Hacker Chronicles 2 (Alt)/The_Hacker_Chronicles_Volume_II-CD2.iso/td2/td14_10.txt

Text File | 1995-01-03 | 24.5 KB | 648 lines

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 5 Jan 94 18:33:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 10

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 500 Channel Cable TV (Bill Pfeiffer)
    Re: Dialing 1 First Prohibited in Dallas (David H. Close)
    Re: Dialing 1 First Prohibited in Dallas (David L. Kindred)
    FCC Approval for Telcom Devices (Jon Batcheller)
    Sprint (Dvorak) Modem Offer - Not Again! (David Horvath)
    Hayes' New Modem (Charles Randall Yates)
    Data Services - GSM (Lars Kalsen)
    Professor Neon's TV and Movie Mania Machine (Lauren Weinstein)
    AT&T Secure Software (David R. Arneke)
    Notice to Antique Phone Buyers (Todd Inch)
    Japan's Telecom Market (Alex Cena)
    SW-56 and ISDN Questions (Lenny Escalante)
    Re: Landlines Pay Airtime To Call Some Cellular Phones (Carl Moore)
    Re: Landlines Pay Airtime to Call Some Cellular Phones
    Re: Landlines Pay Airtime To Call Some Cellular Phones (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Caller-ID in Pennsylvania (Jeffrey J. Carpenter)
    Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Jan Ceuleers)
    Re: Question About Ring Frequency (Tony Pelliccio)

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 GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * [e-mail] *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: [e-mail].

    ** 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 gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. 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.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable TV
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 1994 10:28:44 CST


Michael Jacobs <[e-mail]> wrote:

> This entails an available, dedicated high-bandwidth
> connection between a subscriber and a software (programming) source
> on-demand.  Each subscriber will be able to access common (ie-network)
> programming or custom (on-demand) programming in real-time.

> The keys to this are:

> 1) high-bandwidth subscriber loops;
> 2) ATM broadband switching; and
> 3)mass-storage programming systems (called video servers).

Let's not forget #4:  Total accounting as to who is watching what channel.
Arbitron will have a field day.

> There will be no choice to make as to which of 500 different channels
> to watch, rather it will be a choice as to what to program on the one
> available video dialtone line, much as one chooses who to call on the
> current voice telephone line.  ALL SOFTWARE WITH NETWORK ACCESS will
> be available to the subscriber on demand!

Well that will be a real kick in the teeth for couch potato(e) channel
surfers, won't it :-).  I think I'll take my cable-clicker (which I
can use to sample the wares on several channels quickly) over this
system.

> The revolutionary concept here is that instead of some programmer in
> NY or LA deciding what I should watch, it will be me choosing what to
> watch.

No, the same programmers will determine what you watch, just like a
restaraunt manager decides what choices are on their menu.  Current tv
technology offers you a choice among the available programming.
On-demand exists now.  Nobody holds that channel selector but you.
How does the medium of delivery change the fact that someone else
still creates the programming?

> If the cable companies think that they can compete with a fixed 500
> channel system against on-demand video dialtone, they are doomed to go
> the way of the dominant telecommunications company in the US of 100
> years ago, Western Union, namely technological and competitive
> obsolescence.

Well, Mike, I am old enough to remember all the fancy claims that
'cable-tv' would put over-the-air tv out of business, would make
networks obsolete, would transform our very lives, would offer
first-run movies, would offer live video from foreign countries, would
bring the classroom to the living room, would offer access to niche
programming, fine arts, etc etc etc.  What we wound up with is re-run
mills, home shopping channels, music videos, 24 hour weather channels,
preachers, pay-per-view wrestling and more commercials than ever.

Even the so-called premium services like HBO are lame and repetitive.
So before I go GA-GA over this new network idea, I gotta see the
plans.  If the tele-entertainment industry's history of 'promising
heaven and delivering re-runs' is any indication, we will have 500
channels of on-demand QVC and pay-per-view wrestling.

> Personal Opinions Only

Same here.


     William Pfeiffer - Moderator/Editor
rec.radio.broadcasting - Airwaves Radio Journal
              - Internet email -
Article Submission: [e-mail]
Subscription Desk:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: Dialing 1 First Prohibited in Dallas
Date: 5 Jan 1994 07:56:59 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


[e-mail] (Linc Madison) writes [about Dallas/Fort Worth]:

> In most cases, you are permitted, but not required, to dial the 1
> anyway, and all telcos are recommended to allow 1 + NPA + number for
> all calls within the NANP, including local calls within the same NPA.

> I only tried this from GTE Southwest, not from Southwestern Bell,
> since my parents had to accept exile to be within commute distance of
> my father's new office location.  It is possible that SWB does better
> on this point, as well as in every single other facet of telephone
> service.

