A Beginner's Guide to the Internet/INTERNET.ISO/text/telediag/tc13-154.txt

Text File | 1996-05-06 | 21.8 KB | 534 lines

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 5 Mar 93 01:47:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 154

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Terence Cross)
    Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever (Bernard Rupe)
    Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings (Paul Gatker)
    Re: OSPS and ANI Failures (Al Varney)
    Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (John Higdon)
    Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: The Future of Videophones (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: National Data Superhighways - Access? (Dan J. Declerck)
    Re: Tell Me About Your Pager (Jack Lowry)
    Re: Mini PBX on PC Card? (Steve Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 93 08:55:45 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever


Daniel E. Ganek <[e-mail]> wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Terence Cross) writes:

>> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a
>> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong
>> province, China.

> Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it
> to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement?

I don't think US phones will work.  I think there are two issues here:
there must be a billing arrangement with the foreign roamer (e.g.  an
on-line transaction system (VLR) between Chinese PTT and US mobile
carrier or perhaps the visitor could become a Chinese PTT subscriber)
and the foreign roamers phone must be compatible with the system in
use.

The system in Guangdong will be the sophisticated digital GSM (Global
System forMobile communication).  If the foreign man has a GSM phone
then he is half way there.  I don't think GSM is used in the US, yet.


rgs,

Terence Cross

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

From: [e-mail] (Bernard Rupe)
Subject: Re: China's Largest Cellular Order Ever
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 16:05:22 GMT


Daniel E. Ganek <[e-mail]> writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Terence Cross) writes:

>> Ericsson has been awarded a contract worth over USD 150 million for a
>> large expansion of the mobile telephone network in the Guangdong
>> province, China.

> Can a US cellular phone be used in China? If so, how difficult is it
> to setup an account or set-up some sort of roaming aggreement?

No.  China uses the TACS system while the US uses AMPS.  By the way,
Motorola has around 70 cellular systems going in to China this year
alone, worth more than the Ericsson contact listed above.


Bernie Rupe                 1501 W. Shure Drive  Room 1315
Motorola, Inc.                  Arlington Heights, IL 60004
Cellular Infrastructure Group    [phone]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings
Date: 4 Mar 1993 17:48:13 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


John Castaldi ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of
> all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our
> Vax to try to save money on 411 calls.  Any info would help.

There is a vendor that markets something called PhoneDisk USA (your
spelling may vary) What it is is a list of all published phone numbers
for the USA.  There is a eastern disk, western disk, business disk,
and I believe a Canada disk.  It is a subscription service and you get
new ones every so often.  (it is a CD-ROM) If you want to try one out,
outdated ones are featured in Drew Allen Kaplans wonderful catalog of
neat gizmos.  I believe it has name, number, address, and business
catagory for the business listings.  It includes a database search
engine on the disk also.


Dale Farmer

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Gatker)
Subject: Re: Info Wanted on Database of White Pages Listings
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 04:10:22 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Castaldi) writes:

> Does anyone know where I can get a database (hopefully in ASCII) of
> all white pages listings. I would like to load this information on our
> Vax to try to save money on 411 calls.  Any info would help.

> [Moderator's Note: *All* white pages listings? ...

> The reason 411 and/or 555-1212 is as cheap as it is is because
> everyone is sharing the costs of a lookup clerk, the hardware, etc in
> common.  PAT]

 In NYC 555-1212 is free information for out of NYC information. But
411 is not cheap!  Just to find out a local number they charge $.45
per lookup whether they find a number for you or not.

 The solution is to make a list of every possible area you may need to
get a number for and order the entire book from NYTel. I'm pretty sure
they send it for no charge. Of course it would be nicer if they sent a
CD-ROM!

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

Date: Thu,  4 Mar 93 11:41:21 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: OSPS and ANI Failures
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Floyd Davidson) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
> ati.com> writes:

>> On Mar 1 at 23:23, Andy Sherman writes:

>>> could show up on [an OSPS] screen with an incoming call were
>>> the messages ONI FAILURE and ANI FAILURE.  In those cases you hand to
>>> ask the customer for the number and then complete the call.

