Hacker Chronicles 2 (Alt)/The_Hacker_Chronicles_Volume_II-CD2.iso/td2/td14_78.txt

Text File | 1995-01-03 | 28.7 KB | 700 lines

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 12 Feb 94 22:36:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 78

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls (Daryl R. Gibson)
    Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls (Richard Barnes)
    Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls (Bill Llewellyn)
    Re: Phone Number History (Dr. Daniel L. Jones)
    Re: Phone Number History (Robert Casey)
    Re: Phone Number History (Mark W. Schumann)
    Re: Phone Number History (Jim F. Williams)
    Re: Phone Number History (Ken Jongsma)
    Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company (Carl Chatski)
    Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Busy Call Return and Hunt Groups (Al Varney)
    How to Get Long Duration Tones From a Rolm Phone? (David Chasman)
    Paging Available on Cellular Phones (Scott Colbath)
    How to Build Modified Three-Way Calling? (Misuzu Nakazawa)
    Seeking Internet Providers (Charles John Statton, Jr.)
    A Switch Slipping Time (Dan Srebnick)
    Displease Mr. Postman (Col. G.L. Sicherman)

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] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls
Organization: CMC Network Products, Copenhagen DENMARK
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 94 10:37:38 GMT


Bill Garfield ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> OK all you telephone company techno-jocks, I need some help with this.
>> We are being besieged by single-jingle (one ring) calls.

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mario M.
Butter) writes:

> Could this be a phone company problem? I had the same thing happen to
> me yesterday at home. About 30 times over a three hour stretch, the
> phone rang once then stopped. I picked it up a few times on the first
> ring, but there was no connection on the other end. Also, this was
> happening on both of my lines, not just one.

I have run into this problem with some FAX modems that did not like
unfamiliar call progress signals, and hung up just as the call went
through. Very annoying.

In particular, some modems recognize UK-style "double ringback" (as
provided by Panasonic switches) as BUSY. I have also caught some PBXs
sending short tone bursts (monofrequency) during DID call handovers.

This problem is especially bad if you use non-telecom-approved U.S.
modem models (the technical term is "non-homologated") in Europe, but
given the great variety of equipement, it could happen anywhere.


Lars Poulsen     Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products    Phone: (011-) [phone]
Hvidovre Strandvej 72 B    Telefax:      [phone]
DK-2650 Hvidovre, DENMARK  Internets: designed and built while you wait

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls
Date: 13 Feb 1994 03:00:35 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


We have had that going on for about three weeks now. I finally called
repair and it checked out ok. I figured it was a problem and would
stop even if they said there was no problem.

I finally filed a report with the police and gave the number to the
telephone company. Shortly after the trace program was placed in the
switch it happend. It would happen six or seven times a day during the
hours of 6 AM and 10 PM Pacific time. After a while the telephone
company was able to locate the caller and it turned out to be a
collection agency that was dialing my number looking for someone with
the same last name as mine but only the same first initial.  They must
have been real stupid or at least played that way since the person
that they claimed they were trying to reach was located in another
city and another county.

This happened to my answering machine, but it was still a pain. I sure
wish California would wake up and allow full Caller ID and to hell
with the little old ladies and rights groups that feel their rights
are being violated; what about our rights to know who calls us? Almost
every other state has it now and there is no good reason California
could not have it. The time is now here for the people in California
who want it to write their reps to pass laws that would force the PUC
to place the service as designed and not the piece meal way they want
the companies to set it up. Either that or get rid if the PUC as they
seem to think we work for them.


The above are my personal thoughts and not those of whatever company I
may or may not work for. This was also done on my own time with my own
computer and telephone. SO There!!!!!!!!!!

Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
[phone] 12/24/96/14.4 V32/V42bis Via PCP CACOL/12/24

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

Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 17:33:13 MST
From: Daryl R. Gibson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls


[e-mail] (Mario M. Butter) wrote:

> Bill Garfield ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> OK all you telephone company techno-jocks, I need some help with
>> this.

>> We are being besieged by single-jingle (one ring) calls.