True also for SWB.  In fact the recording is, "We're sorry..."  As
I've posted before, they certainly are!

Whatever the solution to the 1+ problem, it sure would be nice if
*something* worked everywhere.  Even if other techniques were local
option.  Maybe a new prefix, 111+ NPA+7D, which could be used
*anywhere*, for either local or LD calls, same NPA or different.
Perhaps the third 1 (or whatever) could be considered a country code,
so that whatever scheme is adopted will eventually work world-wide.
The 1+ problem seems like a NANP problem now, but will certainly be a
world problem soon.


Dave Close,   Compata, Costa Mesa
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 5 Jan 94 12:18 EST
From: [e-mail] (David L Kindred)
Subject: Re: Dialing 1 First Prohibited in Dallas


Linc Madison <[e-mail]> writes:

<stuff about dialing in/around Dallas deleted>

> I only tried this from GTE Southwest, not from Southwestern
> Bell, since my parents had to accept exile to be within
> commute distance of my father's new office location.  It is
> possible that SWB does better on this point, as well as in
> every single other facet of telephone service.

My parents lived in the SWB part of the Dallas area a few years ago.
During the time they lived there, the dialing requirements not only
varied due to area code and "localness", but also by whether the
"other" phone company was involved.  I don't remember the particulars,
but dialing a local SWB-SWB call was different than dialing a local
SWB-GTE call.  As I recall, you needed at least ten, if not eleven
digits, to call a GTE 214xxxxxxx number from a SWB 214xxxxxxx number,
even if the call was to the next exchange (or next house...).

One major annoyance was the percentage of calls into GTE that went
high-and-dry.

Has any of this changed recently?


Dave

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Batcheller)
Subject: FCC Approval for Telcom Devices
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 1994 22:29:33 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics


I am looking for a lab or list of labs to get FCC approval of a telcom
device to be marketed in the US.


Thanks!

Jon A. Batcheller
Mentor Graphics Campus
8005 SW Boeckman Rd., Wilsonville, OR 97070-7777
[phone]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Horvath)
Subject: Sprint (Dvorak) Modem Offer - Not Again!
Date:v Wed, 5 Jan 94 17:40:17 EST


I was one of those who, a few months ago, ordered Sprint LD service
while under the impression that I would get *one* external 9600 baud
*data* modem with FAX.  After speaking with the post-offer Sprint
staff, I accepted the internal 2400 baud data and 9600 baud fax modem.

Now the problem -- I just got a second modem in the mail!  Exactly the
same as the first.  All I have is an 818 area code phone number for
Best Data, so I don't want to call them back; it came UPS, so I can't
just throw it in the mail with REFUSED scribbled all over it.  I doubt
the Sprint rep's will be able to help.  Now what?


David Horvath


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you want an honest answer or a
correct answer? Let me know, and I'll reply.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Charles Randall Yates)
Subject: Hayes' New Modem
Date: 5 Jan 1994 19:52:24 GMT
Organization: University of South Florida


Dear Information Theorists:

Have any of you heard about the Hayes Optima 288 V.FC + FAX modem? It
can allegedly transmit data over a phone line at 28.8 kilobits per
second *WITHOUT COMPRESSION*!!!! I thought you guys told us the upper
limit was in the low 20's. What gives?


Randy Yates
Electrical Engineering/Mathematics Major
<[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Kalsen)
Subject: Data Services - GSM
Date: 5 Jan 94 19:56:03 GMT


Hi - outthere,

I have a couple of questions about data services in GSM:

   - is there right now terminal equipment on the European
     market for datatransmission via GSM?

   - what plans do the different suppliers of mobile
     telephones have to put on GSM the market in 1994?

   - will the GSM-operators offer all the data services in
     the GSM-specifications - or will they all offer different
     subsets of these?

Please e-mail me if you have any piece of information. I will
put the information together and send this to all who respond
to this letter.


Happy New Year,

Lars Kalsen    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 5 Jan 94 11:34 PST
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Professor Neon's TV and Movie Mania Machine


On the subject of fun phone numbers, "Professor Neon's TV & Movie
Mania Machine" is definitely still up and running!

    ---

[phone] --> Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania Machine!

Greetings.  In honor of the bygone days of telephone entertainment,
I'm pleased to announce that Professor Neon's TV & Movie Mania Machine
is available, 24 hours/day, on [phone].  This of course is
an ordinary phone number, so only regular phone charges (if any)
apply.

Callers will receive a randomly selected item relating to television
and cinema, including nostalgia, trivia, games, viewing suggestions,
and more.  Right now, the nostalgia element strongly predominates.  I
think I can say without fear of contradiction that most of the
materials on there now are things that you haven't heard anywhere for
at least 20 years -- if not longer -- or ever!  You'll fire up some
old neurons and relive memories you thought had faded away decades
ago.  Will you go running for your old polyester leisure suit or
bell-bottoms?  I certainly hope not.

