The World of Computer Software/World_Of_Computer_Software-02-385-Vol-1of3.iso/t/tc13-004.zip/TC13-004.TXT

Text File | 1993-01-03 | 23KB | 516 lines

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jan 93 23:46:00 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 4

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Recent East Coast Storm (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: X.25 Switch Vendor Info Please (Tom Benham)
    Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) (S. Howard)
    Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) (Pelliccio)
    Re: No Link Between Location and CO? (David Tamkin)
    Re: DID as Replacement For Caller ID? (John Higdon)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Looking For Small-Handset Cordless Phone (Will Martin)
    Re: SNET Rate Request (Seng-Poh Lee)
    Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works) (A. Siegman)
    Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing? (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: PRO-34 Wanted (Craig R. Watkins)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 07:57:03 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: The Recent East Coast Storm


In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 928 [e-mail]
(Jeffrey Jonas) writes:

[ report about storm damage in NYC deleted ]

> [Moderator's Note: You are correct. Not a word was mentioned here. I
> did not see it personally, and no one bothered to write about it. :(
> Thanks for bringing it up.   PAT]

Long Island took a *major* hit.  Places like Bayville, located on a
peninsula jutting into Long Island Sound, were cut off completely from
the mainland of the island for days.  The damage there was
unbelievable; houses destroyed, roads washed out, electricity out and
variable telco service.  Ditto Eaton's Neck and Asharoken.

Downtown Port Jefferson, located directly on the Sound, was under
several feet of water.  Docks were washed out and the ferry terminal
was severely damaged from the wind and waves.

A friend of ours who lives in Nassau County and right on the ocean
spent the night on the top floor of her apartment building.  Her car
had water up to the top of the tires.

Downtown Riverhead, located on a small river (anyone who has seen a
major river wouldn't call this one a river), had flood waters up to
the tops of cars.  My wife works there and had to find an alternate
route home.

Orient Point was cut off from the Island when a causeway became
damaged after a barge (whatever that was doing there) hit a bridge on
the causeway.  Damage: No electricity or telco service (really bad
since the only way to get water there is by wells with electric
pumps).

Orient Point is on the easternmost tip of the North Fork of Long
Island.

Fire Island, which protects the mainland was breached in two places:
One was a 500 foot gap which looks like a new inlet; the other is 100
feet wide.  Both are pouring sand and water into the south shore bays
and upsetting the salinity levels.  This can wipe out what is left of
the clamming and fishing industry there.

Robert Moses State Park, located on Fire Island, saw the near
undercutting of a road in front of a lighthouse which used to have
about 100 feet of beach in front of it.

Almost 50 homes on Fire Island washed out to sea or were destroyed in
place.  Some are so cut off that one local township has said: "No more
road rebuilding to them.  We (the taxpayers) can't afford it."

There were one or two lives lost due directly to the storm.  Other
than that injuries were minimal if at all.

During the course of the storm, the winds seemed like they were of
hurricane force and probably were in some places.

Nassau and Suffolk Counties were declared disaster areas last week
thus clearing the way for federal aid.  On a sad note, the Nassau
County of the American Red Cross has gone broke.  It had spent a lot
of money last August when Hurricane Andrew struck Florida and the Gulf
states.  This was money and supplies that they contributed to the
relief effort.

Red Cross officials said that this storm will take $500,000 (US) of
their 1.5 million budget which has nearly been exhausted by this time
of the year.

How did the storm affect me personally?  Not much.  I lost electricity
for 2 1/2 hours.  Telco service was available all of the time.  I live
1.5 miles from the Great South Bay to the south and east and never had
to worry about flood damage.  Some of my wife's colleagues were,
though and they had to evacuate.

There were a lot of complaints about electricity service from the Long
Island Lighting Company for outages.  LILCO's way of doing things is
to restore service to the greatest area first and then go after the
smaller ones.  One problem was that just when one area was restored,
another would go out.  Some days, no one can win.

To their credit, I will congratulate LILCO and NYTel for their
efficiency and dedication in restoring their respective services.
Neither of these utilities is on my Christmas Card list, nor will they
ever be.  However credit must be given where it is due.

