TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Dec 93 16:03:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 828

TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Dec 93 16:03:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 828

Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson

Calling a PBX and Billing (Neil R. Henry)
Caller-ID: Southern Bell Changes Rates (A. Padgett Peterson)
Future of North American Numbering Plan (Robert L. McMillin)
LD Rates From "Wholesale Club" (Richard Layman)
ATT, MCI, Sprint: Who is Really the Cheapest? (Rudolf Usselmann)
10xxx Dialtone (was Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D (Paul Robinson)
Re: Two Cell Phones With the Same ESN (Lars Nohling)
Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Charles McGuinness)
Re: Cable Channels (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (A. Padgett Peterson)
Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Richard Cox)
Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Darren Ingram)
Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Gordon Grant)
Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Liz Auchinvole)
Re: Inexpensive (Cheap ?) Modem Part II (A. Padgett Peterson)
Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Steve Cogorno)
Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Anthony D. Vullo)
Re: 1-800 Caller ID (Dave Levenson)
Re: Book Review: "The Smiley Dictionary" by Godin (Rodolfo Paiz)
Re: Are Local Calls Kept on Record? (Gordon Croft)
Re: Fax Networks (Steve Elias)
Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage (Henry Mensch)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [email protected].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

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

From: [email protected] (Neil R. Henry)
Subject: Calling a PBX and Billing
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:29:05 GMT

I have a question for the collective net wisdom. I am doing a good
deal of telephone work recently and am tracking the times and lengths
of calls for clients. When I call a "direct number" at a large
organization (through a PBX but direct to their desk), when do I begin
to pay for the call? I hear the initial ring and then the diverted
ring to voice mail. Do these make a difference? Does the PBX pick up
my call and then ring its lines or does it work as its own switch?
Does it mimic a switch to start billing when the line is picked up? I
am on a nodding aquaintance with SS7 so I can handle the big words and
acronyms. Thanks for any clarification.

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

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 93 08:01:14 -0500
From: [email protected] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Caller-ID: Southern Bell Changes Rates

As you may know from previous postings, Southern Bell was charging
U$7.50/month for residential Caller-ID service. With this month's bill
I see that it is now U$6.00/month for basic Caller-ID and U$7.50 for
number and name. They automatically changed my charge to the lower
figure.

Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: [email protected] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Future of North American Numbering Plan
Organization: Surf City Software/TBFW Project
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 14:13:34 GMT

I'm looking for a document that contains the future plans for the
North American Numbering Plan. I tried looking in the Telecom
Archives, but didn't find anything satisfactory. But before you say
to me, "You need the history.of.area.code.splits file", please know
that doesn't have quite what I want. I would like to know the status
of Bellcore's proposals for 7D or 10D only dialing nationwide, as well
as the proposed upcoming area code splits.

Now ... who can help?

Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | [email protected] | Dude!

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

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 12:36:00 EST
From: Richard Layman <[email protected]>
Subject: LD Rates From "Wholesale Club"

On Monday I received a direct mail package from "Long Distance
Wholesale Club" 1-0-297-1 offering savings of 10-30% off "ATT, MCI,
etc." Of course, their mailing didn't list the specific rates and I
called. After telling the clerk repeatedly that I didn't want the
pitch, just the rates, he gave 'em to me.

Mileage 8-5 5-11 nite

1-55 .189 .12 .11
56-124 .198 .13 .12
125-925 .207 .14 .13
926+ .16 .14 .13

For day calls, that isn't bad, especially because my volume
isn't big enough to justify an account with a WilTel broker and the
like.

I don't know if they provide service beyond DC, MD, and VA.
Their number is 703-243-4600.

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

From: [email protected] (Rudolf Usselmann)
Subject: ATT, MCI, Sprint: Who is Really Cheapest?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 08:16:30 GMT

OK, so now I'm getting calls on a weekly basis, asking to switch. And
each of them has the cheapest rate ;).

Anybody have a *total* and *complete* understanding of rates and
services? Any kind of performance review? I do a lot overseas (Europe
and Pacific Rim) calling. I need clean lines for mostly local high
sepeed (14.4kboud) modem connections -- which is pobably handled by my
local carier anyway (PacBell). Actaully I need good (clean) lines for
long distance too, since I do alot faxing (mostly 9600bd).