> Could this be a phone company problem? I had the same thing happen to
> me yesterday at home. About 30 times over a three hour stretch, the
> phone rang once then stopped. I picked it up a few times on the first
> ring, but there was no connection on the other end. Also, this was
> happening on both of my lines, not just one.

I remember a case in southern Utah that had this problem. The telephone
installer went out, couldn't find a thing. Finally, he watched and noted
that the rings came whenever somebody used the toilet.  Turned out the
phone was grounded to the sewer pipe, was badly grounded, and the
pressure from the "movement" caused a temporary short and made the
phone ring.

Bad ground, maybe?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is this some sort of variation on the
dog in the UK who was tied to the pole in the back yard and whatever?
Everyone remembers that story, right?  :)     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Barnes)
Subject: Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls
Date: 12 Feb 1994 21:56:01 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access   [phone]  [login: guest]


We had this happen a while back, and frequently at night.  We had to
call the phone company several times, and finally talk to a supervisor
(we got incorrect information from everyone else).  The supervisor
said it was the phone company's test equipment.  After talking to this
person the calls tapered off over a period of one or two weeks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Llewellyn)
Subject: Re: Harrassing One-Ring Calls
Organization: a2i network
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 07:08:38 GMT


I have heard of fax auto-dialers which randomly dial telephone numbers
searching for a fax modem carrier. The intent is to broadcast junk
faxes, simialr to junk mail, to any and every fax machine the
broadcaster can find. If the calling machine hears no carrier after
one ring, it hangs up and moves on. They are set up this way because
most fax machines are programmed to answer on the first ring and
immediately put out a carrier on the line.

We've had a number of "one-ringers" at our home over the years -- any
time of day or night. It is frustrating. Perhaps your system is the
unfortunate victim of an overly aggressive junk fax broadcaster?


Regards,

Bill Llewellyn   <><  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Anyone who gets those 'one ringers' from
some company looking for fax numbers (or for that matter, some phreak
looking for modems, call extenders and miscellany) should make an effort
to stop the caller dead in his tracks. That's the great thing about Caller-
ID and 'return last call': Even one ring is enough to capture the data
most of the time; if the party hangs up after a ring usually the data is
still transferred over to you, so call 'em back! Ask what's going on and
if they might begin having the courtesy to apologize for dialing a 'wrong
number' at 3 AM or whenever. Either that, or just keep a log of the calls
for a week or three, then confront them. Caller-ID is a great tool; it
is the poor man's self-help to peace and quiet on the telephone. Oh, I
know the ACLU and the Socially Responsible People don't approve of it,
but then, I don't approve of them either.  PAT]

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

From: jcc-one![e-mail] (Dr. Daniel L. Jones)
Subject: Re: Phone Number History
Organization: Jones & Jones
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 19:35:49 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the party line suffixes in most
> places were -J, -M -R and -W. I never had a party line, but a friend of
> mine did. Do party lines still exist anywhere or are they all discontinued
> by now?   PAT]

Party lines are alive and well in the rural west and midwest.  Here in
NE Colorado, most farms have the choice of a party line or no line.
(two or four party primarily, although some outlying areas have eight
party lines as the only option.)

It always takes me a few moments to re-learn not to blindly answer the
phone when visiting friends and relatives in the country.  "No, don't
answer that -- ours is two longs and one short, not one short and two
longs" is a common experience.

The newer two and four party lines use a signal box at the demarc to
filter all but incoming calls for the right party.  If the line is in
use and you pick up to dial, you get a fast busy signal.

The older eight party lines are live to all parties at all times.  You
have to listen to see if there is someone talking on the line before
dialing.  You learn not to say anything confidential on the phone
since anyone could be listening.  There is a law with some teeth
requiring that you immediately hangup if another party breaks into
your conversation with the words "This is an emergency, please clear
the line."

I believe that the PUCC has required the availability of private lines
by 2000 for most of the region.  The wide spread availability of
cellular in the region and its declining cost will probably make this
a moot point.


