The World of Computer Software/World_Of_Computer_Software-02-385-Vol-1of3.iso/t/tc13-026.zip/TC13-026.TXT

Text File | 1993-01-16 | 22KB | 500 lines

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 15 Jan 93 02:23:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 26

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Apartment Security Stupidity (Elana Beach)
    OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Rob Knauerhase)
    Free Publicity on Telecommunications Issues (Tom Worthington)
    Calling Cards (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune) (Andy Sherman)
    Voice Mail With Call Back (Paul Robinson)
    Remote Call Forwarding (Paul Robinson)
    Paging -> SW Bell Gives Up (Guy Hadsall)
    Wiring For CSU/DSU Units (Doug Barr)
    Looking For Portable X.25/Frame Relay Imformation (L. Tzeng via Seth Dobbs)
    Telecom Management Degrees (J.D. Delancy)
    Still 0 + 7D For Local Within 713? (Carl Moore)
    313 Split Not Being Well Publicized (Jim Rees)
    Another Teee Heee :-)) (Rich Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Elana Beach)
Subject: Apartment Security Stupidity
Organization: Open Communications Forum
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 16:32:05 GMT


I live in an apartment building.  This place uses a system called
Entraguard that lets tenants screen visitors.  The visitor punches a
three number code on the panel outside the front door, the tenant's
phone rings, and if it's someone they want, the tenant hits 9 on
his/her touch-tone phone.  The tone triggers the front door to unlock.

All this was fine and dandy until one day when I came home, I was
taken aside by the assistant manager and told to get a new answering
machine or else.  Turned out that the beep tone on my answering
machine was the same frequency as the tone that opened the door.  It
also turned out that the management of my building traditionally
forced tenants to get answering machines instead of getting this
Entraguard company to fix the original problem.  I talked to the head
manager, who claimed the company had come three times and tried to fix
it, and there was no fixing it at all.

I was supposedly required to get a new answering machine because
unsavory types had discovered that my answering machine would let them
in.  Well, that sure explained the small number of blank messages on my
machine that sounded like they originated at the front door ...

When I heard I had to replace MY machine because of THEIR problem, I
got MAD.  Off the the head manager's office I go.  The main manager
claimed that since this was not a fancy high-income building, I should
not expect them to be able to afford a high-tech security system.  At
the time I knew very little phone tech.  I decided to fake it.  I told
that manager (I was bluffing here) that all that Entraguard had to do
was install a certain electronic chip which cost less than $2 which
would allow the system to know the difference between an answering
machine and a touch-tone.

I really did not know what I was talking about, but THEY didn't know
that.  Within a month, the system seems to have been fixed.  They have
let me keep my answering machine, and some tests I have run recently
show no effect of my beep tone on that door.  Another positive effect:
when I consulted the net for a place to ask about this, I was directed
to the TELECOM Digest.  I have enjoyed reading it ever since.

I threatened the apartment management that if they ever give me
trouble about this door problem again, I was going to bore them with
some REAL technical details until it made their heads spin.  They seem
to be fairly tech-allergic, and they haven't bugged me since.  ;-)


[Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell offers apartment front door security
service to grandfathered customers who had it installed prior to about
1983. They use a sort of hybrid centrex from the central office to run
it. The pairs from the CO to the phones in each apartment have to be
dedicated without any possibility of multiples on those pairs. This is
done for security reasons, and other security techniques include
having the front door opening device camp-on the line *after*
decisions are made by the software to hunt, call-forward, bridge to an
answering service, etc. This prevents the place where you forwarded
your calls to or your answering service from opening the front door of
your building ... the answering service will never see the call, and
even with call-forwarding turned on, a front door call will ring
through with an easily identified ringing cadence of its own. Likewise,
the CO can tell the difference between a digit punched at the phone (4
to open the door, 6 to deny entry and disconnect) and something similar
fed to it from a foreign source like an answering machine or pocket
tone sounder. IBT called this product 'Enterphone', following the
divestiture in the early 1980's, new customers were referred to a
company called 'Interphone', a division of GTE in Canada which makes
customer premises equipment which does the same thing but instead of
being in the CO is wired up at the demarc where telco's pairs meet up
with building house pairs.  I'll elaborate in more detail on both
systems here if anyone is interested.   PAT]

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 10:17:34 CST


 From a local (to Ohio) news item:

(COLUMBUS)--State Representative Mike Stinziano says he will introduce
a bill prohibiting telephone companies from eliminating flat-rate
service. The Columbus Democrat says he believes phone companies will
try to force residential customers to pay based on a time, distance,
length and number of calls formula. An Ohio Bell spokesman says the
company will oppose such legislation.