So, can any kind soul help me? Pleeeaaseee?!

Thanks,

rudi [email protected]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Who is cheapest and who is best is purely
an applications thing; there are programs available for PBXs which claim
to examine every possible factor involved (time of day, distance, etc)
and make a decision call by call and carrier by carrier on how to route
the traffic of the moment. Most of us don't have the volume of traffic
to warrant that, nor the resources and time to continue studying the
matter indefinitly, so we tend to pick and choose based on what sounds
good at the time. Perhaps it is a premium being offered (modem, cash,
etc) or perhaps it is the rate to a specific point at a specific time.
Then we decide to examine the quality of the transmission, and realize
the best long distance carrier (whoever that may be) is only as good as
the caller and called party's central offices. This is sort of like
the analogy that the chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Choose
all the long distance companies you want; you won't have the option of
selecting a local telco anytime soon, yet we still talk on the same
instrument over the same pair of wires.

A fellow wrote a book several years ago published by the Telecom
Library (Harry Newton's organization in New York City) in which over
several hundred pages he examined all the long distance carriers
available at that time. He laid out all the rates, terms and conditions
for service, etc. I wish I could remember his name and the name of his
book. It got rather technical in places and the final conclusion the
reader had to reach after reading it all? What is *your* specific
application? Is your traffic great enough that it really matters? A
few general rules of thumb might be: Do you make lots of daytime calls
and very few nighttime calls? Then you want a plan which gives you a
flat rate per minute unless your calls are mostly to nearby out of
state points. Mostly nighttime calls? Then you do not want flat rate
since those are biased in favor of daytime users. Instead, you want
something which is time of day and distance sensitive. You'll have a
big savings on your short calls to nearby points. Are your calls very
very short in duration? Then you want a carrier who will bill in six
second (or less) increments. If the carrier has a monthly fee in
addition to call charges, can you justify or amortize that monthly fee
in a short time each month and still save money? Would you be better
off with a carrier who charges more per minute but bills in shorter
increments, etc? And on and on it goes. You tell me who is best. PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:29:08 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[email protected]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[email protected]>
Subject: 10xxx Dialtone (was Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA

Al Varney <[email protected]>, writes:

> Note these shorthands:

> 00 = 10XXX+0# IXC operator
> 0# = LEC operator

> Also, 10XXX+# is cut-thru to IXC dial-tone (sorta like
> 950-0XXX). There is no shorthand for this access, since '#' by
> itself is an error.

This is a special feature and is not available everywhere. Here is
what happens on calls made from from Montgomery County, MD:

10000#: (A known invalid 10xxx code). Looooong pause. Click. <SIT
TONE> "We're sorry, your call did not go through. Will you please try
your call again." Message does not repeat.

10222#: Several seconds delay. <RING> "Your call cannot be completed
as dialed. Please, check the number and dial again. 2CG."

10333#: Immediate click. <RING> "Your call cannot be completed as
entered. Please check the number and try your call again, or call
customer service. 44 230. " Message is not repeated. The voice
appears to be Sprint's "Regular" error message woman.

10288# and 10732#: Several seconds delay. <RING> <SIT TONE> "We're
sorry, due to telephone company facility trouble your call cannot be
completed at this time. Will you try your call again later?"

��
(continued next message)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area # 700 EMAIL 12-19-93 17:03 Message # -6873
From : TELECOM Digest
To : ELIOT GELWAN PVT RCVD
Subj : TELECOM Digest V13 #828

�@FROM :[email protected]
��(Continued from last message)

10444#: Immediate click. <RING> "33-3. We're sorry, the number you
have dialed is invalid. Please check the number to make sure you have
used the correct area code or call directory assistance in the city
you wish to reach."

Where it doesn't say, the message is repeated at least once. Where it
says the message is not repeated, it either goes to reorder (fast
busy) after the recording or dead silence for ten seconds.

Paul Robinson - [email protected]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 10:05 EST
From: Lars Nohling <LNohling_+a_BSSI_+lLars_Nohling+r%[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Two Cell Phones With the Same ESN

If I read the FCC Quote correctly it is unlawful to change a phone's
ESN number.

Motorola has a procedure that transfers an ESN from one flip phone to
another so that a defective phone can be replaced without having to
notify the carrier.

It sounds like this violates the FCC rules?