   But did you then ask "YOUR number, please?", which is confusing on
Operator-assisted 0- calls.  What is the sequence of questions when
the caller says "I want to make a collect call", for example?

>> So my question is this: What happens when it is my Trailblazer or fax

>> automatic devices is increasing exponentially, feeble attempts to
>> "rescue" a call via operator intervention would seem to be a complete
>> waste of time and resources.

>> I guess what I am trying to say is, "why bother?" Just let the call
>> die; why take up more time?

   As pointed out earlier, YOUR calling habits are not typical.  There
are entire NXXs out there that might see one modem call per week.
(OK, maybe only 200 DNs are assigned to the whole NXX, but still ...)
And towns where a FAX only exists at the local service (gas) station,
for public use at cheap rates.  And these are the old switches that
are most prone to ANI failure (assuming ANI was ever installed).

   You seem to assume that ANI is available everywhere.  There are
still (very few) CDO and independents that use LEC/AT&T Operator
Services to do all the work, including identifying the calling party.
This is also needed for calls from (non-GTE anyway) eight-party lines.
While ANI failures (or mutilated ANI digits) might not be worth
saving, there are still lots of calls from stations that don't do ANI.
So the ability to do ONI is still needed.

   To complete a FAX or modem call over such lines (they are usually
not allowed on two-party or eight-party lines, for other reasons), the
modem typically provides a way for one to MANUALLY dial calls, and
force a connection (via "ato" on some), while the FAX typically allows
for the same MANUAL dialing and connection completion.  The modem

capability is also useful (thanks, Hayes) from hotel rooms where the
"bong" for calling cards is very unpredictable or where only Real
Operators(tm?)  collect the card numbers (as for some Toronto airport
coin phones).

> Routing ANI failures to an operator doesn't just result in a call
> completion, it also generates 1) better customer relations, and 2)
> trouble tickets which should lead to corrective action.

> And, in fact there are ONI only exchanges still out there.  We
> (the Fairbanks Toll Center) had a trouble ticket opened by an upset
> customer last week because he kept getting an operator ... and in
> our most pleasant manner someone (NOT me) explained that in Clear,
> Alaska you get an operator every time because it is the last known
> place in the world where the telephone company won't put in modern
> equipment, and we expect it to always be that way ...

   I wouldn't bet on Clear being the ONLY place.  There's around 1500
non-RBOC TELCOs in the continental USA, and most are just (rightly)
trying to use cheapest equipment that does the job.  Maybe that's some
old SXS CDO, or a cheap PBX-like box.  If the number of toll calls is
a few dozen/day, why put in that ANI stuff?

In article <[e-mail]> tim gorman <71336.1270@C
ompuServe.COM> writes:

> 1. For regular direct dialed calls there are two types of AMA
> recording offices, Local Automatic Message Accounting (LAMA) and
> Centralized Automatic Message Accounting (CAMA). CAMA offices, as the
> name denotes, provide billing for a number of subtending offices. It
> does this by having the subtending offices forward ANI as well as the
> called number.  Please note that this type of operation is not
> compatible with SS7.

   Tim, I'd like more info on this SS7 "compatibility" issue.
Bellcore has certainly provided for CAMA AMI interfaces in the SSP 800
service requirements and in the LEC and IXC SS7 Interconnection
requirements.  SSP 800 also supported ONI directly, and I thought ONI
POTS calls were also covered.  The Operator Services SS7 interface
isn't well defined (yet), but that's not how I read your statement.
If you meant that Caller-ID wouldn't work with CAMA (in spite of those
that wanted it as an alternative to SS7), then I concur.

> The other case where these CAMA operators are used is in providing
> toll service for four-party and eight-party customers. We, in Kansas,
> still have some four-party customers even out of some of our digital
> offices. There are CAMA Operator Number Identification (ONI) trunks
> from these four or eight party serving offices to our CAMA toll
> offices.

   But when you replaced the CDO in my home town, you forgot to
activate the "four-digit local calling" feature on the new switch
(grin).  And my dad's impression was that it was SWBT, not the PUC,
that forced him to private line service from 8-party.  Of course,
since the other parties all got their overhead lines replaced with
buried cable, he was (and is) the only party on the remaining pair of
overhead wires.  Kinda weird to see almost a mile of telephone poles
with one pair of wires on them (but arms for many more), and directly
below is a cable.

