TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 May 95 09:50:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 219 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MFS Advertising Irony (Dave Levenson) Re: Local Competition Epiphany (Michael D. Sullivan) BRI to Bipolar T1 (Joseph Hagan) PayPhone (COCOT and RBOC) Newsgroup (voices@unix.asb.com) Cross-Border Local Calls (Dale Crouse) CFP: Special Issue of Journal of Symbolic Computation (Mehmet Orgun) Fiber Loops and Coax Converters (Theodore F. Vaida) Looking For Integrated E1/V.34/PPP - TCP/IP/Ethernet Solution (P. Nikander) ThinkPad Modem in India (S. Arora) Internet in Dubai? (Sandy Kyrish) Regulation of PA Cable and Carriers (Theodore F. Vaida) Challenging Phone Bill (Grady Ward) International Telephone Number Length - Maximum Allowed (David E A Wilson) 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: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * 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: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The radio advertisement for MFS was a clever parody. It featured an automated attendant answering for your local telephone company, with a bored voice intoning (paraphrased a bit): "This is your telephone company... If you need repair service, press 1 If you need to discuss your bill, please take a number If you don't have a telephone at all, please call later..." This was contrasted with an apparently live and happy-sounding voice answering: "MFS, Can I help you?" This was followed by a the suggestion that you are no-longer limited to one local telephone company, and an invitation to call 800-669-6374 for more information. Later that day, I called the 800 number in the ad. Just like on the radio, a live human being answered the phone: "MFS, Can I help you?" "Good morning," I replied, "can you tell me if you offer local service in Morris County, New Jersey?" "No, sir, I can't. You'll have to call our New Jersey office at 201-938-7700 for that information" I thanked the MFS live attendant, and called the 201 number she had given me. That phone was answered by another live human being: "MFS, Can I help you?" "Good morning, can you tell me if you serve Morris County, New Jersey?" "No, sir, you'll have to call our Lyndhurst office at 201-507-8100 about service there." I called the Lyndhurst number. "MFS, Can I help you?" When I repeated my question about local service (for the third time, now) the Lyndhurst live body transferred my call to a sales representative. The sales representative answered: "MFS, this is Christine, can I help you?" "Good morning, can you tell me if you serve Morris County?" I asked, by now somewhat amused by the whole process. This time, my question was answered in the affirmative. The rep then put me on HOLD while going to look something up. While I was on hold, another party said: "MFS, Can I help you" "I was talking with Christine," I told her. "Oh, just a minute..." The call was then answered by Christine's voice mail greeting (with no automated-attendant menu options). I left my number and hung up. Christine called me back after about five minutes. So what did I learn from all of this? In case anybody else in this area wants to know, MFS doesn't actually offer local dialtone in Morris County (but some day soon, according to Christine). They do offer intra- and inter-LATA toll service, accessed by a 10xxx code or (for inter-LATA calls) by becoming your default inter-exchange carrier. Their rates were somewhat higher than we now pay another carrier. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That sounds like sort of cheap-shot advertising in my opinion. As evidenced by your experience, MFS has no idea at all what large volume, massive amounts of inbound calling is all about, as would your local telco business office. Telco handles a hundred times the volume of calls inbound to their various business offices in a day that MFS gets in a week, and probably does so with much more effeciency -- despite their voicemail front end, or perhaps because of it -- than MFS with their telling you to make several calls all over the county to get what you wanted. Note how they advertised on your local radio station, then are completely unprepared to accept your call and deal with it at the number they announced. PAT] ------------------------------ Donald E. Kimberlin <0004133373@mcimail.com> writes: > For the past four days, full-page ads have appeared in the > Charlotte, North Carolina {Observer}, telling of a coalition of > companies that seek particular objectives in U.S. Federal legislation > concerning local telephone competition. Those who remember "how it > used to be" will find some of the statements no less than an > astounding change from what AT&T once used to say to the world, in > addition to noting AT&T's recognition of entities it would once have > hoped to ignore and perhaps even hogtie to death. It certainly seems > AT&T has discovered a new reality, and now has joined in to promote a > new reality into