Hacker Chronicles 2 (Alt)/The_Hacker_Chronicles_Volume_II-CD2.iso/td/td13_767.txt

Text File | 1995-01-03 | 27.3 KB | 649 lines

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 18 Nov 93 14:18:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 767

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MCI Internet Service (Jim Graham)
    Re: MCI Internet Service (Steven King)
    Re: 65 Per Line or 65*per Line? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (David Esan)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (Andrew M. Dunn)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (Scott D. Fybush)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (Tony Harminc)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (John Little)
    Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (Carl Moore)
    NPA 905, NAFTA and Mexico Area Codes (Robert Casey)
    Re: Check From MCI; What to Do? (Steve Lamont)
    Re: Check From MCI; What to Do? (Mark W. Schumann)
    Re: Strange T1 Behavior (David Devereaux-Weber)
    Re: Strange T1 Behavior (Dave Levenson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jim Graham)
Subject: Re: MCI Internet Service
Organization: Future site of Vaporware Corporation (maybe).  --Teletoons (NW)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 02:39:49 GMT


Well, I do believe we have a record here!  This makes three posts from
me to comp.dcom.telecom in less than one week (I normally expect my
posts here to go the same route as the first two of the three this
week ... into the Moderator's bit bucket, regardless of the content, so
I usually just don't bother).

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

> I have a friend living in Grants Pass, Oregon, who wishes to connect
> to Internet but currently has to call long distance to gain access to
> a univeristy account for e-mail access. MCI offers something similar
> via an 800 number but you have to pay $0.50 for the first K of data
> and then $0.29 for each K thereafter ...

Ugggghhhh ....  what a horrible price!  Your friend needs to setup
some type of batched process for getting mail and downloading it (UUCP
would be an ideal solution).  With a V.32bis modem and V.42 error
control, you're looking at around 1724 cps (see the first of my three
posts to comp.dcom.telecom in this past week for details on how to get
at that number).  At 1724 cps, that amounts to about 800k per minute,
and with the AT&T calling plan I'm on, that's 10 cents for around
800k, vs around $230 for that same amount of data, assuming batched
mail handling (such as UUCP).

Ok, your friend doesn't want to setup UUCP?  No problem.  Just get on
something like the program I'm on (I think it's called Evening Plus,
or something like that), and from 1900 to 0800 S-F, and 1900 Fri to
1700 Sunday, it's ten cents/minute flat rate within the US (intra-state
calls are more, obviously, and your mileage may vary).  And then don't
spend time reading mail online -- save it to a file, download it (if
you can, use Zmodem), read it, type up any response(s), upload the
response(s), and then mail them.

> Or other means to legally access Internet e-mail?

The easiest, and usually by far the cheapest, is to get a local UUCP
feed.  If you run dog on a PC, you'll need something like UUPC, which
is UUCP for the PC.  :-) That's how I'm setup here.  I have a UUCP
feed (actually, I have two feeds), and all of my Internet e-mail is
via those feeds.  Setup is a bit tricky if you're not a computer whiz
(I personally found setting up UUCP to be rather trivial, for the most
part), but once it's setup, you just let it run on its own.

Another thing you can always do is find a local public access UNIX
site.  Refer to the nixpub listing (which, I believe, is still posted
regularly in comp.misc) for sites near you.

Feel free to e-mail me for info on how to find a local feed, etc., as
well as more details on setting things up, good reference material,
and so on.

> [Moderator's Note: If all he wants to do is get email, there are lots
> of ways to get that.

 [ .... -jdg ]
> If all he wants is email access, then MCI Mail offers that, as does
> Sprint Mail and ATT Mail.  Is that all he wants?   PAT]

Those are rather expensive options, compared to something as cheap as
a simple UUCP feed or using a public access UNIX site ... I personally
would *NOT* recommend those choices, unless you just have money to
burn, and don't care about some of the problems you might encounter
(e.g., my previous employer uses one of the above, and incoming mail
has this nasty habit of not being delivered, and not having any error
messages sent to the originator of the e-mail ... in other words, it
isn't worth a d*mn).