Lars Nohling [email protected]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not really, because other parts of the
FCC regulations address the matter of what is called 'type acceptance'
and who is or is not authorized to construct a transmitter and put it
on the air. Motorola holds licenses from the FCC saying that their
products have met 'type acceptance'. They are authorized to build and
service radio equipment. ESNs have to be originated somewhere; the
government does not create the ESN nor do the carriers. Motorola, as
the maker of the phone originates the ESN and then advises the carrier
what it is (through the registration process when a phone is purchased
and put in use for the first time.) Please note also that when a firm
like Motorola swaps out a bad phone for a good one under warranty for
example and re-uses the ESN in the process, they are NOT permitted to
return the old phone to the customer as part of the contract they have
with the carrier. And despite what they say about 'not having to
bother notifying the carrier', what they mean is the end-user customer
does not have to bother with this. The carrier does get notified by
Motorola, but it is just a paperwork transaction.

The law was intended to address the cellphone phreaks who rarely are
authorized to modify the phone in the first place, and never remember
to complete the paperwork part (smile) ... if you get FCC authorization
to build/repair cellphones and a contract or understanding with the
carriers regards same, you'll be lawfully entitled to swap out ESN's
also. And I dare say that if you have such authorization and decide to
sneak through a few 'side jobs' for a phriendly phreak which get
traced back to you, your license or authorization will be yanked as
fast as you can snap your fingers. Motorola, Radio Shack, Cobra, Uniden
and the others are not going to jeopardize their licenses which are
worth a slight fortune to play games with ESN's. PAT]

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

From: [email protected] (Charles McGuinness)
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 17:27:20 EST
Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)

A. Padgett Peterson writes that he thinks that there is not much of a
logical reason for a 500 channel system. Specifically:

> The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think
> "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad
> enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now
> requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for
> the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel
> listing ?

I think the perspective is wrong. It's not that a system where you
have to press "upchannel" 500 times to loop around is going to be a
success, but a system where I get to choose which 40 (or whatever)
channels are on display instead of the cable company will be.

For example, the city I live in has quite a heavy population of native
Italian speakers; no doubt, they would appreciate the addition of some
Italian channels. I, on the other hand, would find no value in that,
but would be thrilled to get BBC and perhaps some other european
channels. When you add up the individual choices of all of us,
suddenly 500 channels sounds like too few, not too many.

I don't want 500 channels; 40 or so will do. But I want to pick the 40!

charles

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

Date: Sun, 13 Dec 93 08:09:27 -0500
From: [email protected] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Cable Channels (was Union Losing Telco Jobs)

From: UVS1::"[email protected]" 12-DEC-1993 23:17:34.13

> channels, it is quite possible that we each want 9 DIFFERENT channels.

> The advantage of a "500" channel system would be that each of us can
> select what we want, without preventing our neighbor from doing the
> same. Hopefully the implementation of these new systems would allow
> us to pay for what we wanted, and let us leave the rest behind.

From what I have seen, the delta cost between 1 channel and 500 is
essentially zero. The hard part will be in knowing what is on. It is
easy to set a modern television to simply skip the unwanted channels,
the hard part is in knowing what channel to turn on when.

Unless some sort of tailoring of the "preview guide" is possible or an
intelligent "TV-Guide" becomes available (weekly download?), the
choices will simply overload most people.

Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: [email protected] (Richard Cox)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Reply-To: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:00:30 GMT

[email protected] (Zarko Draganic) asked:

>> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing
>> in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this?

Almost. The change is scheduled for June 1994 (which will be the
start of the permissive period); the old dialling will be turned off
in April 1995.

>> Right now I believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London.

Correct.

>> What's it changing to?

001 (i.e. 00+ CCITT country code)

>> Why?

Standardisation with the rest of Europe (and, ultimately, most of the
rest of the world, apart from North America !)

UK internal area codes will be changing at the same time. With a few
specific exceptions, they are to be prefixed with a "1". i.e. London
(currently +44 71) will become +44 171

Richard Cox, Mandarin Technology, Cardiff ([email protected])
Voice: +44 956 700111; Fax +44 956 700110:
These numbers will NOT be changing in 1995!