local telephone business in the U.S. Welcome to the brave new world of "grass roots" politics. The ad found its way into the Charlotte paper to generate letters to Fritz Holings, who is the senior Democrat on the Senate Communications Subcommittee, from his home ground. And the same AT&T that is the driving force behind the "coalition" sponsoring this ad had its chairman testify last year before Sen. Metzenbaum's hearing on media megamergers that local telephone competition was virtually impossible, and told the FCC that local exchange service was a "natural monopoly." In other words, they are perfectly willing to let the Bells into interexchange competition only when local competition has fully occurred, a condition it has publicly equated with Satan skidding on ice. If local competition is such an impossibility, why are they now lobbying for it? Makes one wonder about how far you can throw any press release (or testimony) by AT&T. Michael D. Sullivan | INTERNET E-MAIL TO: mds@access.digex.net Bethesda, Md., USA | also avogadro@well.com, 74160.1134@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Boy do I have a good one ... I have been looking for this one for two or three months: I am looking for a mux/imux/csu that will allow me to connect two Telco-type, vanilla flavored, generic, T1 channel banks (ESF, voice and LS data) using 3+ ISDN BRI 2B+D lines as opposed to leased line T1 or Switched 384K. (My total bandwidth requirement is only 384KBps.) I have found lots of gear that will do V.35, RS-449, EIA 530 at 1.544; but I need something that will synch something as unglamorous as channel banks. I thought this was a piece of cake (but it's Devil's food). Any help or ideas would be greatly appreciated. Joseph Hagan Full Circle Communications email: haganj@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ Hello All, I was reading through this news-group and a thought popped into my head. I wanted to know if there was a news-group or a mailing list that anyone knew of designed specifically for those interested in the payfone (AOS, COCOT, etc) aspect of telecom. If there isn't, I would like to know how many people might be interested in alt.coin-phone or comp.dcom.telecom.coin, or something like that. adam VOICES@UNiX.ASB.COM [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems to me you can stretch things too thin here. Unless you are interested in adding still one or two more to the total number of 'newsgroups' circulating each day (what is it up to now, about seven thousand?) it hardly seems worthwhile to parse this topic down into even smaller groups, giving the spammers still one more place to post their get-rich-in-thirty-days and sell-long-distance service at home messages. PAT] ------------------------------ I noticed in the FAQ file for TELECOM Digest that cross border toll-free dialing is available from some points in Maine to New Brunswick, and from a New York community to Quebec. At one time I new of toll-free dialing from Portal, North Dakota to North Portal, Saskatchewan. Does anyone know if this is still true? Also, I believe there was toll-free dialing from El Paso, Texas to Juarez, Mexico. I'm curious if this is still in effect. The FAQ article also makes reference to cross-border dialing from Point Roberts, Washington to Vancouver, BC. I believe that used to be offered on an unregulated basis by BC Tel, but the franchise was sold to Whidby Island Telephone in the 1980's, and they instituted a toll charge for cross-border calling. Prior to the sale, US 800 numbers were available by dialing '0' and asking the (Canadian) operator for the number. Incidently, Point Roberts used to get its water from BC too, and Canadian Currency is the primary medium of exchange there. Hyder, Alaska, like Point Roberts is intimately tied to its Canadian Neighbor, Stewart, BC. Does anyone know how they get their phone service? (I believe the RCMP provides the law enforcement there.) Dale Crouse Internet: dcrouse@crl.com voice: (206) 545-6933 fax: (800) 755-1380 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also, what is the relationship between Detroit, Michigan and Windsor, Ontario where telephone calls are concerned. I don't think it is strictly within a local zone, but isn't it handled like a 'suburban' point or for a small extra fee depending on the type of monthly service you have? PAT] ------------------------------ The Journal of Symbolic Computation ----------------------------------- [Editor-in-Chief: Bruno Buchberger] Special Issue on Executable Temporal Logics Guest Editors: Michael Fisher, Shinji Kono, Mehmet Orgun Call For Papers --------------- BACKGROUND: Logical representations have been widely used in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence. In recent years, particularly with the advent of languages such as Prolog, the direct execution of such representations has been shown to be both feasible and useful. Logic-based languages have been used, not only for applications such as the animation of logical specifications, the