(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)
||==\\ ||==\\ ||===|| //==\\ //==\\ ||===||
|| || || || || || || || || || || ||
||==// ||==// ||===|| || \\==\\ ||===||
|| || \\ || || || || || || ||
|| || \\ || || \\==// \\==// || ||
(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)
The Official News Letter of PRACSA The Public Remote Access Computer
Standards Association. News and reviews of programs, hardware, and
peripherals for users of microcomputers.
William A. Strouse - Editor (Sysop Wild Bill's)
Beth Hall - Asst. Editor (Asst. Sysop Wild Bill's)
***
================= -={ Distribution/Copyright Notice }=- ====================
This newsletter and its articles may be freely distributed on other remote
systems as long as this title page and all copyright notices remain
intact. We accept material submitted from outside sources for
inclusion in future issues (subject to editorial review of course.)
***
============================== CONTENTS ====================================
July 1987 Vol.2 No.7
Use your wordprocessors "find string" function to jump to the numbers.
1. LETTER FROM THE EDITOR
Where is PRACSA headed ?
2. CP/M
CRUNCH/UNCRUNCH (By Steven Greenberg)
3. DOS
Pereline (from PereGrin Data Systems Inc.)
4. Hardware
5. The FCC and Packet Switching
AND THEN THERE WERE NONE
By Brock N. Meeks
from Microtimes, August, 1987 #34
HOW TO REPLY TO FCC DOCKETS
By Bruce Bergman
from Microtimes, August, l987 #34
INTERVIEW, Dave McCord
6. System Spotlight
7. Humor
8. PRACSA news
The June meeting.
9. Classified Ads
Upload your ad to the PRACSA bbs and in the FOR file
put SUBMISSION FOR NEWS LETTER CLASSIFIED.
======= 1. Letter From the Editor ==========================================
For this months editorial I would like to share some thoughts that have
been running through my head on how we could improve our association and
expand our membership.
1. Computers are about information, mass storage and instant access, the
'information revolution'. BBS's are for sharing this information and
software.
2. We have an online system for our members, but it's mostly P.D.
software and electronic messages. A good one, but not much different from
all the rest.
3. Our pooled knowledge is our greatest resource, especially to the vast
majority of computer users, who are not lucky enough to live in or around
the Silicone Valley.
4. I think we all agree that we must offer some sort of incentive to
expand our membership and keep old members involved. Especially those that
live too far away to attend the meetings.
5. And, I think most of us agree to some extent with Al Mehr that we
also need to do something constructive so we're not just another social
group.
If we just had a more effective way to pool and share our knowledge
with members all over the world I think it would create a real incentive.
Let me regress for a second. I set up my first copy of BYE.COM about
three and a half years ago and it took me better than three months to make
it work properly with my computer.
I was running the new (at that time) CP/M Plus and I had to do a great
deal of research to find help with it. I was not known by anyone and I
must have left messages on fifty different bbs's before someone told
me about George Peace in Harrisburg Pennsylvania and Paul Bartholomew in
Freeport IL. That's how I found out about PRACSA to begin with.
I ended up spending literally hundreds of dollars on the phone and
hundreds of hours to get BYE working. If there had been a database I could
have searched for who to call to get help with CP/M Plus & BYE.COM the
whole process would have been much faster, easier and much, much less
expensive.
What I envision is a remote system a member could call and browse
through a database. Choose the subject of interest and search on multiple
keys for the desired information
Al Mehr's a dBASE whiz maybe we could get him to construct these
databases. Or as Dave McCord suggested, maybe we can use regular ASCII
text files and get Irv Hoff to alter FOR/NEW to do the job. Then one would
look at a list of key-words and search a text file for the answers.
They would be maintained and kept up to date by volunteer sysops
who would answer questions and take suggestions through the message base.
Thus splitting up the workload and allowing us to have resident experts in
each field.
One sysop (Irv) would be in charge of organizing the system, security,
directing callers to the proper bases, sysops and/or messages and
coordinating system use.
Public Domain software would be a good one to start with. Someone in
our group recently made a list of P.D. software (was that you John?),
We could create a database so a user looking for a specific piece or
type of software could find it in the database as well as what system(s)
it was on and who to contact for help.
For instance, say someone was looking for "WORD PROCESSING",
"WORDSTAR", "PATCHES". The database would produce a list of relevant files
and what system(s) they could be found on, the phone number(s) and
the resident expert(s).
We could create a PRACSA database on OEM's and VAR's so people living
in remote parts of the USA and foreign countries could search it to find
who, what and where for commercial hardware and software. With Phone
numbers and addresses for customer support, upgrades, etc. I would be
willing to contribute to that list myself.
Since so many of us keep in touch with systems all over the world we
could also do a regular verified list of systems keyed on special
interests, area code, country, etc.
This would create a "NETWORK" of all our member bbs's and still leave
us free to be the Maverick's we all are.
To work this would require some effort from all of us and I'm willing
to volunteer to coordinate the project if there's enough support from the
membership to make it work.
We will need to.
1. Consolidate our information.
2. Create databases from this information.
3. Set up software to make it accessible to remote callers.
4. Advertise it! Any place we can do it free. We can start with our
systems, newsletter and possibly Computer Currents.
I suggest we don't allow downloading of an entire database (to
maintain control of them) and the software (as it will probably be
proprietary). Users would do a search with capture buffer open thus only
receiving the needed portion of the base.
