A Beginner's Guide to the Internet/INTERNET.ISO/text/telediag/tc13-122.txt

Text File | 1996-05-06 | 20.2 KB | 502 lines

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 21 Feb 93 21:37:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 122

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CRTC News Release: Bell, B.C. Tel New Charges (Adele Ponty)
    Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy (Nigel Allen)
    Call for Articles: ConneXions (Ole J. Jacobsen)
    International Calling Services (Jim Sturtevant)
    More About General Turmoil (Brian D. McMahon)
    Any Way to Use Cellular Phone on Normal Phone Lines? (David C. Kovar)
    Re: AT&T Are You Listening? (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: AT&T Are You Listening? (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Long Subscriber Loop Problems (Pat Turner)
    Re: Long Subscriber Loop Problems (Bruce Sullivan)
    Re: Let's Do a Figure-8 (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Procedure to Use 800-321-0ATT (Laird Broadfield)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Adele Ponty <[e-mail]>
Subject: CRTC News Release: Bell, B.C. Tel New Charges
Organization: UTCC Public Access
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1993 15:53:21 -0500


CRTC news release
January 29, 1993

BELL, B.C. TEL, APPLY TO INTRODUCE NEW DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE CHARGES

OTTAWA/HULL - The CRTC today announced that it has received
applications from both the British Columbia Telephone Company (B.C.
Tel) and Bell Canada (Bell) to revise their customer charges for
directory assistance (Telecom Public Notice CRTC 93-13 and 93-14).

Bell and B.C. Tel both propose to apply a directory assistance charge
for each requested telephone number, whether it be for a number in
Canada or the United States.  Specifically, the two companies are
proposing to introduce a $0.50 local directory assistance (LDA) charge
for requests for local numbers not listed in the current editions of
their telephone directories; introduce a long distance directory
assistance (LDDA) charge of $0.50 for Canadian telephone numbers
outside the subscriber's free calling area, and; reduce the LDDA
charge for requests for telephone numbers in the United States from
$0.80 to $0.50.  Bell also proposes to reduce its LDA charge for
listed numbers from $0.60 to $0.50.

The proposed changes would also affect the exemption currently
available to persons with disabilities and, in the case of Bell, those
persons 65 years of age and over.  Currently, Bell provides unlimited
local directory assistance free of charge to seniors and persons with
disabilities.  There is also no charge for persons with disabilities
for lond distance directory assistance for numbers within Canada.  For
numbers within the United States, the general limit of 50 free
requests per month is applied.  Under Bell's proposal, there would not
be unlimited free directory assistance but rather a combined maximum
of 25 free local and long distancE directory assistance requests per
month per residence customer account.  B.C. Tel currently allows
persons with disabilities unlimited local directory assistance and
unlimited long distance directory assistance for numbers within Canada
or to the United States.  B.C.  Tel now proposes to only exempt
persons with disabilities from paying local directory assistance
charges if he number requested is listed in the company's telephone
directory.  There would no longer be any free long distance directory
assistance.

The applications made by Bell and B.C. Tel are available for
examination at any of their respective business offices, or at the
offices of the CRTC.  The Commission invites anyone affected by the
proposed changes to submit their comments in writing, by March 1,
1993.  Note: Both the public notice and this news release are
available in Braille and on audio cassette.


Contact:

Bill Allen, Director
CRTC, Public Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario  K1A 0N2
[phone] - TDD [phone] -
Fax [phone]

or one of our regional offices listed below:

Halifax,Nova Scotia -  [phone] -  TDD [phone]
Montreal, Quebec - [phone] - TDD (514) 283-831
Winnipeg, Manitoba  - [phone] - TDD [phone]
Vancouver, British Columbia - [phone] - TDD [phone]

or the Department of Communications Regional Office:
Toronto, Ontario - (416)  973-8215

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

Notice

Ottawa, 29 January 1993

Telecom Public Notice CRTC 93-14

BELL CANADA - REVISIONS TO DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE CHARGES

Reference: Tariff Notice 4505

The Commission has received an application from Bell Canada (Bell),
dated 11 September 1992, for approval of tariff revisions related to
directory assistance charges.