Well, considering the fact that it's highly doubtful that this will even
get posted, I think I'll stop here ...


jim
#include <std_disclaimer.h>                                  73 DE N5IAL (/4)
INTERNET: [e-mail]  |  [e-mail]     ICBM: 30.23N 86.32W
AMATEUR RADIO:  (packet station temporarily offline)       AMTOR SELCAL: NIAL


[Moderator's Note: Why do you feel it is 'highly doubtful it will get
posted'? I can't remember any messages from you which specifically were
not posted recently, although at 100-125 messages per day, the majority
being replies to something previously posted/replied to, there has to
be a cut off somewhere.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven King)
Subject: Re: MCI Internet Service
Date: 18 Nov 1993 15:01:50 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In comp.dcom.telecom [e-mail] writes:

> While I don't want to focus on MCI, I reference MCI as an example to
> pose my question. I have a friend living in Grants Pass, Oregon, who
> wishes to connect to Internet but currently has to call long distance
> to gain access to a univeristy account for e-mail access. MCI offers
> something similar via an 800 number but you have to pay $0.50 for the
> first K of data and then $0.29 for each K thereafter ... this may be
> about the best deal one can get from a site like Grants Pass ... but
> it would seem that the Northwest Bell system would offer some type of
> inexpensive Eugene, OR, line so he could access Internet via the
> University there.

> Is anyone aware of inexpensive services like this that interface with
> Internet?  Or other means to legally access Internet e-mail?

Gahh!!!  Are you sure you're not quoting prices per MEGAbyte of data,
instead of per KILObyte of data?  Remember that a kilobyte, 1024
bytes, is less than a full screenful of text.  $.29/K would be the
most exhobitant rate I've ever heard of.

There's a company called Speedway you might be interested in.  I don't
work for them and I'm not even a customer, but they might fit your
needs nicely.  They give free dial-up access to the net.  The catch?
You must call them via AT&T.  They're directly connected to AT&T, not
the local telco, and they make their money off of kickbacks.  Since
you can use any AT&T calling plan you normally would, this can be a
pretty good deal.  For example, AT&T's Reach Out America plan puts
long distance at $.12/minute or thereabouts.  Using a 14.4 kbps modem
and a batch transmission like UUCP, PPP, or SLIP this works out to
around 100K/minute.  This is quite reasonable for a news and mail
feed.

Also, look for the Public Dialup Internet Access List (PDIAL). This
lists a lot of public access Internet providers. Most if not all of
these are for-pay commercial services. The newsgroup alt.internet.access.
wanted may also be of service to you.

If you're primarily interested in Usenet news and email and not so
much in ftp, telnet, and other Internet goodies check out the Nixpub
list.  This is a listing of public access Unix systems. These systems
may or may not have what you're looking for and they may or may not
charge, but it's certainly a place to begin your investigations.

Another source is looking for BBS lists local to your area. You can
look on the net in alt.bbs.lists and maybe comp.bbs.misc. Also, call
around to local computer stores and user's groups and ask if they know
of any BBSs in the area. Most BBSs carry lists of other local BBSs so
you get kind of a snowball effect very quickly. Hopefully you can find
one that carries what you need.

 Public Dialup Internet Access List (PDIAL)
 [e-mail] (Peter Kaminski)
        alt.internet.access.wanted, alt.bbs.lists, ba.internet,
 news.answers

 Nixpub List
 [e-mail] (Phil Eschallier)
 all.bbs, comp.bbs.misc, comp.misc

The above lists can be found in the listed groups and are available
for ftp at rtfm.mit.edu.


Steven King -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group

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

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 13:18:59 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 65 Per Line or 65*per Line?
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Someone asked me about the charge for message units on phone service:

>> different one. Now I am told the original story -- that each
>> line has a limit of 65 calls whether or not the lines are
>> billed to one party or separately billed -- e.g. if I use 66
>> on one line and 5 on the other, I will be charged for one
>> message unit. The phone company clerk tells me that each line
>> is individually metered and it doesn't matter whether the
>> three lines are attached to one account or billed to three
>> different accounts.

> This implies that there's a per call charge after your 65th
> call.   Can you offer a few details on the billing and let me
> know who your telco is?

There are three 'flavors' of phone service which is provided by C&P
Telephone of Maryland.  Rates are per month and do not include long
distance usage but DO include the $3.50 per line carrier access charge:

1.  Unlimited local calls in the service area, which is all of the
Washington Metro area which extends from Dulles Airport, VA to
Rockville, MD to Prince Georges County, MD to Columbia, MD,
encompasing four area codes from Silver Spring.  Note that this option
is only available to residential customers.  This costs about $22 a
month with taxes.