With one central system listing all possible (public) information about
members and their bbs's in multiple databases, with stacked security
levels we would have something very special. Something extremely useful to
computer users all over the world. Members would join to get access to
this information and the databases would grow with each new member.
There's a system in Canada called CRS (Canada Remote Systems) that's
set up a network of twelve or fifteen computers, some LAN'ed and some
linked through iNET.
They're charging $60 for the first year and $40 to renew membership
(full membership); $35 with no system access and $20 to renew (limited
membership); $50 to sign up for iNET access or $85 bundled with a full
membership and $60 to renew (plus you have to pay for the calls you place
through iNET). They have something like 2,500 members so you know they
must be making a bundle.
Now I know we could never do something like that because the majority
of us see ourselves as promoters of public domain. Also, we would be hard
pressed to find three members that would give up there (system)
individualism to band together that tight.
But, with a loose network such as I have described I believe we
could offer better service to our membership than CRS for a very
small membership fee and expand greatly.
We could even provide the service to the general public and charge a
nominal fee for non-members and possibly recoup some of our investment.
I've always felt that the users should help out with some of the
expenses and I've met a few users that felt the same. Why should a
sysop cover all the cost of hardware and maintenance just so any
kid can call and try to crash it? I feel we would attract a better class
of user and weed out some of the riff-raff if users had an investment in
the systems they call.
Consider: If users paid you just $5 a year for full access to your
system and you had 200 regular members you would have $1000 a year to
upgrade hardware and software. But you would have to offer something that
other systems didn't have.
What do you think?
***
======= 2. CP/M ============================================================
I picked on Irv Hoff a great deal over using Crunch/Uncrunch on PRACSA
bbs files (and so did several others members).
Mainly because of incompatibilities between different versions of the
program ie: it was reputed one version could not un-crunched some files
crunched with other versions of the same program.
Also members had problems with it working properly on certain
brands of computers (such as my CP/M Plus Morrow).
It got to the point where there was talk of "The Compression Wars" and
we got lots of good natured chuckles over the on-going arguments that
ensued.
But it looks like all the problems have been solved with the latest
version (v2.3) so I feel in all fairness I should tell all that v2.3 has
been accepted by PRACSA vote.
What follows are excerpts from the documentation included in
CRUNCH23.LBR (By Steven Greenberg 201-670-8724 (voice; eves, wknds)).
========================================================================
USAGE
Prgm: CRUNCH v2.3
filename date, etc. Verbose
/ / /
Usage: CRUNCH {du:}<afn> {du:} { [id] } { /Q | /V | /C}
\ \ \ \
source destination Quiet Confirm
Items in curly brackets are optional (namely everything except
for the filename). The two optional 'du:' specs may be of the
form DU:, UD:, D: or U: where D is any legal drive letter, and U
is a user code from '0' thru '15' inclusive. The colon must be
typed. The first 'du:' specifies where the filename '<afn>' is
located, and it should immediately precede the <afn> with no
intervening blanks if it is used. If no drive is specified, the
default (currently logged) drive is assumed. The same is true for
the user code. The filename <afn> may contain the ambiguous
(wildcard) characters '?' or '*' if desired.
The second 'du:', which has the same form as the one described
above, is an optional drive specifier where the output will be
directed. No filename may follow the the second 'du:' - the
filename will be generated automatically (see below). As above,
if either part of the 'du:' spec is not included (or if the spec
is left out altogether) appropriate defaults will be used.
The resulting file will have the same name as the crunched file,
except that the middle letter of the extension will be converted
to "Z". If the original file's extension was blank, or already
had a "Z" in the middle, then a filetype of "ZZZ" will be used.
[id] is an optional "date stamp" (or other information), used to
identify the file. If used, [id] consists of any text contained
between a pair of square brackets (ie the brackets must actually
be typed). The text contained in [id] will be recreated at the
console for the operator's reference when the file is later
uncrunched.
Three command line options, "/Q", "/V" or "/C", are available.
If used, the option should be last on the command line, and the
"/" must be preceded by a space. Although the technical usage
above implies only one letter may be used, rev 2.3 will accept
any two options. Other combinations, which would include both
Q and V, are contradictory.
"/Q" and "/V" will "quiet down" a version of CRUNCH which has
been configured to be "verbose", or cause a "verbose" run of a
program normally configured to be "quiet". This relates to the
amount of information sent to the console while the function is
in progress.
"/C", the confirm option, is used for selective crunching. Norm-
ally used in conjunction with wildcard filespecs, this option
causes the program to ask "Y/N" for each matching file. Only the
files to which "Y" is responded will be crunched. Selecting this
option causes the program to automatically ask for additional
confirmation if a pre-existing file is about to be overwritten,
regardless of the program's configuration.
Prgm: UNCR v2.3
filename Quiet Confirm
/ / /
Usage: UNCR {du:}<afn> {du:} { /Q | /V | /C}
\ \ \
source destination Verbose
All usage, options, and patches are identical to CRUNCH, de-
scribed above, except that no [id] can be specified. Also note
that the that the resulting filename will be recreated from the
name of the file that was originally crunched.
It is not necessary that the file to be uncrunched have "Z" as
the middle letter of the extension; an attempt will be made to
uncrunch any filename explicitly specified. Note however that
"UNCR *.*" will be internally converted to "UNCR *.?Z?" to facil-
itate quickly uncrunching all crunched files in a mixed group.
