A Beginner's Guide to the Internet/INTERNET.ISO/text/telediag/tc13-133.txt

Text File | 1996-05-06 | 20.3 KB | 447 lines

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 26 Feb 93 02:34:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 133

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    TOPS Birthday (Charles Hoequist)
    Beep! The Baby's Coming! (Harold Hallikainen)
    Pregnancy and Pagers (Robert J. Woodhead)
    40th STC Annual Conference -- Preliminary Program (Binion Amerson)
    Help Becky With Her 900 Bill (Tad Cook)
    Speech Recognition Press Announcement (AT&T Press Release via N Tiedemann)
    Fiber Optics Comes to Cable, Telco Screams Unfair (Dave Niebuhr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1993 08:34:00 +0000
From: Charles (C.A.) Hoequist <[e-mail]>
Subject: TOPS Birthday


The following birthday announcement made the rounds here in January; I
thought Digest readers might find it interesting.

First, some acronym decipherment:

TOPS = Traffic Operator Position System, a hardware and software
system that supports operators from a toll switch.

MSS = Member of Scientific Staff; a grunt. I believe this is
equivalent to AT&T's MTS (Member of Technical Staff?).

Protel = NT/BNR's switch programming language.

PLS = Product Library System. Source code and document control
system.

BCS = Batch Change Supplement. A system of tracking features from
feature proposal to customer release.

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

TOPS is 20 years old this month, and I thought some of you might like
to know a little about how it came to be.

TOPS started officially in January 1973.  Bell Northern Research was
three years old and had a few hundred employees, most of them located
in Ottawa.  BNR and NT (then called Northern Electric) had recently
installed their first stored program switch, the SP-1.  Bell Canada
had asked BNR to investigate the possibility of using the SP-1 to
replace their manual cordboard operator exchanges.  The official study
concluded that the idea was impractical, but in the middle of 1972 one
of the software design groups decided to do some skunk work
development.  They demonstrated it to senior management, who said very
nice but stop wasting time and get back to doing something useful.

NT marketing, however, knew a good thing when they found a customer
willing to buy it.  The design manager was called from his Christmas
1972 vacation in Mexico to go straight to Alaska, and inspired by the
bracing weather he helped to sell the idea.  When he got back to
Ottawa in January, he was put in charge of the newly approved TOPS
project by the same people who had reprimanded him for the bootleg
work.

He formed an interdisciplinary group of 9 or 10 people drawn from
hardware, software and human factors.  I joined the team as a new hire
in mid 1973 to work on TOPS software.  We also had a couple of people
from Bell Canada Operator Services to advise us.  Our design
methodology was a lot less formal than it is today.  We discussed how
it should work and then coded it.  Design reviews consisted of having
them come and look at it in the lab to see if they liked it.  In two
and a half years, we wrote call processing software and built NT's
first ASCII terminal, the TOPS-1 position.  The SP-1 processor was
capable of about 0.1 MIPS, and the software we wrote, mostly in
assembler, could handle about 100 positions.  The TOPS-1 position used
an Intel 8008 processor and had furniture designed to move telephone
operators into a modern office environment.

The first TOPS office went into service in Alaska in mid 1975.  NT
thought it would take about another year to finish development.  As
far as I know, there's still an SP-1 TOPS software group at NT.  TOPS
was a success on SP-1.  It was installed on about 30 of the 200 SP-1
switches that were eventually sold in Canada, the US and Puerto Rico.
The TOPS-1 terminal was replaced by the TOPS-2 and TOPS-3, which used
8080 microprocessors and more integrated electronics but kept the
original keyboard, screen and furniture.

In 1979, as the first DMS was going into service, the SP-1 TOPS team
moved over to DMS.  There was a fair degree of culture shock.  We had
a whole new system to learn, and Protel enforced a degree of structure
that was quite new to us.  It wasn't the DMS environment we know now,
because PLS and the BCS (among other things) had not been invented.
We persevered, and put the first DMS TOPS into service in Kingston
Ont. about the beginning of 1981.  It used the TOPS-3 position, and
reproduced the feature set and the look and feel of SP-1 TOPS almost
exactly.