characterisation of database queries and knowledge representation, but also as high-level programming languages in their own right. However, as the problems tackled have become more complex, the requirement for more powerful logical representations has been growing. In particular, since the concept of time is of central importance to an increasingly wide range of applications, including the representation of time-dependent data and the specification and verification of concurrent and distributed systems, many logics incorporating temporal notions are being developed and applied. It is not surprising, therefore, that executable temporal logics have been proposed in order to provide system developers with access to these, more powerful, logical techniques. Just as the development of sophisticated, and relatively efficient, theorem-proving techniques for first-order logic led to executable forms, such as Prolog, so the development of executable methods for temporal logics has often been based on temporal theorem-proving techniques. However, each particular executable temporal logic combines not only a logical perspective, but also an operational model, drawn from its intended application areas. Thus a wide range of languages have appeared, exhibiting a variety of characteristics and execution mechanisms. Consequently, such languages have a variety of application areas, such as temporal databases, temporal planning, animation of temporal specifications, hardware simulation, and distributed AI. OBJECTIVES: The Journal of Symbolic Computation is planning a special issue on Executable Temporal Logics, scheduled to appear in 1996. High quality original research papers are solicited on all aspects relating to the foundations, implementation techniques and applications of languages based upon temporal logic. The research described must not only incorporate an adequate level of technical detail, but must also provide a clear indication of both the utility and the applicability of the results. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, * theoretical issues in executable temporal logics * design of executable temporal logics * relationship between execution and temporal theorem-proving * operational models and implementation techniques * programming support and environments * comparative studies of languages * relationship of executable temporal logics to (temporal) databases * applications and case studies Because of the nature of the journal, it is particularly important that submissions, even purely theoretical ones, indicate the algorithmic relevance and applicability of the approach. Papers must be original and must not have been previously published or simultaneously submitted for publication elsewhere. The papers will be reviewed based on their originality and technical quality, relevance to the special issue theme, and the extent to which they will advance the frontiers of knowledge in this area. In addition to longer papers, we would welcome short papers (5 to 10 pages) describing specific features or novel applications of executable temporal logic. Submissions should follow the JSC style guide available from: ftp://ftp.risc.uni-linz.ac.at/pub/jsc LaTeX users are encouraged to use the jsc.sty file. úÿ Michael Fisher Department of Computing Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester M1 5GD United Kingdom Tel: +44 161 247 1488 Fax: +44 161 247 1483 Email: M.Fisher@doc.mmu.ac.uk GUEST EDITORS: Michael Fisher (details as above) Shinji Kono Sony Computer Science Laboratory, Inc. 3-14-13, Higashi-gotanda Shinagawa-ku Tokyo 141 Japan Email: kono@csl.sony.co.jp Mehmet Orgun Department of Computing Macquarie University Sydney NSW 2109 Australia Email: mehmet@mpce.mq.edu.au IMPORTANT DATES: Submissions of full papers due: October 15th, 1995 Notification of acceptance/rejection: January 15th, 1996 Revised final manuscripts due: April 15th, 1996 Queries concerning this special issue are welcome and should be forwarded to the email addresses above. Information about the special issue will be available via the WWW page: http://www.doc.mmu.ac.uk/RESEARCH/jsc-extl.html ------------------------------ I'm working on some marketing studies and ran into this quandry: Does the concept of fiber-loops for high speed trunking of SONET/ATM (or other physical/transport layer) with interfaces that gang coax 'star' type sub-nets? Let me expand on this - To implement high speed bi-directional networks with: - downstream adhoc video capability (read video on demand etc.) - di-directional digital data streams (computer data, video data for conferencing etc) implemented as a central loop/trunk of fiber to various ditribution points where an interface device converts from the fiberoptic trunk to short haul coax cables (say 1-200 customers) with the option for dedicated coax's for high density customers (eg: businesses wanting T1 type connection). Specifically the fier-optics could use SONET and ATM for multiple connections, high bandwidth, and the coax would have a