CRINSTAL.DOC
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Note: You need CRINSTAL v2.3 to install CRUNCH and UNCRunch v2.3.
If you run the old installer on the new program or vice-versa,
you will get an "Invalid or Incompatible CRUNCH.COM" message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
As of v2.1 an installation (or "configuration") program is pro-
vided to facilitate defining certain default options to a users
own preferences or requirements. The program is called
"CRINSTAL.COM". It is quite self-explanatory in nature, so not
many further instructions need be given here. The only thing
which requires some clarification is how to "fire up" the thing.
All you need to do is follows.
1. If you are running TurboDOS or Compupro Concurrent on your
computer, you may wish to read "TURBODOS.WRN" before proceeding.
2. Get copies of CRUNCH.COM, UNCR.COM, and the install program
itself, CRINSTAL.COM, all on the same drive (and area). Note
that CRINSTAL will try to configure both programs at once, so
they BOTH must be there. Since CRINSTAL is a simple program
which makes no provision for entering different filenames, you
must also make sure that the programs have exactly the names
given above. If you prefer different names (eg CR instead of
CRUNCH), you will have to
rename your programs after the instal-
lation process. Note that their is no such thing as an "unin-
stalled" version of CRUNCH or UNCRunch. Each may be configured
as many times as desired.
3. Make sure there is enough room left for 1 more copy each of
CRUNCH.COM and UNCR.COM, as the old files will be left on the
disk as well, renamed .BAK. Normally, this should only require
about 12k total free space.
4. Type "CRINSTAL". Just plain "CRINSTAL".
5. Answer the five questions (six counting "Do you want to con-
tinue"). If you are unsure about anything, just hit <return> and
you will get the default selection. Saying "Y" to "Do you want
to continue" followed by five <returns> will provide a very rea-
sonable installation similar to previous versions of CRUNCH.
PATCHES.DOC for CRUNCH / UNCRunch v2.3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The patch bytes for v2.3 are in different locations than
previous releases. The corresponding functions are the same, how-
ever (except of course the Z3 flag, which is new to this version)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This document describes every possible one byte patch which can
be made to CRUNCH.COM and UNCR.COM. In each case, the patches
can be made to either program for corresponding identical effects
(except the "Bigger File" patch has no significance on the
UNCRunch program).
The patches marked "***" are the ones which can be changed by
running the installation program, CRINSTAL. In each of those
cases, a "NO" answer corresponds to the "zero" patch value, which
is considered the default.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Byte Significance
==== ============
10EH *** "Quiet Mode Flag". Patch to any non-zero value to
have the program default to "non-verbose" mode. This
has the same effect as using the /Q option on the com-
mand line, ie the program will not display lots of
churning numbers on the screen during operation. If
this flag is zero, it can be effectively reversed for
any single run of the program by using the /V option on
the command line.
10FH *** "Prompt Before Overwrite flag. If patched to non-
zero, existing files will be overwritten without a
prompt.
110H *** "Turbo-DOS Flag". If patched to non-zero, program
will not attempt multi-sector I/O. Otherwise the pro-
gram will use it if the BDOS "Get System Version" call
returns a value of 3.0 or higher. See "TURBODOS.WRN"
for more information.
111H "Confirm Every File Flag". If set to non-zero, the
program will ask "Do it?" for EVERY file (as it does
when the /C option is invoked). While this is probably
not a particularly useful configuration, it is included
for the sake of completeness.
112H "Warm Boot Flag". If set non-zero, the program will
perform a "warm boot", as opposed to a return to the
CCP, each time its is run. This is normally not neces-
sary, but is included for people running systems who
have reason to believe that the CCP will not remain
resident.
113H *** "Bigger File Flag". If set non-zero, the program
will NOT ask the question "Result file larger than
original. Keep it anyway?". The assumed answer to the
question will be "Yes".
114H "Maximum Drive allowed, plus one". The default value
here is "FF", effectively disabling the feature. If
you so desire, you may enter a value here ("A" = 2, "B"
= 3, etc), in which case the program will intercept any
references to higher drives (giving an "Invalid Drive"
error). If you leave this feature deactivated, your
operating system will gladly tell you about the invalid
drive spec when it gets it.
115H "Maximum User Code Allowed, plus one". Similar to
above. Note however that the command line parser will
reject all references to values above 15 no matter
what. In this case, you don't even get an "Invalid
User Area" message, you will get "Invalid Argument".
31 user areas are NOT currently supported.
10BH *** "Z3 Flag". Non-zero configures program for use on
the ZCPR3 operating system. Non-zero values in either
109H or 10AH ( Z3 "environment descriptor" ) will have
the same effect.
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| All source code contained in CRUNCH23.LBR, as well as object |
| code created from it, are Copyright (C) Steven Greenberg, |
| 15 November 1986. May be reproduced for non-profit use only. |
| Public release of modifications strictly prohibited without |
| expressed consent of the author. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
This source code is being released in the public interest by its
author, with the good faith that those receiving it will adhere
to the above copyright message. In other words, you can distrib-
ute "CRUNCH / UNCRunch", and you can modify it if you wish, but
you can't do both. I must also suggest that you be careful of
changing CRUNCH, in particular, in any way that might affect the
program's output. Incompatible "crunched" files floating around
won't do anyone any good.