[e-mail]            Daniel L. Jones            Office: 303-522-6638
[e-mail]                                       Direct: 303-522-0652


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only is there a law in almost every
jurisdiction which requires that a communications link (i.e. telephone)
be released upon demand when an emergency has been declared, but the same
law usually goes on to say that to influence the use of the telephone
(i.e. get someone to disconnect) by declaring an emergency to exist when
in fact none does exist is also a crime, punishable in most jurisdictions
(either way it goes down) by a fine and or some period of imprisonment.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: Re: Phone Number History
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 18:26:50 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There were some exchange names which seemed
> to be common everywhere, while others were unique to some community. Many
> places had PLAza, and we had a WABash here in Chicago. But some we had here
> I have never heard of in other places: GRAceland, MULberry, TUXedo,
> INTerocean, VICtory, EDGewater and IRVing are a few which come to mind. PAT]

My parent's house was in the COlfax exchange (261-xxxx), so, we were
Colfax-1-xxxx.  My father tells me that Colfax was some local
politician, like town mayor, congressman, or some such.  If so, this
may be a unique exchange name.  I was about ten years old when the
phone company abandoned the exchange name thing, and started just
using numbers.  I first thought our phone number had changed, but then
realized it worked out the same on the dial.

The phone company's got your number!

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark W. Schumann)
Subject: Re: Phone Number History
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 18:28:08 GMT
Organization: Systems for Today's Retailer, Brecksville, Ohio USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the party line suffixes in most
> places were -J, -M -R and -W. I never had a party line, but a friend of
> mine did. Do party lines still exist anywhere or are they all discontinued
> by now?   PAT]

My ma/pa-in-law still have one, although they're the only party.  Ohio
Bell (Ameritech) has repeatedly said they'll take it away and start
charging them regular single-line rates but that hasn't happened yet.

What's funny is that they're in the 216-741 exchange, which is about
five miles out of downtown Cleveland.  You would think this would have
been one of the first places to eliminate party lines.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If Ameritech wants to get them off the
single-party 'party line', the best way would be to (use their right to)
assign some other subscriber to the party, preferably some subscriber
with *a lot* of incoming and outgoing calls; maybe a family with a few
teenagers, etc. That would drive your in-laws/outlaws or whatever off
in a hurry, and Ohio Bell could smile sweetly and tell your relatives
how sorry they were to lose them as a party-line subscriber.  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (jim f williams)
Subject: Re: Phone Number History
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 03:32:31 GMT


The J M R and W suffixes were used to designate the side and polarity
of ringing for party lines.  I don't remember the scheme but for
example pretend that R meant ring on the Ring wire and ground wire
with + polarity; J meant ring on the Tip wire and ground wire with -
polarity.  This would allow up to four parties to share a single pair
and not hear other than their own ringing.  (T +, T -, R +, R -)
Larger party lines were something like 1044R2 line 1044, ring ring +
to ground, ringing pattern 2.

I don't think the JMRW were derived from Morse, rather were chosen to be
phonetically distinct.

(This was the way it was in Fairmont, WV pre-dial).


J. Williams


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are correct; it was phonetic distinc-
tion the telephone company was concerned with.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 16:46:41 EST
From: Ken Jongsma <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Phone Number History


(Gordon asks about an old yard stick that says "Grand Rapids Lumber")

You might try calling the company and asking them. I looked them up in
our phone book. It said to see Caretaker Products [phone].

I called them up and they confirmed that the same family still owns
the company. The receptionist was very nice. I'm sure she could fill
you in on the history of the company and how old the yardstick is.


Kenneth R Jongsma           [e-mail]
Smiths Industries      [e-mail]
Grand Rapids, Michigan           [phone]

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

Date: Sat, 12 Feb 94 21:29:26 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company


I am almost reluctant to say it after all of the high-tech answers but
to me the key is "wife's best friend". My first thought was of some
neighborhood prankster with a lineman's handset walking up to the
telco junction on the side of the house, making the call, and lurching
away chortling with visions of Mr. Bodine searching the electronic
world for an answer ...


Warmly, (85 today: hee, hee, hee)

Padgett

PS: Look for someone who knows Tom and his wife's best friend's family
well enough to know that the WBFF has Caller-ID.

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

From: [e-mail] (chatski carl)
Subject: Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company
Date: 12 Feb 1994 20:25:50 -0500
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County


In article <[e-mail]>, Robert Hettmansperger <bobh@
cc.bellcore.com> wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>:

>> Also FYI, on forwarded calls, the CallerID delivered is supposed to be
>> the number of the original caller, not the number of the forwarding
> >station [TR-31, 3.8F].