2.  Metered by time.  All calls costs 3.1c for the first minute and
1.3c for each additional minute.  Residential customerts have an
option of obtaining $5.85 worth of metering for $3. This costs about
$11 if you take it with no meter allocation, or $14.50 with the extra
$5.85, including taxes, plus any usage if no meter allocation or more
than $5.85 is used, respectively.

3.  Metered by count.  All calls cost 9c regardless of how long you
are on the line.  Residential customers have an option of obtaining 65
calls for $3.  This costs about $11 with no meter allocation, or
$14.50 with 65-call count, including taxes, plus any usage if no meter
allocation or more than 65 calls are made, respectively.

A commercial telephone will pay about $15 a month over these rates,
and all calls are billed either at 3.1c a call/1.3c a minute or 9c a
call.  Except for touch tone, all other services (call forwarding,
three-way, call waiting, caller id, etc.) are at an additional charge.

I switched my service from 1 to 3 with 65 metered calls.

> I'm guessing that you pay a monthly service charge for Caller
> ID.  But this "per message" charge over the 65th call is news
> to me.

You only pay for message charges if you choose to take metered
service.  Caller ID costs $6.50 a month.  I'm only keeping it for the
duration of the test I'm doing, which means in a month I'll drop it
since I will know everything I wanted to know about it.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized
Date: 18 Nov 93 14:44:46 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jamie Mason) writes:

>    Now, correct me if I am wrong here, but is it not the case that
> NPAs for North America are assigned by Bellcore?  Presumably the split
> of the old 416 into 416 and 905 was authorized by Bellcore.

>    I was under the impression that Bellcore publishes, on a regular
> basis, its list of NPA assignments ... and I would assume that any LEC
> or IXC with enough chutzpah to call themselves a "phone company" would
> go to the trouble of reading these lists, and programming their
> computers with them.

Since I don't get tapes from BellCore any longer I can't speak
directly about them, but I can add some experiences.  The tapes from
BellCore generally parallel the additions to the document FCC #10, in
terms of time of addition.

Now, the information for NPA 905 just arrived (11/15/93), even though
905 has been implemented for more than a month.  Why?  I don't know.
We got the information for 810 and 910 in October, and the informtion
about 610 in November.  Both were some time before these codes were
implemented.

I don't think this is strictly a problem because it is a Canadian area
code.  We have gotten in information on some splits a years in
advance, most about three months in advance, and a few after the fact.


David Esan      [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Obviously instead of relying on Bellcore to get you
the information in a timely way, you need to read this Digest for the
latest news on area code splits, etc.  :)  We were talking about 905
long before it occurred. We were even talking about 905 back in the
days when it used to be an 'area code' for Mexico.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 93 15:08:52 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James
Taranto) writes about calling the Toronto Ontario Canada weather info
number:

> [e-mail] wrote:

> It works from Brooklyn, N.Y., though the recording said it was nine
> degrees out.  Can that be right?  It was in the 70s today in NYC!

Yikes!  70 degrees!  That's close to the boiling point of water.  I'd
hate to be outdoors in that kind of heat ... you could fry an egg on
your forehead.   :-)

(Hint ... in Canada we use the metric Celsius system of temperature
measurement, not Fahreinheit.  100 degrees C = 212 degrees F, 20
degrees C is a pleasant 68 degrees F, 0 degrees C is 32 F, and 9
degrees C is around 48 degrees F, quite normal for this time of year
in southern Ontario).


Cheers,

Andy Dunn    <[e-mail]> or <uunet!mongrel!amdunn>


[Moderator's Note: In the USA, we use the metric system to measure the
size of the ammunition for our weapons. :)  9mm bullets are common.
Ooops, I said that one yesterday, but it bears repeating I guess. :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott D Fybush)
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 04:04:00 GMT


Could someone with knowledge of the 416/905 split enlighten me about
416-551?  The Niagara Falls Bridge Commission hotline was at
416-551-3409, and I had thought that area was going to 905.  Yet from
617-254 Brighton, here's what I get when trying to call 905-551-3409:

Via AT&T: Loud rushing noise with occasional clicks and pops.
Via MCI and Sprint: "Your call cannot be completed as dialed".
Via Westinghouse internal network: Ditto

416-551-3409 connects just fine.  It's not that 905 isn't working, I
can call Mississauga numbers in 905-820-XXXX just fine via all four
carriers.

Is there something weird about 416/905-551?