*****************************************************************
Changes for v2.3
NOTE: Although there is a CRUNCH22.LBR, there is no v2.2 of
CRUNCH or UNCRunch. It was skipped to get the library names back
in sync with the program versions.
1. ZCPR3 support. The programs now can be configured for ZCPR
use. The configuration may be accomplished by a patch byte, by
running the install program CRINSTAL, or by performing a Z3INS
installation of the program.
2. Patch Byte Locations. To support the Z3 environment descrip-
tor, the patch byte locations have been shifted up. If you are
going to be patching these bytes yourself, refer to the new
PATCH23.DOC, included ( Note: while the location of these bytes
has changed, their function has not). If you are going to use
the install program CRINSTAL.COM, just make sure to use v2.3 of
that program, included. If you make a mistake and use the wrong
install with the wrong program, you will simply get a "Invalid or
Incompatible CRUNCH.COM" or some similar message.
3. That's it. Usage of v2.3 is identical to that of v2.1.
******************************************************************
Release Notes: Many people have noticed that the type program
TYPELZ has not been included in the last few releases of CRUNCH.
I will shortly release a TYPELZ library which contains the most
recent version of that program along with the source for the REL
files needed to support it. I will then leave subsequent type
program releases to others. There are already one or two very
good alternatives to TYPELZ, and I prefer to concentrate my work
on compression itself, rather than associated utility support.
Speaking of utility support, there have also been a number of
inquiries concerning a CRUNCH.REL (companion to UNCR.REL) for use
by utilities to support crunched files. I will take care of this
as soon as practical; possibly it will be included with the other
support programs in the TYPELZ release.
Greenbug notice: The USQREL file currently used with versions 2.x
of TYPELZ will refuse to type a squeezed file in the 1/128 chance
that one of the checksum bytes is zero. The corrected USQREL
will be released in the TYPELZ library mentioned above. Note
this only affects squeezed files, not crunched or uncompressed.
(Note to programmers involved- In the mean time the problem can
be fixed by inserting any non-0 value in these two [unused] bytes
before calling USQREL).
Questions, problems, suggestions, etc:
Steven Greenberg 201-670-8724 (voice; eves, wknds)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Acknowledgements:
=================
ZCPR3 Consultant: Bruce Morgen
Also thanks to (continued from last release...)
Keith Peterson, Jon Schneider, Jay Sage, Gary Inman, Steve Russel,
Terry Carroll, George Peace, Pete Zuroff and many others...
***
======= 3. DOS =============================================================
At our May meeting Tom Serface and Einar Pederson of Peregrine software
gave a demonstration of there new PereLine communications software. They
were also kind enough to give me an evaluation copy.
I have since used PereLine on several different IBM and IBM compatible
computers and it's become my dialer of choice for DOS machines.
I've used Qmodem for a long time and loved it, but I've found PereLine
is much better for what I do since I never know what machine I'll be
using next. For one thing I use an AT clone in an office where it's not
unusual for me to show up in the morning and find it dismantled all over
my desk. It belongs to a friend who's always scavenging parts to sell to a
customer or test a faulty machine with. One morning I found it dismantled
for publicity pictures. It's in a constant state of flux as to what boards
it has in it and I've had three different modems in the last month. Or
I'll show up at a company to work on their machine and find I need a
piece of software I didn't bring.
If they have a modem I can call and get it from one of my friends,
but I've found many of the dialers people use are crude and have
problems with file transfers. As a matter of fact some of the older ones
refuse to do file transfers beyond a capture buffer.
Well I can't learn to use all of them and I find Pereline is easy to
transport from machine to machine. It's one of those "tools" I always
carry with me. It's much quicker and easier to set up than Qmodem and I
have not found a computer (PC/MS-DOS) or modem (Hayes compatible) that
it's had problems with.
PereLine allows the me to customize menus and/or create my own.
It Supports multiple concurrent sessions using two windows so I can
be connected to two modems at the same time, directly connected to two
computers, or a combination of modem and direct connect then jump back and
forth between the windows.
One feature I really like is the LEARN function. Have you ever tried
to write auto-logon scripts for a dialer? It's just like programming in
any other language. First you write the code then you spend a bunch of
time de-bugging it by making one call after another until it works
properly.
With PereLine's Learn function I just turns on the learn feature
before placing the call and the program stores the keys-strokes (with the
phone number) for use the next time I call that number.
In addition when I enter a number in one of the (unlimited number
of) "Phone Books" (limited to 60 entries each) I'm asked a short series of
questions that establish the communication parameters for that individual
phone number (baud rate, transfer protocol, terminal emulation,
timing constants, etc).
Speaking of emulation, PereLine emulates ANSI, VT100, VT52, VIDTEXT,
IBM 3101, DG210/211.
File transfer protocols include XMODEM, YMODEM, KERMIT, TELINK, and
two file capture buffers, one for each window.
I can execute DOS commands from inside PereLine without having to
exit the program. PereLine's built in File Manager allows me to easily
Copy, Rename, Delete files, Change directories, and Log onto a different
drive.
PereLine if requested will keep a log of all commands it executes and
supports a telephone log to track calls and there length.
And, PereLine has the ability to work as a simple unattended (password
protected) remote system that I can call and drop to DOS to execute
other programs (a mini-bbs with DOS privileges).