I apologize to PAT and others for not reporting in sooner but the
holidays got in the way and the storm came just before they did.  What
an ufortunate occurrance.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for passing along your very sad note. I
guess the storm in Florida late in the summer occupied so much
attention and took so many resources the events in California (big
fire which went on for a long time destroying many things) and New
York early in December were given a short-shrift in the media as well
as relief agencies whose funds were dangerously low as a result of the
Florida horror. 1992 was a very bad year disaster-wise in the USA with
the various events both of nature and the total social breakdown
which occurred in Los Angeles in April. Here in Chicago, 1992 was the
second most murderous year in our city's history with over 900 murders
committed in the city alone. Saddest of all, about 200 of the persons
killed were under age 21; about two dozen were small children -- about
two youngsters per month are gunned down in our public schools here,
usually as a result of their gang-affiliations or lack of same.  :(
We here in Chicago are fully expecting a major riot ala Los Angeles in
the next year or two. With luck (see my tongue in cheek), the New
Yorkers and Californians will get their tribulations by fire and flood
out of the way early in the new year and thus get the attention and
relief assistance they deserve before it all runs out.  :(   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Benham)
Subject: Re: X.25 Switch Vendor Info Please
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 03:14:05 GMT


[e-mail] (Rob Warnock) writes:

> [e-mail] writes:

>> A foreign company would like to purchase a few small X.25 switches
>> from an US company. I am collecting information for them.

> Be aware that X.25 packet switches fall under the COCOM export
> controls.  You will need an export license, and can't ship at all to
> some countries.  As Phil Karn said at the time:

I don't know about export controls, but IBM sells software that runs
on PCs that lets you build an X.25 net.  A friend of mine and I were
thinking of selling it in the Carribean, but opted for other greener
pastures.  In addition, you can also build a very expensive X.25 net
on an SNA backbone.  I know no one in his right mind would want to do
this, but it is possible.


Tom

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 9:28:24 MST
From: Steve Howard <breck1![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#)


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

>> COCOTs have.  People who rent out their homes or condos have similar
>> issues with loaning their phones to others.

> Things you can currently do:

> 1) Ask for a toll restriction. In one place I had to pay a one time
>    charge. In another there was a monthly charge. (Not altogether
>    sure about which was which but I think the monthly charger was
>    Illinois Bell, the other one Southwestern Bell.  Other differences
>    were being able to reach Operator.

> Of course a toll restricted phone is of somewhat limited utility but a
> lot better than having driving to a payphone for even local calls.
> Incoming long-distance calls are of course not restricted.  And if you

> happen to have a calling card you can even get direct dial rates (from
> AT&T at least) if you tell the LD operator (800 numbers can be
> dialed) that you are at a toll-restricted phone.

A solution that I recommend to some of my clients is to: (1) order
selective class of call screening from the LEC (this is toll
restriction with 0+ and no 10XXX), (2) Contact an IXC that offers
toll-restriction, forced authorization code validation, and commission
on 0+ calls, (3) have your line PICed to the carrier found in step 2,
and (4) order collect and third party block.

Under this scenario, your transient guests can place calls (on which
you make commission), you are protected from toll charges, and the
owner/authorized persons can make calls at direct dial rates by using
their authorization code.


Steve Howard         Breckenridge Ski Resort      [e-mail]
Disclaimer = The opinions above do not necessarily represent those of
my employer.

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 18:38:20 EST
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#)


In regards to loaned telephones and blocking access to tolls and
900/976 number, I believe Radio Shack sells a unit for under 100 bucks
that completely restricts toll calling. Just allows you to dial
straight seven digits, not much else.


Tony Pelliccio   pjj125 @ uriacc.uri.edu

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 13:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (David Tamkin)
Subject: Re: No Link Between Location and CO?
Organization: Contributor Account at ddsw1, Chicago, Illinois  60657


Randy Gellens wrote in <[e-mail]>:

> When I called to find out what prefixes I could be on and which
> switch types, I received some conflicting information.  It seems that
> I could be served by any of three COs, with 19 prefixes, and a mix of
> 1, 1A and 5 ESS switches.  Even though the total area served by the
> COs is rather large, it appears as though any location within the
> total area could be served by any of the three.  Anywhere else I've
> been, each CO has a defined area it serves.

> Is this the case?  Why does PacBell do it this way?

In Chicago two Illinois Bell CO's are in the same building at 10 S.
Canal Street.  Although some prefixes are wired from Canal East and
some from Canal West, they can appear anywhere in the service area.
One company I used to deal with had, in the same office, voice lines
on the Canal West 312-648 prefix and data lines on the Canal East
312-715 prefix.  The matter of voice vs. data wasn't the issue either,
because virtually every voice phone line in Sears Tower is wired from
Canal East (312-993 or 312-876, mostly), and AT&T's original Redi-
Access node for downtown Chicago was out of Canal West (312-454).

