Software Vault: The Diamond Collection/The Diamond Collection (Software Vault)(Digital Impact).ISO/cdr16/tc15_141.zip/TC15-141.TXT

Text File | 1995-03-12 | 27KB | 676 lines

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Mar 95 14:50:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 141

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    More on Hong Kong's Internet Debacle (Rob Hall)
    Who's the B Cell Carrier in Ithaca NY? (John Levine)
    Re: Is ISDN Equipment Limited by Switch? (Howard M. Weiner)
    Re: Is ISDN Equipment Limited by Switch? (Michael Berlant)
    Re: AT&T Offers 'International Redial' (Al Varney)
    Re: Paging Interface With Computer (Raymond Abbitt)
    Re: Caller ID, Privacy, and Cranks (was Yes, Yung'uns) (John R.
Levine)
    Re: Caller ID, Privacy, and Cranks (was Yes, Yung'uns) (Craig
Steinberger)
    Re: Caller ID, Privacy, and Cranks (was Yes, Yung'uns) (Benjamin
Carter)
    Re: PBS Rumors and Innuendo: Any Truth? (Richard F. Masoner)
    Re: Pair Gain Line Problem (Gordon D. Woods)
    Re: E(TACS) and GSM (Samir Soliman)
    Re: E(TACS) and GSM (John Leske)

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 America
On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 8 Mar 1995 11:08:27 +0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: More on Hong Kong's Internet Debacle


 From the March 8, 1995 {South China Morning Post}:


Police blame Internet raids on expansion
========================================

Rapid growth of the Internet was partly responsible for police raids
that left thousands of users with their links to the global information
superhighway severed, police said yesterday.

"In the last few months, the Internet area has grown wild," head of
the Commercial Crime Bureau (CCB) Chief Superintendent Neil McCabe
said.  "Suddenly a large number of unlicensed providers [came on the
market].

"We felft now was the time to do something rather than wait till it
becomes a very huge and out of control commercial enterprise.  It is
vital that the service providers operate on a commercial footing."

Last Friday, the CCB raided seven Internet service providers.

Computer equipment was seized and seven men and one woman were
detained for questioning and later released on police bail.

An estimated 5,000 Internet subscribers in Hong Kong were disconnected
as a result.

The CCB initially claimed it was acting on complaints by the
Telecommunications Authority that a number of Internet service
providers were operating without a license.

The search warrant used by the CCB to gain access to at least two of
these companies' premises stated they were under suspicion of
"maintaining any means of telecommunication without license" in
contravention of Caption 106 Section 8(1)(a) of the Telecommunicaitons
Ordinance.

However, police said on Monday the raids were related to an
investigation
into computer hacking.

The office of the Telecommunicaions Authority (OFTA), which is
carrying out its own investigation into the licensing issue, has
distanced itself from the CCB's actions.

Since January, OFTA has been looking into what if has publicly called
"grey areas" in the applicability of telecommunications licenses to
Internet access providers.

However, Mr McCabe said the CCB had received advise from Legal
Department that no such grey areas existed.

He said the primary reason for the CCB raids was hacking.  "We know
that hacking took place via one of the unlicensed platforms and that's
what we're investigating," Mr McCabe said.

The CCB move has sparked widespread criticism of the Government among
Internet users.  Industry analysts believe the CCB failed to consider
the public interest when it cut access to the Internet without
warning.

"I fully appreciate people's concern, but my view is that the concerns
should be expressed to the providers who have set themselves up as
legitimate [but were not]," Mr McCabe said.

Provider Hong Kong Internet & Gateway Services will be back in
operation this morning, a company official said yesterday.

The firm was yesterday granted a permit which allows it to restore the
Internet to about 2,000 subscribers.


end of article
                        -------------------

Locally, this situation is being likened to Liquor and Restaurant
Licensing.  The current laws and procedures would require that an
establishment be fully renovated, then sit empty for six to nine
months before licenses would be granted.  This, in a city with the
second most expensive rents in the world.

The government body tasked with issuing PNETS licenses (OFTA) says
there are "grey areas" in its licensing policies, but the government's
lawyers say there are none.