PereLine is superior to any DOS dialer I've used and I would (and do)
recommend it to my friends. But I guess you should also consider the fact
that I might be a little biased since I got one of the nicest pieces of
software I have in my collection, free.
Two of it's strongest features are
1. Its easy to install
2. And it's easy to learn by someone that knows nothing
PereLine is only $69.95
Contact PereGrine Data Systems, Inc.
5365 Baron Drive San Jose, CA. 95124
(408) 356-6105
P.S. Did I hear rumors about a bulletin board system in the works?
***
======= 4. Hardware =======================================================
Next issue. I ran out of time...
***
======= 5. The FCC and Packet Switching ====================================
AND THEN THERE WERE NONE
by Brock N. Meeks from Microtimes, Aug 1987.
I submit that in this age of high-tech high-touch, a new "right" should
be defined: the right to low-cost access to information. There is not a
moment to waste.
On June 10 l987 the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM)
that will on January 1 l988 push the cost of information access into the
stratosphere and guarantee the creation of a new social class: the
"information poor."
These information poor won't be able to dial into computer databases or
commercial online services simply because they won't be able to afford
them, not because they don't want them. We're close to that situation now
given the current cost of information access, but with the promise of a
dramatic rate increase looming on the horizon, the future looks grim.
The FCC proposal calls for assessing an additional charge of about $5
an hour for computer telecommunications services that offer enhanced
services, such as those provided by U.S. Sprint's Telenet and Tymnet.
These enhanced service companies are currently exempt from access charges.
The FCC proposes to eliminate this exemption.
If the exemption is eliminated you can take the price you pay for every
hour of connect time and jack it up by at least five bucks, and probably
much more. (Five dollars would likely be the charge if these services
just passed on the increase to their users; in reality they will probably
raise charges even more to cover administrative charges.)
"If this proposal were to go into effect, our country's blossoming
information age could whither and die without ever fulfilling its
heretofore bright promise," says Paolo Guidi, president of Telenet.
Educational institutions will also be harmed, according to Guidi because
"they are just now beginning to have affordable information services made
available to them."
A MATTER OF EQUITY
FCC attorney Ruth Milkman told the Commission at the June l0 meeting
that the basic theory behind the removal of the current access charge
exemption is that if enhanced service providers use local networks to
provide interstate services they should pay for the same access and
contribute to cost of facilities in the same way as providers of voice
services.
Milkman adds that the commission realizes that imposing the fee on
computer services would not offset the charges on long distance carriers.
Rather she says, the FCC merely wants all carriers to pay an equal share
for use of the local telephone exchange.
The Commissioners were in agreement that the crux of the access charge
issue is "a matter of equity
," as stated by Commissioner Mimi Weyforth
Dawson during the June l0 meeting.
"The bottom line here...is that we want the networks to evolve...in
response to a consumer demand... not to various subsidies and anomalies,"
said FCC Chairman Dennis Patrick during the agenda meeting. He added that
the information service providers have had plenty of time to get used to
the charge and would "bear a heavy burden" to prove they could not deal
with it.
"We're currently paying about 30 cents an hour effectively for
dial-in access" counters Philip Walker a vice president for Telenet. "We
buy an ordinary business line for about $30 a month. And we use it
about l00 hours. Under (the proposed) access charges, that same dial-in
hour of use would cost us about $4.50; that's a factor of 15 increase."
What will Telenet do with that added charge? "Pass it on to the
consumer, we can't absorb that kind of rate increase" says Walker.
TELECO MATH 101
Consumer advocate groups are backing the ruling because they
believe it's time that "data users pulled their own weight" according
to Sam Simon, president of Issues Dynamics, Inc. a telecommunications
policy firm in Washington, D.C. "The proposed access charges are
considered common carrier line charges for fixed costs; that is the cost
of the local phone companies to maintain their equipment."
"After all," says Simon, "voice users, for years, have been saying they
are subsidizing new costs to handle data line traffic, costs for services
they neither want nor use.
"When the BOCs (Bell Operating Companies - local telephone companies)
start getting increased revenues from charges on enhanced services, that
money will go for fixed costs. As this happens, overall charges will go
down, and eventually, the access charges as well."
Think again Sam. Let's do some math, and it's rather simple math at
that.
According to figures obtained from the FCC's traffic analysis
branch, long-distance interstate, voice calls rack up 115 billion
"conversation minutes" a year. Figures obtained from public records and
conversations with officials at various enhanced services put interstate
data use at 2.8 billion minutes of data usage a year. Mark Uretsky, a
financial analyst with the FCC's traffic analysis branch says that data
usage "certainly isn't any bigger than 3% of the (long distance) voice
figures.
A simple turn of the crank on your adding machine shows that our
figures set data usage at 2.5% of voice use, a figure that's even less
impressive when you consider that the revenue generated from this extra
2.5% is spread across all the BOCs.
That 2.5% Doesn't go very far to maintain those fixed costs. Further,
the increased overhead to administer the extra revenue will cut deeply
into the 2.5% figure, so the actual increased revenue to BOCs is a
somewhat meager 1%.
That 1% is not substantial enough to cause the FCC to call for a
lowering of access charges. (When the BOCs are treated to larger revenues,
it's been the commissions policy to then decrease interstate access rates.
However, with only a 1% increase, the FCC is not likely to require a
lowering of access rates). the BOCs are handed a windfall profit. Merry
Christmas.
