to the base
station.  This allows a given radio bandwidth to carry more channels,
resulting in less congestion. Other benefits include better voice
quality (see below), future high-speed data capability, more secure
conversation, and more immunity from toll fraud.  One characteristic
of digital cellular, however, is the small added delay in the coding
process, which causes echo to be heard by the cellular subscriber.
This echo can be eliminated through the use of a high-quality echo
canceller. Echo cancellers are now being developed specifically for
digital cellular, and can feature background noise cancellation also,
providing even better call quality compared to analog systems.  Some
service providers will offer you a dual-mode phone, which can operate
either in analog or digital modes, allowing you to use the older as
well as newer networks.  Future cellular networks are expected to be
all-digital, due to the bandwidth efficiency, network control, call
quality and fraud resistance they offer.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gregory S. Lauer)
Subject: Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 14:04:56 GMT


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

> The TCAP (Transaction Capability Application Part) of SS7 is used
> what makes the 'return last call' feature work.  It boils down to
> queries and responses between the originating and terminating switches
> (is the terminating party idle?; if not notify me when he is; etc.).
> TCAP defines a parameter called the 'call forwarding active parameter'
> which indicates if any call forwarding features are active on a line.
> If call forwarding or selective call forwarding is active, than
> 'return last call' is denied.  Here in Lincoln, we have DMS-100's,
> GTD-5's, and a 5ESS; that's the way the feature worked when it was
> tested in our network.

On the other hand if 'Call Forwarding Don't Answer' is used to forward the
call, the 'return last call' feature will not be denied and the call will
be forwarded if/when the phone is not answered.


Greg Lauer

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #84
*****************************