> Of course, this is what Bellcore requires on paper.  What you find in
> the real world may differ due to switch manufacturer noncompliances or
> bugs.

About two years ago I formed a business, and designed a computer based
system which relied on the receipt of original Caller ID through forward-
ing.  In the Baltimore/Washington area this simply does not work --
you get the number of the last forwarding phone.  This put an end to
the business.

In there any way to work around this variance from specification?

Will switches be brought into compliance at some time in the future?


Thanks.

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

Subject: Re: Don't Trust The Phone Company
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 94 08:30:22 EST
Organization: Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz) writes:

> However, would the original writer know if the victim's husband used
> the TELCO call-return feature, or a Caller-ID box's call-return
> feature.  Some people (when relating a story like this) may not know
> enough to differentiate the two.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well if the victim's husband read the
> number off of the Caller-ID box and used its call-return feature, then
> I'd say Mr. Bodine has got a bit of a problem. If he used telco's same
> feature out of the switch instead, then who knows ...  PAT]

Oh, no, exactly the opposite.  If I pick up my phone after the first
ring I know for a fact that my box will miss the Caller-ID data, so
retrieving the last call and dialing it will get me the SECOND to last
phone number (since the last is missing).

If the irate husband had bought a Caller-ID box from "the phone
company" he might refer to the dial button on the box as a "phone
company return call feature."  If the wife who received the obscene
phone call answered the phone too fast (before the Caller-ID data
stream came down the line) the scenario could have happened, and be
reported, just as I described.

Now all they need is a good "block-the-blocker" Caller-ID box and
they'll be all set ... ;)

[e-mail] (Robert Hettmansperger) writes:

> By Bellcore's requirements, the record of the last incoming call
> should NOT be updated if the incoming call is given busy treatment
> [TR-227, Appx A].  It SHOULD be updated if it is given call-waiting
> treatment.

Wouldn't this have substituted the (second) victim's phone number for
the real obscene caller if the irate husband have also ordered call
waiting on his line, and the woman's best friend had called DURING the
obscene call (but was too distracted to answer)?

On the other hand, if the CO switch, or ancillary equipment, had
re-initialized close to or during the obscene call wouldn't that have
prevented the caller-id data from being updated to show the obscene
caller's phone number?


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place BBS (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Who said either the victim or her husband
picked up the phone during the first ring? Around here, Caller-ID is
delivered *immediatly* following the first ring; had they picked up the
phone even two seconds after the first ring stopped but before the second
ring began the number shown would have been correct.  I don't recall
reading anything here about them answering during the first ring which
would have had to have happened if the previous call data was still in
the buffer.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 12 Feb 94 17:13:44 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Busy Call Return and Hunt Groups
Organization: AT&T


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

> I have a busy call return feature on a phone line for the time being.
> When *66 is dialed after a call to a busy line, the service is
> supposed to give a special ring back (short-short-long?) when the line
> is no longer busy.

> I tried this after getting a busy on a number that represents a hunt
> group of many incoming lines. The free line special ringing never
> seems to occur despite the many incoming lines that would connect and
> disconnect on a frequent basis. I eventually dialed again manuallly
> and getting through.  I have attempted such a call return on a few
> occasions by now, and get similar results.

> Does the busy call return (depending on the telco) only signal a free
> line if only a specific incoming line (such as the first line) of a
> hunt group becomes free, or should it signal the line is free when any
> one of the hunt group lines become free?

   Unfortunately, the answer is "it depends", including a lot of
factors that will probably change over time.  Lines that use Series
Completion will signal free only when the line associated with a
dialed number is free.  If Forward on Busy/Forward on No Answer is
used to effect a type of "multiline hunting", the *66 attempt will
either be denied or will wait for the specific line to become idle
(more dependencies).