Have fun.


 --Lauren--

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

From: [e-mail] (David R Arneke)
Date: 5 Jan 94 15:24:16 GMT
Subject: AT&T SecureE Software


AT&T LICENSES LINKABLE CODE FOR SECURE SOFTWARE

     GREENSBORO, North Carolina -- AT&T is giving software developers
access to linkable code modules for encryption, public key exchange
and other communications security functions.

     AT&T announced today that a comprehensive library of linkable
code modules, including RSA security technology and the NIST Digital
Signature Algorithm, is available for licensing.  Linkable code is
available in the form of linkable object module libraries and Windows
Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), which are under license from
Information Security Corporation of Deerfield, Illinois.

     The code is compatible with shrink-wrapped programs recently
introduced by AT&T.

     The security functions included have applications for a broad
variety of software, including tax returns and other electronic-forms
programs, electronic mail, electronic data interchange and electronic
fund transfers.

     "Electronic commerce has an inherent requirement for privacy,
data integrity, authentication and non-repudiation," said Larry
Salter, director of secure systems and services for AT&T Secure
Communications Systems.

     "These capabilities are ideal for PCMCIA and smart-card
applications as well as conventional software for PCs and workstations."

     The package includes code for DES encryption, the ElGamal public
key cryptosystem, the Digital Signature Algorithm, the Secure Hash
Standard and most RSA security functions, including RSA encryption,
key management and digital signatures; MD5 hashing functions; and the
Diffie-Hellman key exchange protocol.  A proprietary encryption
algorithm for exportable applications is available as well.

     More than a dozen military and civilian federal agencies and a
growing number of corporations have already licensed the code for new
software applications, Salter said.

     "This is a full range of information security functions, relying
on the most widely accepted government and commercial standards,"
Salter said.

     Prices for code packages containing DSA technology are $750 for
the DOS/Windows version, $1,000 for the Macintosh version and $1250
for the UNIX version.  For code packages containing RSA technology are
$300 for the DOS/Windows version, $400 for the Macintosh version and
$500 for the UNIX version.

     The license allows developers to load the code into two workstations
for software development.  Royalty payments are required for distribution
of applications to end users.

     AT&T and ISC have incorporated the code modules into software
that provides a wide range of security capabilities.

     AT&T SecretAgent (R) Software provides DES encryption, ElGamal
key management and DSA digital signature technology.  AT&T SecretAgent
(R) II Software provides DES encryption, RSA digital signatures and
key management, and MD5 for message digests.  AT&T Surity (TM) DSA
Signature Software is a digital signature program.  And AT&T
SecureZMODEM (R) provides DES encryption and user-transparent key
management for data communications using the ZMODEM protocol.

     Programs using RSA technology are in development.

     Software developers can get more information on licensing the
AT&T linkable code module library by calling the AT&T Secure
Communications Customer Service Center, 1 800 203-5563.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Notice to Antique Phone Buyers
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 94 12:54:43 PST


I finally checked out an old phone that has been in a locked case at
the local thrift store for months and wonder if any collectors out
there want me to buy it for them, or buy my old Monophone, for that
matter.

It's shaped like an old Monophone, but has an all-brass base and a
swivel-up handle apparently for carrying it.  The handset is bakelight
and the handset cord is cloth covered.  RTT56 is stamped on the
underside and I believe RTT is in a logo on the dial.  It also has a
white button in front of the dial on the front.  It's priced at
$79.99, which is surprisingly expensive for a thrift store where I
occasionally get "real" (e.g. WECO, ITT, Stromberg, etc) touch-tone
phones for $5 or so.  I can probably get it for half that with a
coupon or during one of their "half off everything" days, which are on
every major holiday.

Anybody interested, or have more information?  It's only in fair shape.

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

Date: Wed, 05 Jan 94 16:12:23 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Japan's Telecom Market


There are several deadlines coming up in Japan over the next few weeks
on various disputes. Feb. 11 is the deadline for a deal on opening
Japan's government procurement market for telecommunications
equipment.

1)  Does anyone have any details or thoughts on this issue?

2)  Are there any US firms that do well selling to private firms in
    Japan? Why?  Why not?

3)  Has anyone seen anything in industry publications on this?

TIA,


Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers, [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 05 Jan 94 12:17:27 EST
From: Lenny Escalante <[e-mail]>
Subject: SW-56 and ISDN Questions


Sirs: I'm a tech with Brown University in Providence RI.  My question
is basic, yet important to our work here at Brown, perhaps you may be
able to give me some direction to obtain the answers.