Are the three CO's at three different locations?


David W. Tamkin   Box 59297   Northtown Station, Illinois  60659-0297
[e-mail]    CompuServe: 73720,1570    MCI Mail: 426-1818

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 00:49 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: DID as Replacement For Caller ID?


[e-mail] writes:

> It's still *very* expensive except for people who have the kind of
> money that they are willing to spend upwards of three grand to put PBX
> capability in their multi-million dollar houses.

I never claimed that CNID workarounds would be cheap or even only
moderately expensive. Actually, the most practical workaround is an
800 number delivered via direct trunk from a long distance carrier.
This is universal, unblockable, and works from anywhere in the
country. There are no pending actions before any regulatory body to
change the ability of end users from receiving callers' numbers in
real time. All it takes is money, something available to businesses
and individuals with means.

My hat is off to the activists. Once again, they have managed to keep
a useful technology out of the hands of the average person, while
businesses (you know, those nasty types who will abuse the knowledge
of your phone number when you call for inquiry) are using 800 numbers
in ever-increasingly creative ways.

It sure is a good thing that the activists pay good lip service to the
cause by disliking ANI delivery a whole lot!


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 04:52:22 -0600
From: [e-mail]


The talk about static on AM radios being useful is only the tip of the
iceberg.  Let's suppose you are blind and you have given your PC
something monumental to do such as sort a large amount of data or
search for a key word in a huge document.  Two things can happen which
can drive someone to strong drink.  The software may print a running
status message, telling you that all is well each time it does
something right.  Who wants to be told 5,000 times that everything is
OK?  Some program setups may do their work silently, but one wonders
if the machine is sleeping or working.  If it takes 30 minutes, for
instance to search a huge document for a key word, one doesn't expect
to hear anything for a while.  If something terrible happens like a
crash, the effect sounds the same until 45 minutes, 50 minutes, etc
have gone by and you realize that the whole time has been a waste.

    Hear's the fix.  Take a portable AM or FM radio and place it
near the computer.  Tune around until you find a whine or buzz that
suits your ears.  It should be possible to find a signal which varies
when the computer is doing something and stays relatively monotonous
when it is hung up or idling.

    One doesn't have to have golden ears to be able to tell when
it sounds like things have gone sour.  This trick has also proved
useful when doing long file transfers as it is possible to hear
disturbances in the noise from the machine when data are coming in.
By using a little common reasoning, one can even get some idea of
whether or not there might be a problem with the data stream by
listening to the cadence of packets and noting whether they seem to be
steady and not halting or ragged.  Try it, sometime.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 10:30:02 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looking For Small-Handset Cordless Phone


Thanks to all who responded to my query!

Several people suggested answering machines, but I fear these elderly
people are anti-answering-machine. (My wife is like that -- she never
will leave a message on anybody else's answering machine, either,
except my voicemail at work, even though three of our closest friends
have answering machines. When she calls them and they do not pick up,
I have to take the phone from her and leave the message ... :-) I agree
that it is a viable solution, but I don't think its worth trying to
force them to change their attitudes at this late date.

I did receive valuable pointers to a couple specific models from
Panasonic and Motorola which I will follow-up on. The suggestion to
modify an ordinary cordless with a handle my aunt can hold sounds good
 -- that might be the most cost-effective route.

Thanks again, and Happy New Year to Telecom'ers worldwide!


Regards, Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Seng-Poh Lee, Speedy)
Subject: Re: SNET Rate Request
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 15:20:44 -0500 (EST)


> Needless to say, overall rates are up.  To take my home town of
> Stamford (in exchange class II) as an example, current residence rates
> are: Flat $11.19, Message $7.59, and Select-a-Call $6.00.  New rates
> (now exchange class III) will be: HCA $15.00, ECA $25.65, and Per Call
> $10.00.


> It's unclear how the current Flat Rate area (which generally includes
> your own town and physically adjacent ones) compares to the new HCA's
> and ECA's, though SNET claims that for "most customers" the new ECA is
> larger than the current Flat Rate area.