The BOCs gain; everyone else losses. Long distance voice users don't
get lower rates, and data users are handcuffed into paying an astronomical
rate increase. And, for the privilege of paying higher rates, data users
don't get any increase in quality, quantity or performance! But to the
advocates of this proposal, these facts are secondary.
Simon, although agreeing that data users will feel the crunch in their
wallets, says:"This applied access charge is the only 'fair' thing to do.
It makes everyone pay their own way. Equity, not the bottom line, is the
real issue here."
What Simon and other advocates don't realize is that the ruling will
actually create an environment of INEQUITY and discrimination.
BITSTREAM DISCRIMINATION
One of the potential loopholes in the proposed ruling is the creation
of private networks as a bypass. Because there are comparative
characteristics of such private networks that perform similar tasks as
enhanced service providers, such private networks are likely to be the
center of debate during the comment phase of ruling. (By law, the FCC
must solicit comments from the public and the industry on any proposed
rulings. After the initial comment phase the FCC then re-evaluates the
proposal while sending copies of all comments to anyone that provided
initial comments. A second round of comments is then worked through
before the Commission sets the proposal into law.)
Given the potential for private networks, the FCC is likely to be asked
to consider what will be the difference in function between electronic
mail provided by Telenet, for example, as opposed to one provided
internally or through private lines, such as the nationwide private
computer service run by General Motors.
According to FCC attorney Milkman, the determining factor for applying
access charges will be whether switched facilities will be used, such as
those used to connect CompuServe or Telenet facilities with the user. No
access charges would be assessed if no switched facilities are used, she
says. If an entire intracompany network, used to provide enhanced
intracompany network, used to provide enhanced services within the
company, was on private line, or used no local teleco exchange facilities
at all, no access charges would be assessed.
"So what this ruling does is set up an inequity among all data
processing providers, e-mail providers, or whatever," says Telenet's
Walker. "Large companies and information providers "able to afford
private lines" are exempted, while those not able to afford their own
networks get banged on."
INDUSTRY IMPACT
Access charges will likely kill innovative services like PC Pursuit and
Tymnet's fledgling PC Express network. "These types of services will not
be possible under the proposed ruling," said Walker. "We couldn't
continue to offer (PC Pursuit) at the current rate." (PC Pursuit
presently costs a flat $25 per month for all the online time you can use
during non-prime time hours.) Services like PC Pursuit are only possible
because users are not "on the clock" when they go online.
Joseph Markoski, counsel for ADAPSO, a trade association of data
processing services rejects the idea that enhanced service providers
(which now pay a subscriber line fee and local business line charge)
should be subject to the so-called Common Carrier Line and traffic
sensitive charges imposed on long distance companies. He maintains that
they are users, not telephone companies.
WRITE NOW
And then there were none.
That could be the information age epitaph of l987, the end of low-cost
(or at least semi-reasonable)information services. Fortunately, there is
already a groundswell of online activism set in motion on this issue, a
signal to Washington that data users are a segment of the population to be
reckoned with.
The FCC is accepting comments on the ruling. Write to them now. Tell
them what you think of the ruling. You can file your comments by writing
to:
Federal Communications Commission
Office of Opinion and Review
The Secretary
1919 M Street, NW. Room 222
Washington, D.C. 20554
Refer to "Amendments of Part 69 of the Commission's Rules relating to
Enhanced Service Providers CC Docket 87-215." For more information you
can call the FCC at (202) 632-7000.
HOW TO REPLY TO FCC DOCKETS
By Bruce Bergman
The following is a do-it-yourself-kit for responding to FCC docket
87-215 regarding amendment of Part 69 relating to Enhanced
Service Providers.
Before I get started with the actual letter, let me take this
opportunity to make a few comments regarding responding to the FCC. In my
experience, the following information is useful and important to the
success of your response.
1. If you really want to make an impression on the Commissioners, send
more than one copy of your response. Send five copies. If you want to
make an even better impression, send eleven copies. Five copies makes
sure that your vote counts and provides a copy for each of the general
groups. Eleven copies will get your document in the 'IN' basket of each
Commissioner. If this isn't possible, even one letter counts as a vote.
Don't send more than 11. Just 11 will do.
2. Don't send form letters. Form letters are usually not worth the
effort you put into them. Why, you ask? Well, while each form letter you
send gets counted as a vote, it can be rejected later. If it turns out
that we win this round, it is entirely probable that our opponents will
ask to go through each and every response. If they can show the 100
responses are identical (or closely similar) with the exception of the
signature, the 100 responses can be reduced to only one vote! Make sure
your letter is sufficiently different not to get caught by this.
3. Limit your main arguments to one page. If you want to go into more
detail, augment your document with additional pages expanding on your
original comments, keying to those original points. Number your points.
4. Give reasonable reasons why you oppose this docket. You can't just
say that you oppose the rule-making without a sound, reasonable response.
Remember that the opposition will read each and every response you send,
if it can benefit them. We don't have that type of financial backing;
they do.
5. Make a statement about who you are and what you do. If you have a
certain expertise, or if you have a degree of some sort, tell them that.
It counts a lot for what the commissioners think if they know you are
someone who knows what you are talking about. if you run a service, are
an administrator, offer services to the public, etc., briefly describe
what you do and why.
6. Double-space your document. This can make the difference between
your response's being read or just counted! If your response is clear,
double-spaced, and concise, it will be read and given a better subjective
value.