   Almost the same as the natural gas pipeline that runs down one side
of the road to the farm.  He doesn't own any property where the
pipeline is buried, so the gas company won't give him service.  But
his neighbors that own land on the pipeline-side of the road can get
service, even if their houses are on the opposite side of the road.
(Guess profits are better on out-of-state sales ...)


Al Varney - just my opinion, of course

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 11:39 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back


MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

> In PacBell CW and 3W, hanging up on either virtual line disconnects
> everybody!

On my Pac*Bell service (5ESS) hanging up on either party in a CW
situation results in the remaining party ringing you back. This is
true on both Commstar and vanilla CW. And are you telling us that once
you have a 3W in progress, you can separate the callers and hang up on
EITHER one of your choice? My experience with 3W throughout history is
that a flash during the 3W call disconnects the third party. Does GTE
do this differently?

> [Moderator's Note: I don't know about PacBell, but IBT does it just
> the way you say GTE does: we can hang up on the party we were talking
> to and the one left on hold is rung back to us as a reminder that we
> left him on hold.   PAT]

That is exactly the way Pac*Bell does it as well. Always has been. I
have GTD-5 service at a mountaintop location. Except for the complete
sluggishness of the switch, the features work pretty much like those
at my home. And of course, three-way calling on a GTD-5 is unusable.
The only reason I have it is because it is part of a "smart" package.
I am sure that is the only way GTE could sell 3W.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 04 MAR 93 16:40
Subject: Re: Call Waiting / Three-Way Calling Ring Back


I wrote:

> In PacBell CW and 3W, hanging up on either virtual line disconnects
> everybody!

John Higdon replied:

> On my Pac*Bell service (5ESS) hanging up on either party in a CW
> situation results in the remaining party ringing you back. This is tru
> on both Commstar and vanilla CW. And are you telling us that once you
> have a 3W in progress, you can separate the callers and hang up on
> EITHER one of your choice? My experience with 3W throughout history is
> that a flash during the 3W call disconnects the third party. Does GTE
> do this differently?

Sorry.  PacBell CW does indeed work as expected.  It is PacBell 3W
that works differently from GTE 3W.  I had gotten used to having both
work the same in GTE land, and really liked being able to "transfer" a
call from one phone to another by flashing for a 3W stutter dialtone,
then hanging up.  My phone would ring, and the caller would hear
ringback.


Randy Gellens                [e-mail]
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         [e-mail]
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: Looking for Distinctive Ring Discriminator
Date: 4 Mar 1993 17:39:31 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


[e-mail] (Greg Trotter) writes:

> I subscribe to the distinctive ring service from my telco. Does anyone
> know of a device that can identify these different rings and separate
> the calls? I'd like to have a separate line for incoming calls to my
> computer; the traffic doesn't warrant another line. Any help is
> appreciated.

I recently surveyed several manufacturers of this equipment.  By far
the unit that I preferred was the SR2/SR3 by Multi-Link (606)
233-0223.  While it only recognizes a maximum of three ring patterns,
US West offers us four, I found it exceptionally reliable, and very
smart when dealing with unusual circumstances.  It also sorted out the
rings more quickly than competitors products, actually learning how
our telco sent the patterns, and adapting to the telco.  No
association with the company, other than as a satisfied customer.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 17:22:16 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: The Future of Videophones


>> I am working on a research project concerning the future of videophones
>> and videoconferencing.  Is there a future at all?

> I'll give you a future:

 ... my pretty, and your little dog, too!  <menacing cackling>

> Vice President Ozone Boy gets his "didn't inhale" associate and
> their Junketeers on Capital Hill to pass an energy tax so stiff that
> the fares on plane trips have to rise substantially.

ROFL!  Hey, is Ozone Boy any relation to Devo's General Boy? :-)


Funny, isn't it, that Mr. Clinton just a couple days ago promised to
help the aerospace companies.  I don't get it: clobber the airlines
with a fuel tax.  The airlines pass this on in the form of higher
prices to their customers, who will then fly less frequently.  Fewer
travelers means more airplanes parked out in the desert, and little
need for new airplanes.  Fewer new airplanes means big layoffs at DAC
and Boeing.  Did I miss something here?