I wonder, if I shared the fact that two of our three Internet IDs have
been hacked (with the only licensed provider) if they would shut them
down also?!


Rob Hall     Hong Kong

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

Date: Wed, 08 Mar 1995 19:18:06 -0500
From: [e-mail] (John Levine)
Subject: Who's the B Cell Carrier in Ithaca NY?


I find that I'm spending enough time in Ithaca NY that I'm thinking of
getting a cell phone.  Oddly, there seems only to be an A carrier
here, and no B carrier.  This is the only part of New York with no B
carrier, and it's nowhere near as rural as areas farther north and
east.

So can anyone tell me who has the B franchise for the NY-4 RSA?  It
consists of Cayuga, Chenango, Cortland, Schuyler, Seneca, Tompkins,
and Yates counties.  NYNEX/NYT is the dominant wireline carrier with
some Contel and several tiny independents with one or two exchanges.

TIA.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail]
Primary perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies"

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

From: [e-mail] (Howard M. Weiner)
Subject: Re: Is ISDN Equipment Limited by Switch?
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 1995 09:36:46 -0800
Organization: Pacific Bell Strategic Systems Architecture


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve
Cogorno) wrote:

> I am in the process of converting my two lines into an ISDN line, and
> while on the phone today the PacBell representative said somthing a
> little startling.  She told me "You are served off a 5ESS (which I
> knew), so you need to buy AT&T equipment." I thought this was a little
> odd, so I asked her why. SHe said that AT&T ISDN equipment will not
> work with a DMS-100 and Northern equipment will not work with the
> 5ESS.  So, if I move to an area that has a DMS-100, I will have to buy
> all new equipment. Is this _really_ true?

Depends ... First, a small piece of the background in the ISDN saga.

CCITT (now ITU) built specifications for ISDN service a long time
ago.  Within those standards, there is much room for interpretation
and unique implementations.

In early implementations, AT&T and NTI went different ways, in access
protocol as well as architecture.  They, of course, also felt the need
to come up with unique features to distinguish themselves.

Since many of the RBOCs who are deploying ISDN must work in a
multivendor environment, these non-transparencies caused many
problems, customer equipment being one of the major ones.

Because of these issues, the major stakeholders got together and
eventually hammered out something called "National ISDN" (NI), as
documented by Bellcore.  NI is implemented in phases, NI-1, NI-2,
NI-3, etc., where NI-2 does not obsolete NI-1, but builds on it
without changing the basic protocol.  So, your NI-1 compliant CPE will
still work (all the NI-1 supported features) after the switch has been
upgraded to NI-2.  Depending on the particular feature and CPE vendor,
upgrading the set to accomodate the NI-2 feature could be as simple as
an EPROM change.

Keep in mind that because there were so many differences in
implementations between the major switch vendors, the NI-1 feature set
that could be agreed upon by them, is really a small subset of a
combination.  Of course, the feature set grows more robust in NI-2 and
NI-3.

PacBell is in the process of retrofitting their 5e`s and DMS100`s with
NI-1 software.  How far along in the process this conversion is, I
longer have contact with.

It sounds to me like the switch from which you are served offers only
Custom (Classic <g>) ISDN.  I think you might want to ask for more in
depth technical help than that first tier rep you are talking with.
Find out what the upgrade plans are, etc., etc.  I'm sure they can
hook you up with someone who will be able to help you.  If not, send
me direct email and I will see if any of my old contacts can help.


Howard M. Weiner    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Berlant)
Subject: Re: Is ISDN Equipment Limited by Switch?
Date: 9 Mar 1995 02:08:18 GMT
Organization: EDS Japan


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

> She told me "You are served off a 5ESS (which I knew), so you need
> to buy AT&T equipment."

This is partly true.  You need to by AT&T-*compatible* equipment.  You
will not need to buy AT&T brand equipment.  I have successfully
installed ITT Cortelco equipment, which is program-switchable between
AT&T Custom, Northern Telecom DMS-100, and NI-1 from the keypad.
Aside from this versatility, this equipment is more feature-rich and
user friendly.  For example, AT&T equipment will not pass call
progress information to the caller (such as "Number Busy" or "Number
Not Assigned"), but the ITT equipment will.