  If the terminating switch does not support "terminating scanning" or
the use of "queues" for *66 requests, the originating switch looks
periodically (say, every 30 seconds) to see if the requested DN or
MLHG group has an idle line.  If not, it looks again in 30 seconds.
You and all the other folks trying to reach the MLHG will have to be
lucky to hit a time when a line is idle.  Even if the line is idle, by
the time you answer the special ringback and the switch attempts to
connect you, there may be no idle lines.  The "Call Return" function
is thus of limited use in attempting to reach someone behind a busy,
large MLHG.

   Bellcore has even recommended that attempts to "Call Return" to
some types of heavily-called numbers (radio stations) be blocked by
marking such lines as "choke" lines -- these would also possibly be
set up for Gapping, to prevent overloading the terminating switch.


Al Varney

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

From: [e-mail] (David Chasman)
Subject: How to Get Long Duration Tones From a Rolm Phone?
Organization: Center for Biomolecular Simulation
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 16:42:30 GMT


I have a Rolm phone in my office -- and an old answering machine that
requires a three second continuous tone to retrieve messages at home
 -- does anybody out there know how to generate such a tone from the
keypad on my Rolm?

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Colbath)
Subject: Paging Available on Cellular Phones
Date: 12 Feb 1994 20:03:13 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA


Greetings. I haven't been reading this group much lately so this may
be old news to some. I just wanted to pass it on.

Bell Atlantic here in Phoenix announced yesterday that they were
making available to their cellular phone customers the ability to be
pagable on their cell phones. Is this being done anywhere else? It
sounds like a good idea. One is able to ditch the pager and just carry
a phone. Any comments?


Scott Colbath  Stratus Computer
Phoenix, Az.  [phone]
Internet:[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Misuzu Nakazawa)
Subject: How to Build Modified Three-Way Calling?
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 1994 16:51:16 -0500


I am trying to build a three-way telephone conference circuit where
parties A and B can communicate with party C (in both directions). C
can hear A and B and A and B can hear C. The catch though is that I do
not want A and B to be able to hear each other at any time during the
call.

Does anyone out there know how to build such a circuit, or where to
get equipement that would do this?


Thank you,

Misuzu Nakazawa   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Charles John Statton, Jr)
Subject: Searching For Internet Providers
Date: 12 Feb 1994 22:02:29 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


I am looking for Internet Service Providers in the Erie, PA area.  So
far I have only found PREPNet. Are there any others for this area?


Chuck Statton    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 94 13:54:22 -0500
Subject: A Switch Slipping Time
Organization: Isle-Net Telecommunications (BBS [phone])


Earlier this evening, I gave Bell Atlantic a trouble report because
some of my BBS users were complaining about excessive line noise.  I
could not identify any problem at my location, and could not even
confirm the problem because an intra-switch call revealed no line
noise at all.  I surmised that the problem lay in the connection
between my switch and the rest of the network.

Fortunately, the 611 clerk understood that the problem was not here.
All too often, they want to dispatch a repair truck for C.O. related
problems.  In this case, the problem was passed on to the C.O.  I got
a call back an hour later saying, "This is Bell Atlantic.  We've fixed
the problem.  The switch was slipping time."

Can someone provide a more technical explanation of what happened
here? I believe I am on a DMS-100 switch.


Dan Srebnick

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

Date: Sat, 12 Feb 94 16:39:43 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Displease Mr. Postman
Organization: Save the Dodoes Foundation


In <[e-mail]>, Carl Moore <[e-mail]> writes:

> Trains came in the 19th century, and I remember reading someplace
> that 30 miles per hour was considered fast back then.  (In some old
> "Highlights for Children" magazine of about 30 years ago, I recall
> some composer being held back in some studying out of fear of "hurting
> the brain".)

The American chess grandmaster Harry Pillsbury was widely thought to
have died from overtaxing his brain with too many simultaneous
exhibitions.  (Actually it was tertiary syphilis.)

By the way, George Gilder was right on all counts.  Postman hasn't
even figured out that central government is technologically obsolete;
he knows just enough about the future to prefer the past.  I read his
_Entertaining Ourselves to Death._ All plausible, and all wrong.
Postman is one of those would-be disciples of Marshall McLuhan who
assimilate as little of McLuhan's teaching as they need to make a
point: they swallow a corner of the oyster.


Col. G. L. Sicherman     [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #78
*****************************


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

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