DMS TOPS sold well for the next few years in Canada and to the
independent telcos in the US.  Then came the divestiture of the Bell
system in the US, which led to rapid growth of DMS switch sales to the
new Bell Operating Companies to meet requirements for equal access.
Under divestiture, the BOCs were required to provide operator
services, but the necessary equipment was allocated to AT&T.  Most of
the BOCs chose to buy DMS TOPS.  We upgraded our position to the
TOPS-4 which used the Intel 8086 and could be installed in either our
own or customer provided furniture, and we developed equal access
translations, rating and signaling.  During 1986 we almost tripled the
installed base of TOPS positions, which certainly put a strain on our
support organization.

At about the same time, we started to design a new workstation, TOPS
MP.  Certain important design elements such as shared high speed
datalinks were not available at first.  The design concept is being
extended now with the MPX, which will introduce an enhanced switch to
position protocol among other things.

If you're working on TOPS today, perhaps you might like to think back
to 1973 and ask yourself what you were doing while the events that
sealed your fate were taking place.

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

Charles Hoequist   |Internet: [e-mail]
BNR Inc.           | 919-991-8642
PO Box 13478, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3478

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Beep! The Baby's Coming!
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1993 19:28:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(scott.d.brenner) writes:

> I'd like to get a pager just for a month or so.  Since they've always
> just been given to me at work when my employer wanted me to carry one,
> I've never actually procured one myself.  Is it possible to get one
> for such a short period of time?  Where would I get one; who would I
> contact?  And what should I expect it to cost?  Is this a poor
> solution to my situation; are there any better alternatives?

    Years ago I loaned a pager to a friend whose friend was about
to give birth.  I now hear that it is standard practice for our local
hospitals to give pagers to their maternity patients.  All part of the
package.


Harold

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Pregnancy and Pagers
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1993 09:34:35 GMT


[e-mail] (scott.d.brenner) writes:

> Now for my question: Although I used to carry a pager for work, I
> don't anymore (I'm *not* upset by this!).  My wife is due to give
> birth to our first child in June.  As the due date approaches, I'd
> like for her to be able to get in touch with me instantly.

We did this for the birth of James (12/12/92) and it worked well.
Here in Japan you can get a pager over the counter, about $25 a month
plus a refundable deposit.

Some advice:

You need to distinguish between a "call me" page and a "call me
because things are starting to happen" page.  Trust me, the closer you
get, the more your wife will page you to do things on the way home,
etc; you want to be able to know BEFORE you answer the page whether or
not it's baby-related, as this will save you from freaking out
whenever the damn thing goes off.

Solution: Get a display pager, and use a code system.  Here is
(adjusted for America) the one we used:

phone number    non-home number, non-emergency call
0+phone number    non-home number, baby-related, call asap

000        Call home, non-emergency
111        Call home, baby may be on the way.
222        MEET me at home, baby may be on the way.
333        GO home, get baby stuff, meet me at clinic.
444        FORGET the junk, just get to the clinic ASAP!
555        IN delivery room, where are you, you jerk?
666        YOU are now a father, soon to be a DIVORCED one!


Good luck.  When it's all over, you'll understand which of the sexes
is the weaker one.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Binion Amerson)
Subject: 40th STC Annual Conference -- Preliminary Program
Organization: OpenConnect Systems, Dallas, TX
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1993 13:29:17 GMT


40TH STC ANNUAL CONFERENCE: PRELIMINARY PROGRAM SUMMARY
AVAILABLE ON USERGROUPS MISC.WRITING AND NEWS.ANNOUNCE.CONFERENCES

Anyone interested in the communication of technical, scientific, and
medical material -- writers, editors, managers, illustrators,
educators, and students (experienced and entry-level alike)--should
attend the Society for Technical Communication's (STC's) 40th Annual
Conference, Post-Conference Workshops, and Exposition to be held at
the Loews Anatole Hotel, Dallas, Texas, June 6-10, 1993.  For a
summary of the Preliminary Program for this Conference, see the
posting on the usergroup misc.writing under the title "TECHNICAL: 40th
STC Annual Conference -- Preliminary Program" or the posting on the
usergroup news.announce.conferences under the title "40th STC Annual
Conference -- Preliminary Program."