7. Get your neighbors into the act. If your friends and/or neighbors
are familiar with and support you and your activities, ask them to write a
letter to the FCC expressing their concern over how this docket might
affect your community. If you can get local officials to do the same,
great! Letterhead and many copies make the best response.
8. Make sure the date is on the document. It is important that the
reader be made aware that this isn't an old response. Put the date on
your document.
And of course don't ever forget to put the docket number at the top!
Lastly, remember that this is going to be a very important point in
future rule-making efforts. Any time the FCC wins a battle, whether by
apathy or some other means, it is a big step for them in the future. If
the FCC decides in favor of this docket, it's likely that you will see
more of the same type later on. Private agencies will see how easily it
went over and base future requests on that information. if we win, it
will make it tough for anyone to raise the issue again. if a specific
proposal fails to make it through a certain number of times (because of
the public's efforts), the commissioners tend to not reconsider it again
during their term.
THE LETTER
Basically you will want to create a letter which has the name of the
FCC at the top, as well as a clear pointer to the docket number.
Here's a sample first page header:
Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of GENERAL DOCKET 87-215
Amendment of Part 69 of the
Commission's Rules relating to
Enhanced Service Providers
TO: The Commission
COMMENTS OF (your full name), (any professional titles).
After you have created the header, you can begin your text, double-
spaced.
Begin by expressing who you are and any specific titles, duties, or
responsibilities that might qualify you as someone who has a vested
interest in what's going before the FCC's consideration. Even stating
that you're a user of a network is suitable. Now is not the time to be
humble, however. Just tactfully explain what makes you significant to
this proposal. You're out to make an impression. Do so! (Don't be
verbose, however.)
Then, begin listing the reasons (numbered) why you oppose this
proposal. The more reasonable, the better. Be concise and clear. If you
need to go into detail, refer the reader to attached pages.
Here's an example:
I am a user of an Enhanced Service Provider. I
frequently make use of such services to obtain
information from computer information services that
would otherwise be unavailable to me. The
information I obtain allows me to (something...).
After you've explained who you are, and have shown why you have an
interest to this docket, continue with:
I strongly oppose the Commission's proposal
to surcharge Enhanced Service Providers for the
following reasons:
1. (reason one).
2. (reason two).
3. (whatever comments you feel appropriate.)
Remember, you don't need to be verbose to get your point across. You
want to make sure the reader understands why you feel the way you do. If
you need additional material in order to accomplish this, feel free to
include additional pages; however, if you are only interested in making
your feelings known and don't want to get really in-dept, the simple
statements like the ones pictured above are sufficient to make your point.
Where you can refer to the text of the original document, do so! This
is great for those who like to know exactly what you are referring to. it
also shows that you have done your homework and are not just spouting off.
The best mode of attack in instances like this is to first explain why
you are against the proposal. Once you have made it clear that there are
good reasons why this wouldn't be a good thing, suggesting alternate
ideas. It can go a long way towards helping your arguments if you can
suggest a viable alternative.
Finally, follow up your reasons with a nice suffix like:
Respectfully submitted,
(Sign in BLACK INK)
(Your spelled-out name and title)
(Your street address)
(Your city, state, and ZIP code)
(The date)
Black ink is important when you sign your response. Also, make sure
that you send the original. Copies for yourself, originals to the people
you are writing to. Make sure you sign and date your letter.
If you have included additional pages, it would be wise to include a
trailer at the bottom of each page, designating what page out of the total
number of pages this is. Example:
Responses to General Docket 87-215
Page 1 of 3
Finally, place a return address on your envelope, place the correct
postage on it, and mail it so
on. If you can spend the extra cash, don't
fold your responses; mail them in a larger manila envelope and keep them
flat. This is especially useful if you are sending multiple copies.
Chances are that it will get there in one piece, and will look great
sitting on the desk of some Commissioner (flat).
The key point to remember is that you are out to make a valid point
about the docket. You don't want to sound like you don't know what you're
talking about, so be sure of your facts. You can best do this by being
concise, clear, correct, and impressive. The impressive part comes to
bear when you consider arrangement and looks of your document as well as
your status in the topic under consideration
***
======= 6. System Spotlight ================================================
Enable Electronics BBS
Vince Endter (sysop), Bryan Fitzwater (owner; sysop). This is
probably not the bbs to call to chat with someone since there's seldom
anyone watching the monitor. And you won't get civil answers in the
message base to questions about Dungeons & Dragons problems, but if you're
having hardware problems these guys do it all, from building custom clones
to repairing IBM monitors. They fix Commodore, Atari, Morrow, IBM, Osborn,
and Eagle computers; disk drives, hard disks, and monitors all the time.
They fix, sell, and install aftermarket add-ons such as large hard disks,
mother boards, controller cards, CGA; EGA boards, and modems. They have
competitive prices on hardware and give free estimates on repair work.
Bryan trained flight technicians for the U.S. Navy and worked for
Amdahl computers before he started his own business so he's worked on just
about everything in the way of computer electronics.
You can leave a message about your problems on the bbs and often get an
idea of what's wrong and/or how much it will cost to fixed it. Or check
prices such as a new EGA board and multiscan monitor for your clone.
Since they're working with the latest hardware they're aware of many
strengths and weeknesses of new brand name products such as how the
Phoenix BIOS cured some of the ills Big Blue had.