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

I mailed an article here last Thanksgiving about Ohio Bell's sales
pitches for their relatively new measured-service variants, commenting
that my mother's phone bill listed an _increase_ if she switched to
any of their new plans (based on her typical usage).  Someone from
this group mailed me privately warning that in Michigan there was now
no option of flat-rate, and to watch out for the same thing in
OBT-land.

Well, from the above blurb, something appears to be going on.  So far,
Ohio's PUCO has been relatively good (or compared to CPUC reports
here, stellar :) with respect to rates and features, so I assume
(hope) that flat-rate pricing will not shoot up in the face of this
legislation.

Since OBT is guaranteed a profit (n'est-ce pas?), the Libertarian side
of me has no trouble supporting the continuation of flat-rate service
for those who choose it, even if some who so choose end up subsidizing
high-usage families.  Am I overlooking anything?

As I am for the time being residing in central Illinois, I'd
appreciate it if an interested party closer to Columbus would keep the
Digest (and/or me) informed as to how (and if!) this legislation
proceeds.


Rob Knauerhase
University of Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign, Dept. of Computer Science


[Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat
rate service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many
years, and for most subscribers, the cost for phone service actually
went *down* when they were no longer forced to pay for all the modem
users who went through thousands of units a month at flat rate.
Naturally, the guys who spent hours every night on a modem calling BBS
lines on the other side of the area code (or even inter-area code; our
old flat rate plans took in 312/708 and parts of 815/219/414) squealed
like pigs when the change was announced; *they* had to start paying
their way ... the 90 percent plus of our population which does not use
modems or make hundreds (or thousands) of calls each month was very
pleased to see a reduction in their bills. When IBT ditched almost all
the flat rate stuff a few years ago, the biggest objections came in
the form of countless articles on BBS message bases from people talking
about the greedy and awful old telco.  Count me as one who approves of
'pay for what you use'; I don't like paying subsidies for my neighbor's
use of the phone. I don't do it for the electricity, water or gas they
use, why should I for their phone calls via flat rate, averaged out
pricing?  But then again, I don't run war dialers against entire CO's
or call computer chat lines in the outer fringes of 708/815.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Worthington)
Subject: Free Publicity on Telecommunications Issues
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 07:36:36 GMT


Toula Mantis is from the Australian Telecommunications Users Group.
She is looking for telecommunications stories to write about in the
ATUG column in each Monday's Australian newspaper (in the communica-
tions section).

Toula is currently preparing an overview of Australian R&D in
telecommunications for next Monday's issue (her deadline is tomorrow
afternoon).

She would like input from the R&D community on topics like: "How does
R&D in Australia compare with the rest of the world?". Information for
good news stores (like what a wonderful research project you are on)
or bad news stories (like "what happened to the $13M for AARnet?")
would also be welcome.

Contact:

Toula Mantis
Australian Telecommunications Users Group
ph:  [phone]    fax: [phone]


She has an "AAP mailbox" (number 9243). If anyone knows how to send to
it from the Internet, we would all be impressed.


Posted by request by Tom Worthington, Director of the Community
Affairs Board, Australian Computer Society Incorporated, as a service
to the community.


[Moderator's Note: Bearing in mind that as I write this, it is already
Saturday in Australia, I'm not sure if submissions will reach her in
time, but perhaps she will do a followup soon.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:36:33 EST
Subject: Calling Cards (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune)
Organization: Salomon Inc, Rutherford NJ
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 12 Jan 93 00:37:11 GMT, [e-mail] said:

> The other thing that has always confused me is why alternative
> long-distance companies (AOSs?) can charge things to an AT&T calling
> card.  I realize that Ma and the Baby Bells have some sort of
> agreement to allow charges to each others' calling cards.  And I
> gather that this all has something to do with the fact that there is
> some standard way to determine if a calling card number is valid.  But
> again, why does AT&T agree to provide billing service for these
> people?  I can't imagine if Sears suddenly decided to accept payments
> by JCPenny credit cards that JCPenny would actually let them collect
> on the bills.