Binion Amerson, Senior Technical Writer, OpenConnect Systems, 2711 LBJ Frwy,
Suite 800, Dallas, TX 75234; 214/888-0447; 214/484-6100 (fax); [e-mail]
General Manager: 40th STC Annual Conference, June 6-10, 1993, Dallas, TX

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

Subject: Help Becky With Her 900 Bill
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 93 10:19:21 PST
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)


(I am posting this for my pal Becky, who does not read Usenet. Folks
who have any ideas or want to help should respond to her at bbullock@
u.washington.edu, or I will forward anything that gets posted on
TELECOM Digest.

I understand AT&T's position ... it looks like the call was dialed
from her line.  But what does one DO when they are reasonably certain
that their line and equipment are secure, they haven't called 900
numbers, and one of these charges shows up?

Her letter follows.

([e-mail])

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

Can you help us with a phone company problem?  We got charged for a
$15 900 call on our January bill that my S.O. and I are 99% sure we
didn't make.  It's to a sports line in Florida, and we show no faxes
sent that day or even similar phone numbers in our address books.  No
one was visiting and the cats don't like sports.

The call was made at 11:22 a.m. on Saturday, January 9, 1993.  The
number was 900-884-8048.  The 900 line is called SPORTS and is run by
ICN in Florida.  The charge was $15 for one minute!  If I was going to
pay that much, I'd at least want something titillating, not a stupid
sports line!

I called AT&T and they gave us the spiel about 900's being direct dial
only and that their equipment is '100% accurate"!  The company this is
charged for doesn't give AT&T a forwarding address or phone. Apparent-
ly, even if AT&T takes the charge off our bill, the 900 company (ICN)
can send us to collections, and we have no recourse with them until
they do, according to AT&T's 900 Specialist.

As I said before, we show no fax or modem calls to any number at that
time, and no errored transmissions either.  We do not keep a computer
telephone log unfortunately.  Seems like there should be some sort of
mechanism to protest this sort of charge, but AT&T doesn't seem
anxious to tell me about it.  Any suggestions from the telecom world
would be helpful.

Do you have any insight?  Could someone have gotten thru our computer
when it was in modem/fax mode?  Is AT&T ever wrong (ha, ha)?  Is it
worth $15? Should we just accept it and move on?  Thank you very much.


Becky Bullock   Office of Risk Management, AD-76
University of Washington  Seattle  [phone]  [e-mail]

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

Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  Internet: [e-mail]           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad


[Moderator's Note: One possibility is that some third party unknown to
you did camp onto your line outside your premises at some multiple on
the cable and placed the call. There are also instances when for some
reason or another the equipment fails to capture the calling number
and an operator will come on the line to ask 'may I have the number
you are calling from please ...' and the information at that point was
entered inaccurately, either because of operator error or by the
deliberate design of the calling party. (This does not happen just
with 900, it can be on any long distance call and is rare, but it does
happen.) The call won't be released until the operator punches in the
calling number quoted to her.  There is also the possibility of an 800
to 900 conversion, but you say you did not make any calls at the time
in question. I would suggest you ask telco to remove the charge, which
most will do *one time* for any subscriber. Telco may suggest or insist
you have premium (900/976) blocking put on the line to prevent further
occurences of this sort. I've never heard of an instance where telco
insisted that credit for a call *had* to be tied with blocking, but
that may be the case.

If the Information Provider chooses to place you with a collection
agency (which is doubtful in my opinion, but it has been done), only a
feeble attempt at collection will be made. There is a bottom line to
be considered after all. Despite threats which may be made, this will
not reflect on your credit in any way.  And finally, before you give
either telco or the IP too much lip or back-talk and sass, bear in
mind that *nearly always* (note how I cover myself! :) ) the billing
records are correct in this sort of situation. Have you any children
who may have made this call and will not admit it? Was anyone else in
your home who might have made the call? Are you certain you did not
misdial and abandon the call after a recording answered? Telco has no
legal obligation to remove the charge (they can wait until the IP
issues credit back through the system, which would likely be the same
day that Hell freezes over), but most (and certainly AT&T) will do so
one time to maintain customer goodwill. But if credit is issued and
the IP winds up eating the charge, which is likely, then you later
discovered a child had seen the number on the television and called it
or your neighbor in your home doing it again, you'd feel kind of silly
with egg on your face, wouldn't you ...    PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Feb 93 18:33:39 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Speech Recognition Press Announcement
Organization: AT&T