In its application, Bell proposes to apply a common directory
assistance charge of $0.50 per requested telephone number for both
local directory assistance (LDA) and long distance directory
assistance (LDDA).  Specifically, the company proposes to:

(1)   reduce the current LDA charge from $0.60 to
      $0.50;

(2)   eliminate the current free allowance of 50 LDDA
      calls to the United States per access per month;
      $0.50;

(3)   reduce the Canada-U.S. LDDA charge from $0.80 to $0.50;

(4)   introduce a Canada/Canada LDDA charge of $0.50;

(5)   introduce a charge of $0.50 for requests for (a)
      out-of-book numbers (i.e., numbers that are
      within the same local calling area, but listed in
      another directory), (b) numbers that are new,
      changed or not listed, (c) foreign listings, and
      (d) 800 Service numbers via LDA, and

(6)   introduce a charge for LDA/LDDA requests from
      hotel PBX Service, and for requests for Bell
      numbers and for special instruction-type listings
      (for example, "if busy call" or "after hours
      call").

The company proposes to establish a free monthly allowance of 25
LDA/LDDA requests per residence account for (1) persons certified as
being 65 years of age or over, and (2) persons who are certified as
physically or mentally disabled, functionally illiterate or who inform
the company of a temporary handicap or disability preventing them from
using the directory.

Bell also proposes changes to the exemptions and exceptions to the
application of LDA and LDDA charges.

In support of its application, Bell has submitted information for
which it has claimed confidentiality.  An abridged version of this
information has been provided for the public record.

The Commission addressed interrogatories to Bell with respect to its
application.  The company responded to these interrogatories on 21
January 1993.

The application may be examined at any of Bell's business offices or
at the offices of the CRTC, Room 201, Central Building, Les Terrasses
de la Chaudiere, 1 Promenade du Portage, Hull, Quebec, or Suite 602,
Complex Guy-Favreau, East Tower, 200 Rene-Levesque Blvd. West.
Montreal, Quebec.  A copy of Bell's application and of its responses
to the Commission's interrogatories may be obtained by any person upon
request directed to the company at the address shown below.

If you wish to comment on the application, please write to Mr. A. J.
Darling, Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, by 1 March
1993 (fax: [phone]).  A copy of your letter should be sent to
Mr. B. A> Courtois, Vice President, Law and Regulatory Affairs, Bell
Canada, 105 Hotel-de-Ville Street, 6th Floor, Hull, Quebec, J8X 4H7
(fax: [phone]).

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

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1993 10:28:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Quebec Yellow Pages Controversy
Organization: R-node Public Access Unix - 1 416 249 5366


Bell Canada's Yellow Pages subsidiary, Tele-Direct (Publications)
Inc., makes Quebec companies that want to advertise in the English-
language section of the Yellow Pages buy an advertisement of the same
size in the French-language section as well, according to {Marketing}
magazine (February 15, 1993, p. 3). French-language advertisers don't
have to buy English-language advertising, though.  This particularly
affects small companies in Montreal and Hull that primarily serve the
English-speaking community. The policy is apparently the result of a
private agreement between Tele-Direct and a Quebec government agency,
the Office de la Langue Francaise.

As well, Bell Canada only puts the French-language Yellow Pages in
Montreal phone booths, the article reports. (That is, the booth would
have the white pages and the French-language Yellow Pages, but not the

English-language Yellow Pages. In practice, many Bell phone booths
don't have any directories at all.)

I have capitalized Yellow Pages, as it is a registered trade mark in
Canada. In the U.S., it is a generic term. (In the same way, Aspirin
is a registered trade mark in Canada, but not in the U.S.)


Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 93 9:03:17 PST
From: Ole J. Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call for Articles: ConneXions


Call for Articles

ConneXions -- The Interoperability Report is a monthly technical
journal which covers all aspects for computer networking and
distributed computing. ConneXions seeks articles ranging from
technology tutorials and user case studies, to letters, opinions and
book reviews. For author guidelines, send a message to
[e-mail]. Authors receive a complimentary lifetime sub-
scription.