This should only be the case with the old-style AT&T Card numbers, the
kind that contain your billing telephone number followed by a PIN.
Those are not really AT&T numbers, and therein lies the problem.
Those numbers belong the local carrier, and they will verify that
number for any phone company.

For the past year or more, AT&T has been issuing new cards with a
private number (so-called CIID cards), and the AT&T Universal Card
uses a CIID number also.  A CIID card can *NOT* be billed by an AOS,
and can *NOT* be billed by another carrier.  As you note, AT&T has
cross-verification agreements with virtually every local exchange
carrier in the country, so that LEC cards can be used to bill AT&T
calls and CIID cards can be used to bill LEC carried calls.

If your AT&T card can be billed by the slime, then you need to call
AT&T and get a new card.


Andy Sherman    Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 15:44 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Voice Mail With Call Back


If anyone is interested, I used to use a local area-code 202 voice
mail service which had the option of adding an 800 number on it. Also,
the service, which is run by an interexchange carrier, can be
programmed (by you) to call you whenever a message comes in, anywhere
in the U.S.

The nice thing about this is you can also restrict the hours the
system calls you.  I had mine set up for the hours I was home, 10-2.
So if I get any calls from 2:01 pm until 9:59 am, the system would
hold them and then at 10:00 it would call me and announce I had
messages.  I could then enter my password and have the same access as
if I had dialed in for messages.  If a message comes in between 10 and
2, after the message is left, the system calls me and then announces I
have a message.  Also, since I can reprogram the number for it to
call, if I have to go to a different location, I can take my messages
with me.  Apparently the only thing I can't do is have it signal a
touch-tone pager directly since it uses touch tones to indicate where
to call; but the administrator said that they could set it up if I
wanted it.

The only problem I had with it was the price.  Originally it was $1 a
month plus 16c per minute of usage, with an additional 16c for access
via the 800 number.  Then they raised the rate to a minimum $10 a
month usage (I guess it got too expensive for them to continue to
operate it that way; I had four mailboxes and was running about $8-15
a month usage.)  That was when I had to discontinue the service.

The other thing I could do was have it deliver messages.  I could post
a message, then give it a phone number to send it to, and it would
send it out just like one of those robodialers.

Has anyone else seen anything better than this in a public voice mail
service?  I may end up going back to it because of the capabilities.

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 15:27 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Remote Call Forwarding


In Telecom Digest 13 #24, Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]> says:

> And just sometimes telco offers 'REMOTE CALL FORWARDING' where NO line
> goes anywhere. When a local call is dialed, it gets forwarded to the
> remote site.

I had it for a time; the phone company will charge message units for
each local transferred call.  I wanted an area code 703 number for my
voice mail number which was in the 202 area code.

> If you have a trustworthy site you can have the first flavor above
> line delivered to, that is best and someone can plug a phone in and
> reset the number as needed.

Not even that.  Bell Atlantic (C&P Telephone Company's owner) offers
"Ultra call forwarding" in which you can change the call forward
number on your phone even from another location.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: We have both 'Remote Call Forwarding' here as you
describe it and 'Remote Access Call Forwarding' which is what you
describe as 'Ultra'. We can call the switch, enter our passcode and
divert our line (equipped with call forwarding) wherever we want it.
IBT gives this feature for free as part of the Call Forwarding feature
here.  We have to pay dearly for the first type however, if we want a
phone out of another CO somewhere to be permanently set to ring us.  PAT]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 1993 22:48:00 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Paging -> SW Bell Gives Up


It appears that Southwestern Bell Corp. of St. Louis MO is giving up
on the wireless paging business.  It was announed that it will sell
its floundering Metromedia Paging (spun off of John Kluge's Metromedia)
to New York's LOCATE Corporation.

*waving* "Bye Bye Paging as we know it ... hello wireless as we don't
know it!"