Coming Up Next: Gee, the airlines are having trouble again.  I guess
we'd better re-regulate them -- it's for their own good.  Back to two
kilobuck fares for the El Lay to Noo Yawk run ...

> And then there's the sleaze applications which currently can be left
> to the imagination. :) The 900 Area Code and 976 dial-up telephone
> services are a $1 billion a year business, of which I'm sure that a
> nice chunk of this is in the "X Rated" class (and I don't mean stuff
> running under X-Windows!)  Anyone want to guess how much this stuff is
> worth with full video and sound?

A CE friend of mine who works for SGI tells me that the companies
spending the biggest bucks in Virtual Reality (tm) are the virtual sex
outfits.  It's hard to believe, but then again ...

Hey, tell you what -- I want a job in Quality Assurance!


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]
                         After June 25 : [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: National Data Superhighways - Access?
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 15:48:55 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jeffrey Jonas) writes:

>> I think it is clear that the access problem will get cleared up. The
>> question then becomes what do you do with all the information and get
>> it into a usable form;

> Why, Mr and Mrs. John Q. Public will use their wide screen digital
> HDTV surround sound Sear's/IBM TV connected to Prodigy! (Remember
> AT&T Sceptre, the TV terminal?)

> Jeesh -- just what I needed -- a combination Sega/Nintendo/Mac/PC
> compatible color high resolution surround sound stereophonic
> multimedia system with CD-ROM, keyboard, mouse, joysticks and power
> pad!

If you look at the hardware requirements for HDTV, you'd see a computer
(Multimedia) without a:

Keyboard (input device)
Disk Drive (semi-permanent storage device)

Adding the computer part shouldn't add more than a couple hundred
using today's prices. In five years, it'll probably be a wash.  The
hope I have, if this scenario were played out, is that television
would then become an interactive media, and thus, more educational.
Presently, its "talking heads".


Dan DeClerck     EMAIL: [e-mail]
Motorola Cellular APD   Phone: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (jack lowry)
Subject: Re: Tell Me About Your Pager
Organization: Prism Medical Systems
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1993 01:22:52 GMT


Molly Geiger ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am looking for information on radio pagers.

> Would you rather use another form of communication than the pager?

I live and work in the Baltimor/Washington area. I've had a sky pager
and a local Baltimore/Washington pager. The worst thing about a pager
is finding a phone to answer the page. I used to do rather critical
support of a software product. I hated the pressure I felt to respond
when the pager went off.

The skypager had a few advantages over the local pagers I have had:

1. possibilty of retrieving missed pages. (upto 100 hours ago)
2. Blocking pages. (Don't bother me I'm...)
3. future pages. (page you at some time in the future)
4. The newer sky pagers can also tell you when you are out of range.

All of these functions where accessed through a 800 number and you
PIN.  If you travel between markets (The baltimore/Washington market
includes Phily and southern New Jersey with METROMEDIA) a sky page may
be the best bet.

> Would cellular phones be better?

Having had just a pager for about five years I just recently changed
jobs and now have a portion of my cellular phone access and all
business related phone bills covered I have found the phone to be a
great asset.  I purchased a handheld phone and I also carry a beeper.
Each has it's place; there are some area the beeper does not reach and
the phone does, and the beeper battery is not dead as often as the
phone battery is.

If this is business item (you'll get remiburshed for it) get both.
Then keep the phone number to youself and be free with the pager
number.


jack    wb3ffv!pribal!jackl

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Mini PBX on PC Card?
Date: 5 Mar 1993 05:13:03 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Simon Townsend)
writes:

> I've searched the FAQ, the archive index and my press clippings to no
> avail.

> I'm looking for a PC (ISA) based card that would provide a mini PBX -
> say 1/2 external and four internal lines, preferably with some added
> functionality / programmability via the PC.

There is a product called PCBX that does this, although they may not
have a published API.  It is made by a company in Orange County, CA,
also called PCBX.  I thin they may be in Tustin, but I don't have the
specific reference in front of me.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #154
******************************