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

From: Darren Ingram <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Date: 19 Dec 1993 09:01:05 GMT

> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing
> in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this? Right now I
> believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London. What's it
> changing to? Why? How long is the phase-out period?

Correct. The UK will be harmonizing with Europe, so that the
international access code will be 00. It is part of the PhoneDay
project, which will also see a renumbering for *ALL* UK numbers and a
recoding for five cities.

Darren Ingram: (e-mail [email protected] and type 'subscribe
satnews YOUR NAME' for satellite news worldwide.

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

From: [email protected] (Gordon Grant)
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?
Organization: Joint European Torus
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 10:40:56 GMT

In <[email protected]> Clive D.W. Feather <[email protected]>
writes:

> Quoth Zarko Draganic:

>> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing
>> in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this? Right now I
>> believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London. What's it
>> changing to? Why? How long is the phase-out period?

> Last I heard, it's been put back to Easter 1995. The IDD code 010 is
> changing to 00 to bring it into line with most countries, and at the
> same time a 1 is being prefixed to all fixed area codes (so +44 923
> ... becomes +44 1923) but not special area codes like 831 (allocated
> to my mobile carrier) or 800 (free calls).

> There is no phase-out period -- it's a straight cutover.

Wrong! Both BT and Hg are allowing an eight month "Parallel running
period" from the 1-Aug-1994 to Easter 1995. This applies to both the
fixed location area codes and the international prefix.

I have checked this information with the Hg changeover help desk on
0500 04 1995 (this number is only available from within the UK).

After checking and ringing me back I was assured that the emergency
number was not changing at the same time. Now I thought it was moving
from 999 to 112. Anyone know when that's going to happen.

BTW for overseas readers: Hg == Mercury Communications Ltd

[email protected] Gordon Grant Jet Abingdon OX14 3EA UK
Voice +44 235 464792 Fax +44 235 464404

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 11:00:50 BST
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94?

The number change in the UK does not take place until 'APRIL 1995'.
The international dialing code will then be 00 1 from the UK to the
USA instead of 010 1 as now.

Liz Auchinvole AEA Technology Harwell Laboratory

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 12:04:11 -0500
From: [email protected] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Inexpensive (Cheap ?) Modem - Part II

��
(continued next message)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area # 700 EMAIL 12-19-93 17:03 Message # -6872
From : TELECOM Digest
To : ELIOT GELWAN PVT RCVD
Subj : TELECOM Digest V13 #828

�@FROM :[email protected]
��(Continued from last message)

A likely factor in the 144 price erosion is the COMDEX introduction of
a slew of v32ter 19,200 modems ranging in price from $229 (quoted for
Bay Connection Inc. Spectra-Com i192MX internal for PC in PC-Week) up.

This is going to rapidly erode the price of "lesser" modems. Still in
the wings are the vFast 28.8 modems. However I suspect that @ U$99.00,
a 144 external will still find a lot of uses if the low price does not
mask any other deficiencies. For reading E-Mail and telecommuting even
9,600 is "fast enough" IMHO.

Seems the MACWarehose is not the only outlet for the U$99.00 14.4
FaxModem. The have a sister organization named (surprise) the PC
Warehouse also in Lakewood, NJ (thought so as soon as I saw the girl
on the cover of the catalogue). For those who might prefer PC cables
and software, try calling 800.367.7080.

One correction to my previous posting -- apparently the modem is made
Prometheus Products in Tustin, Oregon and not Practical Peripherals.
I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has more information about
the SIERRA chip particularly the CALLER-ID function commands (both
AT#CID=? and AT%CCID=? give ERROR).

The major caveat seems to be that it requires class 2 FAX software and
will not work with class 1. (Lacking proper software, I still have not
tried this part but the AT+F commands seem to work properly).

Warmly,

Padgett

PS: I have no connection with any of the above other than having
bought one.

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

From: [email protected] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 11:31:21 PST

> [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide
> a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of
> non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide
> free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it. PAT]

Are you sure? PacificBell's intercept message on temporary
disconnects says "this phone cannot place calls except to 911 and
Pacifc Bell Business offices." However, this may be PacBell or CPUC
policy.