*** PLEASE: Do not include my message in your reply. If you must
include it, please do so AFTER your reply rather than before it. Thank
you very much.***


Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions--The Interoperability Report
Interop Company, 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040,
Phone: [phone]  FAX: [phone]  Email: [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim Sturtevant)
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1993 13:22:43
Subject: International Calling Services
From: [e-mail] (Jim Sturtevant)


Pat, I've been monitoring the TELCOM group for quite awhile and enjoy
it a great deal.  I want to ask if you are familiar with an
consultants who are knowledgable on various techniques for providing
international callers with inexpensive access to US long distance.
For example there are services where you call once from Euorpe, then a
return call is placed connecting the caller with their desired party
at US intl rates rather than expensive European PTT rates.

Also, do you know of a resource (online or printed) to get
international rate tables for calls originating outside the US?

Thanks for your help, any direction would be helpful.


Jim Sturtevant     Internet:[e-mail]
The Complete PC    CIS UserID: 71333,612
1983 Concourse Dr. San Jose, CA
Phone:[phone]  Fax:[phone]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 93 16:51:13 cdt
From: McMahon,Brian D <[e-mail]>
Subject: More About General Turmoil


I heard yet another interpretation of what the letters GTE stand for
from a long-time employee ... Going to Texas Eventually.

He then went on to say that he'd jokingly told a switchman that the
local CO was moving down south, too.  The instantaneous reply: "That
already happened.  What do you think all those dishes up on the roof
are for?"

Apparently GenTel is the butt of as many jokes inside the organization
as it is on the outside.  Gee ...


Brian McMahon (BDM13)    <[e-mail]>    <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (David C Kovar)
Subject: Any Way to Use Cellular Phone on Normal Phone Lines?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1993 18:20:59 GMT


I have a Uniden transportable phone that I use occassionally. I was
wondering if there was any way of adapting it so I could use it as a
normal phone, ie, connected to a house phone jack? I prefer it's
handset to the other ones I have and I also would like to have one set
of stored numbers rather than two or more. Thanks, in advance.


David

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

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 93 06:34:17 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: AT&T Are You Listening?


Jack Decker <[e-mail]> writes about the
Seven Deadly Sins of Telecom.  I would propose an eighth: the
attitude, common among both MCI and Sprint, and seen elsewhere, that
the customer can always prepend 10288 to his calls and get through.
It is an excuse for shoddy service, plain and simple.  How long was
South Carolina out of service before Sprint finally came back on line?

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

Date: 21 Feb 93 13:46:12 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Are You Listening?


In TELECOM Digest V13 #113 [e-mail] (Jack
Decker) writes:

> Tell me why, for example, an AT&T operator can hold my line open
> until she releases the call, while OCC operators cannot?  Have these
> superior connections been made available to other carriers?  I think
> not.

John Higdon <[e-mail]> replies:

> Why would they want them? What you describe is the old TSPS (left over
> from pre-divestiture). The facilities available now are obviously more
> advanced.

The AT&T operator can hold your line open for exactly the same reason
AT&T can provide true coin service -- they are the only carrier
willing to invest in the network capability for doing so. This
capability has been available for the carriers to order in SWBT since
1989. Thats four years. It would appear to me that the other carriers
have no excuses, they just aren't interested in providing the same
fully capable service as AT&T does.  Economics, I suppose.


Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

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

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 93 14:30 EST
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Long Subscriber Loop Problems


John Braden writes:

> 1. What is a "bridge lifter" (or bridge clips)?

To the best of my knowledge:

Bridge clips: nickel plated bronze clips used to jumper adjcent
terminals on a punchdown (esp 66) block.

Bridge lifters: Inductors used on OPX lines.  Without loop current,
they presented a high impedence to voice frequency.  When the line
went off hook, the loop current saturated the core of the inductor,
lowering the impedence.  This isolated the on hook side of the OPX
from the in use off hook side.

> 3. Is there a way I could improve the signal on my side of the network
> interface?

There are a number of cards built by Tellabs/Wescom/XEL for this.  I
can't recommend a specific one because I don't know how they handle
ringing.  I would call your local Graybar/Anixter/North/Alltel office.
Cost will be around $150 for the card and $50 for mounting.