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Varney)
Subject: Re: AT&T Offers 'International Redial'
Organization: AT&T Network Systems
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 17:18:17 GMT


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

> Actually, as late as 1988 or 1989, there was no direct dial service to
> Syria.  You had to "book" the call with the AT&T operator.

> I am sure this is still used for the few countries which cannot be
> reached by direct dialing.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the majority -- maybe all -- of
> the still non-direct-dialable places in the world from the USA are in
> northern Africa and the Middle East. I think there are historic
reasons
> for this going back many years ago when many countries in Africa were
> colonies of France. The telecom in France held very tight control....

   While I enjoy banging on the French telecom as much as anyone, I'm
not sure that this reasoning accounts entirely for "non-dial"
countries.  And certainly not the current list (circa 1994):

   North Africa/Middle East                   Other
   ------------------------                   -----
     Somali Republic                       Afghanistan
     Spanish Sahara                        Burma
     Sudan                                 Easter Island
                                           Laos
                                           Midway
                                           Pitcairn Island
                                           Wake

   This excludes Cuba, which used to be "non-dial" except for City
Code 99, Guantanamo Bay.  (Or you could say 5399 is the Guantanamo
COUNTRY CODE.)

Hmm ... Could you blame Afghanistan/Burma/Laos on the French telecom
too? :) Then they would be responsible for all the non-island non-dial
countries ...


Al Varney - just my opinion - and I don't really believe France and its
            telephone empire are to blame for all the ills of the world.

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

From: [e-mail] (Raymond Abbitt)
Subject: Re: Paging Interface With Computer
Date: 9 Mar 1995 08:11:39 -0800
Organization: CCnet Communications (510-988-7140 guest)


HUANG Zhengqian ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does anybody know if there is a paging receiver that can be
> connected to a computer so that data received over the air can be
> sent to the computer?

Depends on what you want to do with the data. I haven't seen any fully
integrated system (I looked into this a couple of years ago) but there
are a number of ways to do it. Depending on the paging format used,
the decoding can be decidedly non-trivial, but if you are more of a
software than hardware type a modified pager can be used. If you would
rather spend money than time, there are a number of solutions on the
market ranging from stand-alone systems meant to control some device
to hardware/software packages meant for system monitoring and testing
(the application that I was interested in).

Check the mobile radio trade magazines. There are a number of
manufacturers
out there.


Ray

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

Date: Thu, 9 Mar 95 13:09 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Caller ID, Privacy, and Cranks (was Yes, Yung'uns...)
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


That Call Trace feature is available every place CNID is, and in many
places like California where it isn't.  Of course, Call Trace is more
work and less money for the telco, so they've done their best to make
it hard for people to use it, e.g. in some places you have to
presubscribe for a monthly fee in order to use it, they charge several
dollars per use (unlike the traditional annoyance call bureau which is
available at no extra charge), and they usually make you state that
you're willing to go to court before they'll do anything with the
traced numbers.

Another feature far more useful than CNID for stopping crank calls is
Call Block.  With that service, you dial a few digits after an
unwanted call and all further calls from that number go to a
recording. Your phone won't even ring.

Both of these services are unaffected by CNID blocking, by the way.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail]
Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies"

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Steinberger)
Subject: Re: Caller ID, Privacy, and Cranks (was Yes, Yung'uns...)
Reply-To: [e-mail]

·
Organization: SUNY at Buffalo CFD Lab
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 20:58:38 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Robert Levandowski <rlvd_cif@
uhura.cc.rochester.edu> wrote:

> Here in Rochester NY, the phone company (Rochester Telephone /
Frontier)
> has what I think is an elegant solution to the Caller ID vs. crank
call
> problem.

> To keep this service from being abused, there's a $1.50 charge for
> every call that is successfully traced.

Why should the customer (aka "the victim") have to pay in order to
prosecute someone who is violating the law by placing annoyance calls.
What's next? Should I have a major credit card available before I call
the police to investigate a break in?

IMHO, the cost for the call should be waived if the customer decides to
file a complaint.