Enable is starting a series of "workshops" on software too. The first
one is on basic Lotus 1-2-3 (with yours truly as instructor). It will be
slanted more towards those that have very little experience with computers
and want to do spreadsheet data entry at work. It will soon be expanded to
include advanced spreadsheet functions, macros and graphs though.
Some of you may get a chuckle out of this, but there will also be
workshops on basic and advanced WordStar that include the use of
mailmerge for form letters and mailing lists. There's an ever increasing
demand for people that know how to use WordStar.
They also have PD software to go with that new CGA or EGA system,
color games, utilities, pictures for your new graphics package. RAM
enhancement utilities to set up RAM disks and Print spoolers. You can
download it like any bbs or bring your blank floppies with you when you
come in. Send SASE to:
Enable Electronics
1580 Old Oakland Road Suite C-106
San Jose, CA. 95131
(408) 998-8821
And receive a list of PD software available with short descriptions of
what each does.
Enable BBS, 30Mb
(408) 998-8927
300-1200 baud, 24 hours 8N1
(8 data bits, no paraity, 1 stop bit)
***
======= 7. Humor ===========================================================
Two distinguished looking ladies were window shopping and talking.
One turned to the other and asked "Do you smoke after sex?" Her friend
replied, "Gee I don't know, I never looked!!"
***
======= 8. PRACSA News =====================================================
A vote was taken and carried that PRACSA "recommends" all members
write letters to the FCC in opposition to the new proposal. The first
motion was to have Dave McCord McCord (PRACSA Pres.) write one letter.
Dave said if the vote was carried he would write the letter, but he was
personally in favor of the proposal and when the vote was taken he voted
against the "recommendation".
I dropped by Echelon headquarters in Los Altos this month and among
other things Dave and I talked about his views on the FCC proposal (or
what ever their calling it this time).
When the conversation turned to the FCC the first thing Dave asked was,
"do you use any of the big services?"
I said I didn't, I don't even use PC Pursuit. I just make my calls and
pay the bill.
Dave said that the majority are the same way, they make their calls and
pay long distance rates like I do and that the ruling would not effect
them or systems like the Well either since the Well isn't part of an
interstate network.
He told me PC Pursuit's prime-time users pay the overhead + and since
the off-hour users were pure gravy they could easily cover at the very
least a good portion of the increase. And the big outfits could cover all
of it.
When you stop to think about it, at $ .30 per hour you would have to
use PC Pursuit over 83 hours a month to get them upside down on the bill.
At $4.50 one would have about 5.5 hours of padding, split the difference
and make it $25.00 a month for ten hours.
And Dave feels that if push comes to shove PC Pursuit and other data
service suppliers such as Compuserve and the Source will shoulder just as
much of the cost as they have to to stay in the game.
Dave explained that its the big outfits that get to use the lines for
30 cents an hour and they don't pass the savings along to the end user.
The last modem I got came with a starter pack for Compuserve with no
subscription fee. All I'm charged is $15.00 per hour prime time or $12.00
standard/evening (at 1200 baud), $22.50 prime-time and $19.00
standard/evening at (2400 baud), plus $ .25 per hour for Telenet (there's
the $ .30 were talking about). Gee whiz, what a deal, half the services
they offer are $2.00 an hour in addition to the base charge.
With the Source I have to send $12.95 for their SourcePack users manual
(that's $7.00 off the regular price) and that's just to find out how much
they charge.
So Dave's contention seems to be, that it's time the biggies shouldered
their rightful share of the cost to keep up the phone lines, stop sponging
off everyone that makes long distance calls, also Brock Meeks is confused
if he truly thinks the FCC is trying to lay it on the backs of the
citizens.
What Dave had to say makes sense to me. personally, I never could see
where the FCC's ruling would have any dollar effect on the calls I make
anyway. I thought about signing up for PC Pursuit since I first heard
about it (almost two years ago) but it never seemed worth the headaches.
***
The proposed merger with PICO-NET has been stalled for several
months now due to PecoNet's inability to produce records of their
non-profit corporate standing with the Infernal Revenue Service.
Howard Stateman contacted the IRS for information concerning
PicoNet's situation and this is his report.
PicoNet/IRS
"5/21 I received a letter from the IRS stating that there's a law
against releasing information on what a non-profit corporation has been
charged in penalties for late filings. However, in a follow-up phone call,
the Fresno district office confirmed that PicoNet has not filled a tax
return since December, 1984. I asked what the statutory penalty was for
late filling, and the IRS officer said it was $10 a day, but this penalty
can be waived depending on the circumstances. He said that although
PicoNet would not owe any taxes unless they earned @25,00 or more per
year, they still are required to file".
A vote was carried unanimously to discontinue further efforts
concerning PicoNet.
***
====== 9. Classified Ads ==================================================
COMPLETE SMALL BUSINESS SYSTEM (used)
Morrow MD-11 with Digital Research's CP/M Plus 3.0 operating system
11 meg. hard drive
384k Full Height Floppy
NewWord word processor (like WordStar)
with
Spelling Corrector
Mail Merge
Personal Pearl data base management system
SuperCalc spreadsheet
Mbasic MicroSoft basic
Pilot programming language
Complete with a full set of NEW reference books for all software.
$1000
Freedom 110 smart terminal by Liberty (emulates several different
terminals). Is a computer in itself.
$125 (with MD-11)
***