A couple of weeks ago I responded to a question about speech
recognition in the public switched network. Here (finally) is a press
release which directly addresses that. (I had to wait until the
marketing people said it was OK, before I could talk about it.) This
also follows the thread that has been going on about the "dial one"
prompt at the beginning of the 1-800-CALLATT interaction to handle
dial pulse callers. Now you can say the number you want (if the end
customer subscribes to "AT&T 800 Speech 4RD0l Recognition") and be
routed like DTMF.

If there are any questions about this (technical ones), feel free to
e-mail them to me. I will compile a list of questions (if there are
any) and answers (if they're not propriatary) and submit that to the
Digest sometime in the future.


Norm Tiedemann     AT&T Bell Labs
[e-mail]  or  [e-mail]

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

Thursday, February 25, 1993 -- 11:15 a.m. EST

AT&T today announced an innovative 800 Service feature that makes it
easier for all callers, including those with rotary and non-touch-tone
telephones, to obtain information from businesses by simply
"speaking."  Called AT&T 800 Speech Recognition, this new capability
enables callers to respond verbally to that allow them to select
automatically the information or assistance they want.  AT&T is the
in an 800 service network.  Past technology only enabled callers using
touch-tone telephones to direct their calls after responding to menu
prompts with their keypads.

AT&T Speech Recognition is a network-based, advanced 800 Service
innovation that prompts callers to speak a number -- from "one" to
"nine" -- corresponding to a menu of options that identifies the
department or location they wish to reach within the company they're
calling.  Supported by state-of-the-art technology from AT&T Bell
Laboratories, AT&T Speech Recognition is able to recognize the spoken
number, process the information and route the call through the AT&T
network to the appropriate destination.  During field tests, AT&T
Speech Recognition correctly identified the spoken number 97.8% of the

time.  This high completion rate is achieved even taking into account
the many dialects and accents that exist across the U.S.

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

Date: Thu, 25 Feb 93 10:10:46 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Fiber Optics Comes to Cable, Telco Screams Unfair


This is mostly about a cable company but I'm keeping it legit by
bringing in NYTel - Dave

Today's {Newsday, Feb. 25, 1993} has as it's head article the use by
Cablevision of Long Island (a large regional cable company) of fiber
optics to connect to its subscribers.

It will be fully deployed on Long Island by late 1994 and by 1995
subscribers in Brooklyn and Queens will also be hooked up (I'm not
affected since I have TCI and at much cheaper rates).  The initial
point of entry of this service will be near the border of Nassau and
Suffolk Counties (in and around Levittown in Nassau).  The system will
grow from there to connect all of it's current hubs and subscribers.

Services that could be offered are: Medical Imaging, Telecommuting,
Video-Conferencing, Distance Learning, Video-on-Demand and Personal
Communications Networks (using pocket telephones bypassing NYTel (I
knew I could stick a telecom related item in this article somehow).

Cablevision of Long Island caused a big uproar recently in Huntington
Township (one of the over 660 taxing entities on Long Island) when it
attempted to upgrade it's system; when it arrived, it infuriated many
customers who found they could no longer use their remote controls or
VCRs to record cable shows.

The system will cost $300 million and it is hoped that it will pay for
itself through per-service pricing, rather than through higher
subscription rates and program package deals.  Charles Donlan,
chairman of Cablevision said: "In fact, rates for some basic-service
subscribers could actually decrease;" -- a key consideration since
average Cablevision bills are considered to be the highest cable bills
in the country.

My cable company, TCI, currently has seven miles of fiber installed
and it, too, is going to upgrade during 1994.

NYTel, as expected, is squealing like a stuck pig over this since they
can be cut out of the equation somewhere along the line.

Pat Davidson, a NYTel spokesman, complained, however, that cable
companies, largely unregulated, enjoy an unfair advantage over telcos.
Federal statues say telcos can only own cable companies outside their
operating regions; ain't that a shame.

The fun starts on tax-happy, high-utility-rate (you name it and it's
overpriced with one exception, my public water company) Long Island.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #133
******************************