Craig Steinberger     [e-mail]
SUNY at Buffalo, Computational Fluid Dynamics Lab
http://cfd20.eng.buffalo.edu/~stein-c/craig.html
send email with subject "PGPKEY" for PGP public key

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Re: Caller ID, Privacy, and Cranks (was Yes, Yung'uns...)
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 00:59:39 GMT


[e-mail] (Robert Levandowski) writes:

> Well, here we have Caller-ID, and per-line and per-call blocking, but
you
> don't need Caller-ID to take care of annoyance calls.

> If you get an annoyance call, you hang up, and then dial *64 (or
> 1164 if you only have a rotary phone).

> This will then automatically "trace" the number (or so it says in
> the phone book -- more likely just grab the CNID/ANI information)
> and report it to the Annoyance Call Bureau at the phone company.  You
> do NOT get a copy of the number you traced; but you can then call
> Rochester PD and file a complaint, and RochesterTel will turn the
> traced number over to the police for investigation.

Sounds interesting.  I have a couple of questions.

Does this system work even if the caller attempts to block his ID, or
if he is far enough away to defeat the usual Caller ID, or if he is
calling from a place with its own switchboard?

Do the cops feel obliged to investigate every complaint?


Ben Carter  internet address: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard F. Masoner)
Subject: Re: PBS Rumors and Innuendo: Any Truth?
Date: 8 Mar 1995 21:30:51 GMT
Organization: Central Data Corp.


This piece of professionally crafted rhetoric is indeed a clever bit
of writing, designed to make you react emotionally without making any
real arguments.  Anyway ...

> Power Rangers.  Sen. Larry Pressler, R-South Dakota and chair of the
> Senate Commerce Committee announced Bell Atlantic was prepared to take
> Big Bird and Barney off the government's hands and syndicate it to
> cable, satellite and television outlets. Americans could still enjoy
> Big Bird -- for a fee, of course.

Barney and Big Bird would obviously have a life if Federal PBS funding
were axed.  I'm not sure about the "for a fee, of course" phrase,
since we *already* pay a fee through our tax dollars.  I, myself,
enjoy listening to Click & Clack on NPR's "Car Talk," but I would have
no problems cutting funding for left-leaning shows such as "Morning
Edition."  There is *much* more to PBS than Sesame Street, boys and
girls.

[Notes about attempts by evil capitalist foreigner who talks with a
funny accent to compete with 'Merican networks, by Jingo!]

Did anyone else catch this?  This is propoganda pure and simple --
the writer is trying to pull the wool over yer eyes, yanking your
chain with Jingoistic "America First!" language to hide the fact
that this guy's a socialist.

> Perhaps the bitter battle over Big Bird and Barney's future
> makes a bit more sense now.

Makes perfect sense: "Capitalism is evil, communism is good."


Richard


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You sir, are going to be turned in to
Senator McCarthy for investigation based on that comment. The last
time I talked to Joe, he said I needed to supply a hundred more names
to keep from getting investigated myself.  Thanks for making my job
a lot easier for me.  <g>

On a related note, did you see the report in the papers a couple days
ago where some little kid goes in the kitchen to get his mother? He
has been watching television and is crying. He says, "mama, Barney
says he has to go away and I won't be able to see him any more unless
you send him some money."  I thought to myself, those #$$%# !!
Appealing to the little kids like that ... but the station which aired
that said later it was only coincidental that the plea to 'help save
public broacasting' went over the air at the time it did; they say
they are trying to keep the kids out of it. Sure they are ... they
know the success the commercial advertisers have each week on Saturday
morning advertising during the children's programs.  The little brats
see the products advertised, then harrass their parents until they get
their way and have one (of whatever) of their own.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (-gordon.d.woods)
Subject: Re: Pair Gain Line Problem
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 15:09:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, ssatchell on BIX <ssatchell@
BIX.com> wrote:

> The original question was why the "pair-gain" line restricted modem
> speed to 9600 bps.

> The problem is that most "pair-gain" systems use some form of ADPCM
> (Adaptive Differential Pulse-Code Modulation) which reduces the
> bitstream rate from the standard 64 kilobits/s to something smaller.