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

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 93 13:18:36 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized


[e-mail] (James Taranto) wrote:

>> Digest readers who are interested in testing 905 out could try to get
>> Toronto weather information at +1 905 676.3066 to see if 905 will work
>> (pre-recorded message). I work in (905) area as well, and could
>> provide the work number(s) on request.

> It works from Brooklyn, N.Y., though the recording said it was nine
> degrees out.  Can that be right?  It was in the 70s today in NYC!

Well it has been a bit chilly here lately -- nine degrees sounds about
right.  But 70s in NYC !?  Let's see -- a hot day in Death Valley would
be around 55 degrees.  My water heater thermostat is set to 65 degrees.
Water boils at 100 -- freezes at 0.

Could it be that NYC uses some funky temperature scale not used anywhere
else in the civilized world ... ?


Tony Harminc   (in the heart of 905 country)

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

From: [e-mail] (John Little)
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized
Organization: UUNorth's AccessPoint Service
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 19:26:43 GMT


When my parents try to call me (905 area code) from Central Florida,
using AT&T, they get an error, and have to use 416 to reach me.  They
live in the 407 area code, and the LEC is Southern Bell, with AT&T as
the LD carrier, you would assume that they would get the most recent
information.


[Moderator's Note: AT&T has nothing to do with the error message your
parents are reaching. Southern Bell is picking it off before it even
leaves the local phone exchange. All the telcos examine the digits
which are given to them for validity and to see if it is a call they
should handle (or hand off to a long distance carrier). Southern Bell
can't find it in their table, and claim it is an error. To prove this
for yourself, have your parents *bypass the local central office* by
going direct to AT&T on 800-CALL-ATT or similar, then dialing the
905 number. It'll go through okay. Another proof will come when you
have your parents dial through the central office as before, but
using a carrier access code such as 10333 for Sprint or 10222 for
MCI (or 10288 for AT&T). The same thing will occur: the call will
be rejected, and one would think Sprint or MCI did not know about 905
either, but in truth, they are never even seeing the request because
Southern Bell is not handing it to them.

And when you call the local telephone company and politely suggest
they get their act together, the clerk first tries to pass you off to
the long distance carrier ('you will have to complain to them') or
maybe they ask if you have tried from all the phones in your house and
get the same problem from each phone, and that they can have someone
come out a week from next Thursday but if the problem is discovered to
be on your end, boy are you gonna pay for it. Illinois Bell had a
prefix missing from their table for area 414 for the longest time. No
amount of talking to them did any good. Finally I reached a reasonably
intelligent supervisor at AT&T who passed the message to her co-worker
in charge of those things, and he called someone at IBT who corrected
it.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 93 11:32:05 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized


I take it that traveler living in Mississauga was a woman?  On rare
occasions, I do hear the play on words where "Mrs."  is heard in the
first part of "Mississippi".

So whoever said "I asked for residence not name" should have
recognized that he/she was right at Mississauga, right?


[Moderator's Note: No, what directory should have said next was
'What town does Mrs. Ogga live in?'    :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: NPA 905, NAFTA and Mexico Area Codes
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 04:32:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David A. Kaye)
writes:

> The problem MAY stem from the fact that 905 was previously one of the
> area codes assigned to Mexico a few years ago, before it was decided
> that Mexico would be reached only via country code.  Until about three
> years ago you could reach them both ways.

Would NAFTA have any impact on area code assignment?  If USA, Canada,
and Mexico are gonna be an economic unit, would there be motivation to
make phone calling to Mexico similar to the style used to call Canada
and USA (outside your local area code)?  Well, they probably couldn't
give back 905 to Mexico, but make up a new sort of area code for
them?


[Moderator's Note: I don't think NAFTA will matter. Besides, TelMex
has never had the same historic relationship with telcos in the USA
and Canada that the telcos in this country have had with each other.
I rather suspect Mexico will remain an 'international' point.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Lamont)
Subject: Re: Check From MCI; What to Do?
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 15:17:04 -0800
Organization: Connected INC -- Internet Services


Henry Mensch ([e-mail]) wrote:

> For my residential long distance I currently use AT&T ... I got a
> check in the mail from MCI last week (not a very big one, as they say;
> only $20) which I get to cash if I let them switch me to MCI (and
> friends and informants, or whatever it is this week).

> Now, I remember reading in this space that some folks were able to
> redeem these checks with their current LD carrier without having to
> switch carriers ... has anyone done this lately ... with AT&T?  If so,
> how ...?