GHz range carrier piggybacked over the normal cable video bandwidth... I'm trying to discern the viability, marketing potential and check for current deployment of this strategy for class. Both engineering comments on the feasbility of the idea and economic realities would be welcomed. Thanks, tfv0@lehigh.edu ------------------------------ I am looking for integrated solutions that have E1 or PRI ISDN at one end, and Ethernet at the other end. In the between the system should function as a number of V.34 modems connected to a TCP/IP - Ethernet terminal server running SLIP or PPP. We need this kind of solutions for our customer. The customer runs, among other things, Internet dial up services with several hundred dial in modem lines. Pekka Nikander Email: Pekka.Nikander@nixu.fi ------------------------------ Hi, I have an IBM 340 ThinkPad with an internal 96/24 fax-modem. I will be taking this laptop back with me to South India (Hyderabad) later this year. I would like to use the modem to dial a local BBS and the fax to send faxes. In the manual it says to use the internal fax/modem in the US only. What I would like to know is this because of some sort of regulatory warning -- or is it that these modems just won't work overseas (specifically I am interested in using it in India). Any sggestions would be greatly appreciated. Also, what type of additional wirting should I bring to hook up the connection to the phone lines there? Sid Call me anywhere 1-500-Hi-Sid-Hi (Local calls: 546-2307/545-0641) arora@kira.ecs.umass.edu s.arora@dpc.umassp.edu s.arora@ieee.org [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sid, in the future when you want to have 'local calls' go to a different number, you might want to include an *area code* in your .signature so people can tell what is local and what is not ... PAT] ------------------------------ A friend is moving to Dubai soon and plans to establish an Internet account once there. Any pointers on providers, prices, access, etc. would be much appreciated, responding either to the list or to my mailbox. Thank you, Sandy Kyrish skyrish@netaxs.com ------------------------------ I'm looking for a succinct way of getting the full picture of current and pending regulation on cable and telecom operators (read local phone COs etc) in the eastern PA area, this includes the FCC stuff as I have no idea what their current restrictions/regulations are ... can anyone name a good source of current information or some documents that would get me up to speed? Thanks, tfv0@lehigh.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, one of the best (that is, most comprehensive and least expensive) sources would be the FCC BBS operated by Bob Keller. Since he is a regular participant here, I imagine he will write you with details. There are of course, others sources. PAT] ------------------------------ I received my Pacific Bell bill today with two bogus $45 charges for repair visits. No such repair orders were authorized. According to the back of the bill I must pay the $90 disputed amount into a California Public Utilities Commission escrow account in order to challenge it. Apparently with some sort of binding arbitration the PUC decides who gets the money and that's it. The question is: is this kind of binding arbitration required by law or did I inadvertently agree to it by ordering service? If I go through with the PUC escrow, will I be preserving all of my rights under law? Do I have any other options? It seems as if the burden of proof is upon me to show that the charge is invalid, while it seems under common law that the entity asserting the charge must show that it is valid. What if the disputed amount were $50,000? Would I still have to post that amount in order to appeal the bill? This doesn't seem right. Grady Ward +1 707 826 7715 (voice / 24hr FAX) grady@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ignore it. That is, simply deduct it and don't pay it without proper documentation. Call the telco business office if you have not done so already to investigate, and if this gets you nowhere then call the PUC and speak to one of the telephone specialists there. What's printed on the back side of your bill is just stock legalese. Don't get too concerned. PAT] ------------------------------ Just last month we ran into a problem with equipment unable to handle twenty digit numbers (the UK just added an extra digit and when you add the four digit carrier selection code plus the four digit international access code to the twelve digit UK number the equipment could not handle it). This raises the following questions: 1) What is the maximum length for an international number (country code plus area code + local number)? 2) Is there a list of how long each country's numbers are? [This will answer the question: Is it just the UK or are we going run into the same problem on other calls]. Thanks, David Wilson Dept CompSci Uni Wollongong Australia david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #219 ****************************