1. Which countries/provinces have SW-56 service and are ISDN capable?

2. Here in the US what cities have been converted to ISDN, and who are
still operating at SW-56?

3. If you know, who are their carriers?

Please respond to [e-mail], or fax to 401-863-7329.

Many thanks in advance,


Lenny Escalante

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

Date: Wed, 5 Jan 94 9:47:43 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Landlines Pay Airtime To Call Some Cellular Phones


The 1 + 7D --> 1 + NPA + 7D is for long distance within your own area
code. (Refers to the comment about Colorado.)

Colorado has two area codes as of 1988: 303 and 719.  In which area
code is 579 located, or do both area codes have it?

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

From: [e-mail] (George Zmijewski)
Subject: Re: Landlines Pay Airtime To Call Some Cellular Phones
Organization: MGZ Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 1994 21:20:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] "John
C. Fowler" writes:

> I wonder what kinds of people will be using "caller-pays" cellular
> service.

In UK calls to cellphones were *always* "caller pays".  Some rip-off
companies charged also for incoming calls but that idea died very
quickly. Who will want to pay for incoming calls if they have the
choice of getting them for "free"?  The UK system of tariffs seems to
me logical (unlike US). If you call cellphones you pay 4.2p for every
7.61 sec (33p per minute); if you call from cellphone you pay 25p per
minute to anywhere in UK including another cellphone.  IMHO this price
structure made it possible for cellphone to become so popular -- most
calls to cellphones are made from offices where somebody else pays for
the call :-) Also the cellphones are subsidized by the airtime providers
(in the best times the dealer would get GBP 400 for connecting new cus-
tomers -- now this commission is down to about GBP 100.  BTW the idea of
free local calls is unknown here. :-(


George Zmijewski

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin McCormick)
Subject: Re: Landlines Pay Airtime To Call Some Cellular Phones
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 1994 19:57:52 GMT


 Charging the land-line caller to a cellular number makes
perfect sense to me.  It isn't any more fair or proper to charge
cellular subscribers for received calls than it is to charge any other
type of subscriber.  There should be a choice of two different types
of cellular service.  One would charge the caller for the call with
the cell phone getting no aditional charges for received calls while
the other would be what we have now with the cellular subscriber
paying for both answered and originated calls.


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

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

Date: Wed, 05 Jan 1994 15:51:49 EST
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller-ID in Pennsylvania


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> I heard an unsubstantiated rumor that Gov. Casey as one of his first
> acts after taking the reigns of leadership back signed a Caller-ID
> bill for PA which includes blocking provisions.  Can anyone substantiate
> that and give more information about how and when it will be available?

Senate Bill 860 was passed and signed into law as Act 83.  I have been
told that it permits Caller-ID with per call blocking.  The person who
drafted the bill is on vacation until Monday, so I won't get any more
specifics until then.  They are sending me a copy of the bill.

Bell of Pennsylvania says it will be available in 1994, but the
schedule for which exchanges will have it when is not yet determined
(or ready for public announcement).


Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter
Computing and Information Services, University of Pittsburgh
600 Epsilon Drive, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15238-2887
[e-mail], [phone], FAX [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 05 Jan 94 13:54:09 PST
From: [e-mail] (Jan Ceuleers)
Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts


I quote Dave Levenson:

> Does the user experience talk-off only from one telephone
> set?  Try replacing its handset or transmitter element.  Can
> the minimum tone duration on your voice mail system be
> administered?  Try increasing it a few tens of milliseconds.
> We have found that 50 - 75 msec. work well.

Unfortunately, this is not in accordance with the specifications laid
out in many countries. A Q.23 receiver must typically be able to
reliably detect as little as 40 ms at up to -28 dBm. In the case of a
voice mail system, the level requirements are even more stringent (-43
dBm). In some countries, these tests are performed while dial tone at
e.g. -7 dBm is also present on the line. Elsewhere, (I think it's
Spain) they even superimpose a voice signal at some ludicrously high
level (-2 dBm or something).

In my opinion, the level requirements are unrealistic in many cases.
Requiring a Q.23 receiver to detect a tone at -43dBm means that the
network is allowed to attenuate by some 36 dB, given the fact that
DTMF tones must be transmitted at -7 dBm.


Jan
Origin: Experimenter Board, Antwerp, Belgium (2:292/857)
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!2!292!857!Jan.Ceuleers
Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: Re: Question About Ring Frequency
Date: 5 Jan 1994 15:07:50 GMT
Organization: Brown University Alumni & Development Office


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jascha
Franklin-Hodge) wrote:

> Can someone tell me the ring frequecies and durations of the standard US
> telephone ring?

Around here it's a 20Hz signal, two seconds on, four seconds off.


Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR
[e-mail]
Brown University Alumni & Development Computing Services
Box 1908     Providence, RI 02912   [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #10
*****************************



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


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