I heard someone say that if you (1) call your local telephone company
(i.e., your LEC) and tell them you don't want your phone slammed
(which means you want to freeze any changes to your long distance
carrier) and (2) cash the check at the bank, the carrier pays you the
money but their change order for their long distance service does not
get processed.  You could say you get to take the money to the bank!

I have never tried this, which is unfortunate because some of my
"checks" have been for $75.


Steven Lamont   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I would suggest that to deliberatly connive and
structure things in that way amounts to fraud even though all you
are doing is taking advantage of flaws in the system.  Anyway, to
be 'slammed' means to process the change without your signature. The
carrier has your signature on the back of the check you signed, and
if your signature is not sufficient to dictate your choice of carrier
then I don't know what would be. Actually, if the local telco froze
changes on your account on the basis of your phone call alone, in
effect you 'slammed' yourself. Slamming by definition means the
undocumented change or confirmation of carriers. Your signature is
adequate documentation.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark W. Schumann)
Subject: Re: Check From MCI; What to Do?
Date: 17 Nov 1993 23:27:26 -0500
Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access Uni* Site


In article <[e-mail]>, Henry Mensch <hcm@netcom.
com> wrote:

> Now, I remember reading in this space that some folks were able to
> redeem these checks with their current LD carrier without having to
> switch carriers ... has anyone done this lately ... with AT&T?  If so,
> how ...?

Yes, you have to switch carriers.

But read the fine print.  You can switch to the new carrier and change
right back again the next day if you like; just wait for the check to
clear and the paperwork to go through.

What's neat about this is if you have AT&T, then cash an MCI check,
you will likely get a check from AT&T to come back.  If you play your
cards right it can be a lot of free money.  :-)

In answer to the obvious question, yes, I am really a pain in the neck
to play Monopoly with also.


Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA
Preferred: [e-mail] | Alternative: [e-mail]
"Aren't you glad you didn't marry someone dumber than you?" --my wife


[Moderator's Note: Regards your signature, it was W.C. Fields who once
commented on his choice of girlfriends, 'The dumber they are, the better
I like 'em ... :)   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 93 12:19:41 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Strange T1 Behavior


In a previous message, Tom Lowe writes:

> I have a client with several T1s from Sprint.  A strange thing happens
> when I place a 14.4 modem call to one of the channels and a voice call
> to an ADJACENT channel (using 800 numbers).  A static type of noise
> becomes present on the voice call when the far end is talking.  It is
> especially noticable when listening to ringback or busy signal.  If I
> disconnect the modem call, the static goes away.

> If there is one or more channels between the calls, there is no problem.
> The T1 is using D4 and AMI formats.  I am not getting any timing slips.
> Has anyone experienced such behavior or have any ideas?

This could be crosstalk.  The data on a 14.4 modem sounds like noise
to our human ears.  In addition to happening within the T span, the
cross-talk can occur at your end (before the calls get in to the
span), or at the far end (after the calls get off the span).  I assume
you have two analog lines at your work location; one for the voice
call and one for the modem line.  The crosstalk can occur in the cable
from your office to the distribution frame, or at the far end from
their distribution frame to their work location.

The fact that the problem does not occur when there is one or more
channels between the calls does not necessarily implicate the T1.  It
could be that the crosstalk occurs within the last three feet of the
cable (in the distribution frame, where the cables are "punched" down
on the terminal block).


David Devereaux-Weber          [phone] (voice)
MACC Communications; B263      [phone] (FAX)
1210 W Dayton St.              [e-mail] (Internet)
Madison, WI 53706

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Strange T1 Behavior
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 02:43:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tom
Lowe) writes:

> I have a client with several T1s from Sprint.  A strange thing happens
> when I place a 14.4 modem call to one of the channels and a voice call
> to an ADJACENT channel (using 800 numbers).  A static type of noise

> The T1 is using D4 and AMI formats.

I am not able to help with a solution to this one, but I am very
interested in it, as I have a customer who is about to install a
substantial amount of Sprint T-1 service.  You don't say how the T-1
line from Sprint is terminated at your client's site.  Is there a
channel bank?  If so, which one?  What's on the analog side of it?  My
instinctive answer would be to look there for the crosstalk.

How about your end?  Are your analog voice and data circuits leaking?


Dave Levenson  Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.  UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #767
******************************



******************************************************************************


Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253