Based on the flyer SNET sent me with my bill, it appears that people
who need Flat Rate Calling to adjoining exchanges are going to have
their bills doubled. HCA appears to only cover your own local
exchange, in my case, Cheshire. That means you have to subscribe to
ECA to get at least the Flat Calling area you used to have. This means
my Flat rate would go from $11.19 to $25.65, just so I can maintain
Flat Rate to the adjoining town. Thats more than DOUBLE! While its
true that ECA is supposed to give you a wider Flat Rate calling area,
SNET has not been to public about just how far an ECA each exchange
will get.


Seng-Poh Lee    <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 13:40:12 PST
From: Anthony E. Siegman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works)
Organization: Stanford University


[e-mail] (Richard Nash) writes:

> Sorry, but telemarketeers are a virus that require radical steps to
> rid ourselves of them.

That may be putting it a bit harshly (in a free country, even
telemarketers have some rights), but yes, telemarketing requires some
legal and social controls; and we (the targets of telemarketing) will
just have to keep pushing until we get them.

> My proposal is that all telemarketeers are required by law to identify
> their intent to the called party's CO which would determine if the
> called party wishes to receive solicitation.

YES! YES! YES!  This would be technically easy and inexpensive to do
(just require that any telemarketing call come from a special
designated prefix, like 600 or 700, or whatever); it's _all_ that's
needed; it's a trivial restraint on the telemarketer's freedom; it
gives the recipient full choice, to block or not.

We have got to work to get this basic idea recognized and implemented.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing?
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 00:00:39 GMT


> *65 turn on delivery of caller id (if you are subscribed)
> *85 turn off delivery of caller id (why would anyone want to do this?)

Because some phone companies charge for Caller-ID on a per-number-
delivered basis?


Gordon L. Burditt    sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon


[Moderator's Note: IBT used to do that, but starting a few months ago
they no longer charge for delivery over a certain number. One monthly
fee pays for it all.  Another oddity IMHO here is that call screening
can be turned on with *60 and turned off with *80. This is despite the
fact that while within the *60 menu of things to do, one can both add
and remove numbers from the repertoire. If you can add or delete
whatever you want there, why bother to have a command to turn it off?
Perhaps it is because IBT is not marketing Call Screening as a
permanent way to get rid of troublesome callers, but merely as a way
to avoid certain people at certain times of day; although I cannot
imagine be willing to chat with certain numbers on my list regardless
of the time of day or occassion. Ditto the feature where you can list
certain callers to get the red carpet with special ringing on your
end; that too can be turned off, although if your boss is an important
person to hear from at 3 PM, why wouldn't he be important at 3 AM?  PAT]

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PRO-34 Wanted
Date: 2 Jan 93 10:42:11 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] ( Bill
Huttig) writes:

> I can't find any Radio Shack PRO-34 Scanners left around here ... if
> any one can find one for me I would be gald to pay the $39 + shipping
> + misc to receive one.

Yesterday I was in Radio Shack for some parts (just let those Radio
Shack bashers tell me where else I can get parts on New Year's Day
during halftime in the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania!) and I asked
about the PRO-34.  It was really $39 -- I saw it on the computer
screen.  However, the guys behind the counter said it was discontinued
about a year ago and anything at a price like that gets snapped up by
employees.  They claimed that regional folks even get together
every-so-often to swap discontinued items between stores (and often
they are for employee purchase).  They wished me good luck finding one
(well, actually, I already have one), so I will wish the same to you.


[Moderator's Note: Well I must say it is the finest scanner radio I
have ever owned, and I've had several over the years, beginning with
the old crystal units twenty or so years ago; and before that I had a
tunable VHF receiver which I bought from Radio Shack's predecessor
company Allied Radio, circa 1960-65. Allied's HQ was right here in
Chicago at Western and Washington Aves. What a grand store that was,
and located right across the street from Olson Electronics just in
case you needed to stop in there also on the way home.  One complaint
I have about Radio Shack is how often the staff changes in the store
three blocks from my house. All new people there twice around since I
bought my CT-301 phone, and three times around since I bought the
PRO-34. I've purchased video cameras there also.  Thousands of dollars
spent in that one store alone; the current bunch of employees has no
idea who I am; the people there three years ago used to drop everything
to wait on me. I have my PRO-34 earphone jack wired out to a larger
communications style speaker pulled from an old speaker-phone. It
really sounds great that way. I still use my old Regency H-604 crystal
scanner from years ago sometimes also.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #4
****************************