> 4. Is there anything I can do to get acceptable signal levels included
> in the published tariff for Massachusetts?

Not really, they would be unlikely to file a second tariff unless the
PUC forces them to.

> 6. Should I just give up and be glad I can sometimes connect at V.32
> speeds?

Absolutely not, V.32/32 bis modems were designed to function over the
public switched telephone network (PSTN).  You can't expect the same

preformance as someone with a Slick in his/her backyard, but you
should be able to connect regardless of tariffs.  I would call in
another ticket, without mentioning modems.  Tell them the problem is
"long levels".  If they can't help you I would give your PUC a call.

>  As a result of the attenuation distortion present on my lines,

Just for reference, attenuation distortion refers to attenuation vs.
freq, usually referenced to 1004 Hz.  This is a different problem, but
quite likely also happening on you line as well. For POTS lines this
is measured with a three tone slope (404, 1004, 2804).


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 93 20:15 GMT
From: Bruce Sullivan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Long Subscriber Loop Problems


> Are there ANY modems which do well with -35dBm signal levels?

I doubt it. I don't do much work in the dial-up world, but for a
leased circuit, -35db is pretty darned cold. My modems will typically
alert me if the RSL goes outside of about -9 to -20db or so, even
though we can still pass data beyond that. -35db would definitely get
the telco a call from me. When we were ordering a lot analog lines
(pretty much DDS only these days..) we paid extra at provisioning time
for 'conditioning.'  I don't know if this is an option with switched
services, since they can't control where you go once you get past your
serving CO. Still, *that's* where you problem appears to be, so if
they can condition it that far, it might be of some help. There are no
doubt others on CDT with far greater knowledge of that than myself.

> Is there a way I could improve the signal on my side of the network
> interface?

Unless the problem exists on your premises, again I doubt it. Even if
the problem is there, you'll be taking shots in the dark unless you
have the equipment to measure it at various points.


Bruce Sullivan ([e-mail] OR [e-mail])

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

Date: Sun, 21 Feb 93 02:32:55 -0800
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Let's Do a Figure-8
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim
Gottlieb) writes:

> [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau) writes:

>> Seriously, what other dialing plan would you propose instead?

> I, for one, would seriously suggest a change to eight-digit numbers.

Wasn't the original reason for thinking of alternatives to the current
proposal that some vendors thought it would be too big of a change to
their equipment in order to support NXX area codes?  Can you imagine
how many things in the US would break if the conversion were made to
eight digit local numbers (or four digit area codes)?  I can't imagine
how long it would take the 500+ local carriers, and about as many long
distance carriers, to convert.  (LA Cellular still does not have the
213/310 split working correctly for roamers in all cases :-() And this
does not begin to include all of the private-sector automation that
deals with phone numbers.

Since the current plan will run out of area codes in less than two
years, I don't think this is nearly enough time to make any
large-scale changes to the NANP.  The FCC has set a 1997 deadline
before publicly-accesible PBX's and COCOTs must be replaced to support
10XXX dialing.  I would think that at least a similar five-year
warning would have to be given to everyone involved before such a
change could reasonably be implemented.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Procedure to Use 800-321-0ATT
Date: 21 Feb 93 10:13:22 GMT


Pat writes:

> [Moderator's Note: After dialing 800-321-0288, you hear the AT&T
> tones, and the robot operator announces, "AT&T ... please enter the
> number you are calling, or zero for an operator."  After entering the
> number you are asked to enter your card number. It is basically the
> same as any other credit card call.  Persons who have experiences with
> this are requested to write.   PAT]

Slightly amusing story: the "please enter the number you are calling"
message confused the bejeezus out of an operator at a hospital I was
working at this week; from the phone I was borrowing, any off-premise
calls had to be made through the operator, including 800 calls (don't
ask me, I don't understand why either.)  So, after a number of calls
to the operator to get me our corporate voicemail, it happened I
needed to make a personal call.  So, I called the operator, asked for
800 321 0288, and then we got "please enter the number you are
calling".  The operator (still on the line) says, in one of the most
bewildered voices I've ever heard, "Didn't we just do that?"


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #122
******************************