Guy Hadsall    Dept. of Health and Fitness
The American Univeristy   Washington, DC
[phone]  VOICE   [phone]  FAX
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (BARR DOUG)
Subject: Wiring for CSU/DSU Units
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 17:10:48 GMT


I am trying to find out what kind of wiring is required from the US
West demark to a CSU/DSU unit. Is there a specification (wire type, db
loss, crosstalk, distance limitation) for all these units or are they
vendor independent. I would appreciate replies. Thanks in advance.

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth Dobbs)
Subject: Looking For Portable X.25/Frame Relay Information
Date: 14 Jan 93 18:17:36 GMT
Organization: Motorola, Inc. GSS-AMT, Arlington Heights, Il


I am posting this for a friend.  Please mail replies to the email
address listed at the end.

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

Dear Netlanders,

I am looking for information on the "Portable" software products/
components in the following areas:

   - X.25
   - X.25

   - X.25 PAD
   - Frame Relay
   - Frame Relay PAD

If you have ported some of the above products to your company's
platforms, I would like to hear your porting experience.  If your
company has the above products, I would like to hear from you, too.

Please either give me a call at [phone] or send me an e-mail at
[e-mail].

Thanks,

Lih-Shyng Tzeng    U.S. Robotics, Inc.
[e-mail]
                        -------------

Seth T. Dobbs  * QMS Royal Artist * | [e-mail]
GSS/AMT Motorola Inc.               | Standard Disclaimer

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:26:51 EST
From: [e-mail] (J.D. Delancy)
Subject: Telecom Management Degrees


Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications
Management Degree program starting at the associates level?  All I've
seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 10:43:31 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Still 0 + 7D For Local Within 713?


I returned a few days ago from the Gulf of Mexico coast area, traveling
east to Pensacola, Fla. and west to Houston, Texas.  In area 713, I
placed at least one local call via 0+ from a pay phone, and (as
happened once in North Carolina) I had to leave the area code off
although area 713 (and North Carolina) have had to program for N0X/N1X
prefixes.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized
Date: 14 Jan 1993 16:02:44 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Michigan Bell announced the 313/810 area code split to its customers
in August.  In the announcement they said, "But from now until Aug.
10, 1994 (that's 8-10-94), when the change will occur, Michigan Bell
will carry out a massive program to educate customers."

Apparently that "massive program" does not include any notice in the
phone book.  The 92-93 book, issued by Michigan Bell in November 1992,
contains no mention of the split that I can find.

By the way, you can get more information at 1-800-831-8989 (I don't
know if this is diallable outside of 313/810).  Permissive dialing
starts December 1993, and ends (with mandatory use of 810) August 10,
1994.

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 16:41:35 PST
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Another Teee Heee :-))


Hi Pat,

The {Los Angeles Times} carries a comic strip called "Bound & Gagged"
by Dana Summers.  For those not familiar with it, it (IMHO) is a
knockoff of Gary Larson's "Far Side", and unually not up to Larson's
quality.  Yesterday's (1/13/93) strip was one of the (again IMHO)
exceptions, and in addition should be particularly funny to most
readers of the TELECOM Digest.  Please picture this:

A horse drawn wagon, no sides, just a flat bed with a bench seat near
the front.  Sitting on the seat is a SNA (Stereotypical Native
American) driving the horses.

On the bed of the wagon, a fire is burning, and another SNA is waving
a blanket over the fire producing smoke balls.

The caption:  "First Mobil Phone".

Enjoy  :-))


[Moderator's Note: Cute.  Another recent cartoon in a magazine showed
a Dirty Old Man at a payphone covering the mouthpiece with a handker-
chief speaking into the phone.  He is wearing a long trench coat and
probably exposing himself.  The symbol for electricity leads from the
wires on this phone to the next picture of a switchboard where this
hateful looking witch of an operator is saying, "I have an obscene
call for anyone at this number, will you accept the charges?"  The
third panel shows this rather perplexed looking woman on the receiving
end of the whole thing. The final picture has the man being led away
by police and a stern looking judge banging a gavel saying, "he forgot
to use star sixty seven when he placed that call. Don't you make the
same mistake!"  By the way, *67 -does- wor #from payphones here.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #26
*****************************