Most seems to be a bit strong. Although most pair gain systems can
support low bit rate voice (ADPCM above), it is a special option and
the equipment costs more. I don't think it is actually installed much
just because of the problems it causes. We should remember that many
telcos are moving toward "integrated" environments where the PCM is
not converted to voice at the local CO but remains PCM until the
destination end office. In this environment ADPCM needs to be
translated back to regular PCM with special hardware.

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

Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 08:25:34 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Samir Soliman)
Subject: Re: E(TACS) and GSM


In <telecom 15.13> Sam Spens Clason wrote:

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

>> GSM is digital whereas TACS is analog. This means your calls are more
>> secure but the coverage will possibly be not as extensive as it is a
>> newer technology (thats the way with GSM and AMPS in Australia
anyway).

> AMPS is on 800MHz, thus those radiowaves "travel farther".  ETACS, NMT
> and GSM are the same however and should behave about the same.  Older
> tech typically has better coverage since it's been around for a while.

It is not really older vs. newer technology issue, it is the
difference in the base station receiver sensitivity that accounts for
the better coverage.  Analog technologies have narrower receiver
bandwidth (AMPS 30 KHz and TACS 25 KHz/ 12.5 KHz) as compared to 271
KHz for GSM and hence has 10 dB better base station receiver
sensitivity.  CDMA on the other hand, being a spread spectrum system,
enjoys 21 dB processing gain that offsets the degradation in base
station receiver sensitivity and provides better coverage than alanog
and other digital systems.


Samir Soliman  QUALCOMM Incorporated

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

From: [e-mail] (John Leske)
Subject: Re: E(TACS) and GSM
Date: 8 Mar 1995 07:14:16 GMT
Organization: Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] writes:

> Alexander Cerna <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Can someone explain to me what E(TACS) and GSM are in detail?

> I'm sure lots of people can! Someone will correct the bits I get
wrong.
frequencies with a lot more than the 1000 or so in AMPS.

> GSM is a French standard which is (roughly) translated as Group
> Special Mobile or something similar. Someone else will know exactly.

GSM is Global System for Mobiles. It is a EUROPEAN standard. But I am
sure the French reading your post can understand your confusion
(France being of course the centre of not only Europe, but the world)
Of course originally it _was_ an abbreviation of the french name.

> GSM is digital whereas TACS is analog. This means your calls are more
> secure but the coverage will possibly be not as extensive as it is a
> newer technology (thats the way with GSM and AMPS in Australia
anyway).

Meaning that more time and effort has been spent so far providing
coverage on the analogue network. However GSM is generally limited to
35km range from the base station, because of timing considerations in
the TDMA technology. I have been told that on a good day, in the
correct phase of the moon, while standing on four leaf clovers, you
can get (some sort of) reception out to 100km with an AMPS phone.
[Accurate advice on this appreciated!] So it is easier to build a
larger coverage in laarge geographic areas with AMPs (and TACS for
that matter) - though the quality will suffer.

>> Also, this service provider that uses GSM says that they're the only
>> provider that's 100% digital.  One of the implications of this, they
>> claim, is that their phones can't be cloned as easily as the analog
>> ones.  Is this true?

<useful reply snipped>

>> Also, they say that analog systems are very prone to charge errors.
>> Is this also true?  Or are they just trying to scare me from going to
>> the other service providers?

The main charging errors that I hear about in analog systems are due
to fraud and poor billing systems. There have been many comments in
this news group regarding cloning and the use of stolen phone numbers.
The cloning issue is certainly stopped in GSM. Phone theft is still an
issue though, because SIM cards can be changed. So while there would
not be extra calls on your account, there is still a reason to steal
phones.

<snip the rest of the reply>

Regarding the comments of [e-mail] (Dr. R. Levine), GSM is
in operation in a large number of countries: over 15 european and more
than 40 worldwide. Roaming certainly is dependent on the existance of
buisness agreements between operators in different countries. The
GSM-MoU group is there to facilitate exactly this, and there is a lot
of emphasis placed on producing these agreements. However note that
there is a difference between GSM and DCS1800 - DCS1800 is a GSM
system running in a different frequency band. As such these handsets
can only be used in the countries (7 so far I think) that have this
system.


Regards,

John Leske

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #141
******************************