Steve [email protected]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is apparently their policy to leave
phones connected during a temporary 'disconnect' and continue to
provide them with dialtone and limited calling privileges. On the
other hand, when Illinois Bell cuts you off for non-payment, they
refuse you any dialtone at all. If you go off hook, you'll get the
battery and that's all. You reach *no one*. PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 10:48 EST
From: Anthony D. Vullo <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number

In V13 #801, we are confronted with:

> [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide
> a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of
> non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide
> free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it. PAT]

Pat, I've experienced several instances in my travels, where I've
attempted to call 911 from my mobile phone to report a disabled car on
the side of a highway, only to find that I was out of range. Most
times, I found that I could switch to the other system (I have one
account on one system) to make the call.

I think that it is in the public interest for the carriers to connect
emergency calls, even when no account exists. The analogy with
disconnected landline service shouldn't carry here.

Regards and Happy Holidays,

Tony Vullo

(No disclaimers needed when you speak honorably.)

[Moderator's Note: I agree with your public interest theory, sort of,
but what you did on the highway is nothing that anyone with cellular
service can't do, i.e. change the A/B switch and make a call on the
competitor's system when roaming. The only time I know of that you
cannot go back and forth between A/B is when you are in your home
territory. There, you have to specifically register with one or the
other. Once you start roaming, neither of the carriers where you are
at is going to know who you are; either or both is going to automatic-
ally extend you the courtesy of one call while they validate your ESN
and cellphone number with your home carrier. Now when they find out
(through the validation process) that you are from the wrong side of
the A/B divider, you'll likely get hassled on your second and subse-
quent calls. But I don't think it is necessarily 911 they are giving
you as a courtesy, it is that first call so you are not sitting there
wasting your time while they do a validation check. The cell companies
here also give 911 free of charge regardless of your credit status,
and it is likely if Illinois Bell ever gets to the point they leave
your line live during a suspension they will also provide calls to
the business office and 911 during that interim. PAT]

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

From: [email protected] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: 1-800 Caller ID
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:19:16 GMT

In article <[email protected]>, Pat writes:

[regarding ANI delivery on 800 calls]

> [Moderator's Note: Just call the carrier handling your 800 service
> and tell then you want automatic number identification displayed in
> real time as calls are received. If they can't do it, you will need
> to switch your service to some carrier -- such as AT&T -- who can.
> You will *not* like the price they charge you for it. By comparison,
> Caller-ID on a regular POTS line is quite cheap. PAT]

U.S. Sprint charges $0.01 per call for real-time ANI delivery as part
of their Clarity(tm) bypass 800 service. There is a one-time charge
of $500 or so to activate the feature.

Dave Levenson Internet: [email protected]
Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well as I said, you won't like the
price they charge you for it. PAT]

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

From: [email protected] (Rodolfo Paiz)
Subject: Re: Book Review: "The Smiley Dictionary" by Godin
Date: 19 Dec 93 07:25:21 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

Rob Slade <[email protected]> writes:

> For even slightly more serious use, stick with Sanderson and
> Dougherty.

And we get this ... where? I'm interested ...

Rodolfo

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

From: [email protected] (Gordon Croft)
Subject: Re: Are Local Calls Kept on Record?
Date: 19 Dec 93 19:37:00 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

> That one to Aurora cost me ten message units every five minutes, and
> the guy called it for a half hour one day and twenty minutes the next

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "message unit"? Is that local measured
service or something?

Just a comment on the original question ... I'm sure that some COs
don't have the ability to record local calls. What I'm thinking of is
some of the old Step by Step switches that we still have in some of
the smaller areas of British Columbia.

Just my CDN $0.02 worth... that's about US $0.0000002 !! :)

Gord

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In Ameritech/Illinois Bell territory, a
'unit' under the old system (in the 1970's) was a measure of time and
distance. Local calls have been measured here for years unless you had
the old unmeasured plan, long since discontinued. Calls cost a certain
number of 'units' and each business telephone was given 80 'units' per
month as part of the basic monthly charge. Extra 'units' in those
days cost about three cents each.

On the real old equipment, the only way they had of keeping track of
local calls was by the use of a device called a pen register.
Typically a pen register was only placed on a subscriber's line when
the subscriber insisted the message count from one month to the next
was inaccurate. Of course the security department tended to use pen
registers a lot also in the course of their duties. There was never
any law (and still isn't) saying telco can't keep track of who calls
where; after all, it is their system and their responsibility where
accurate billing is concerned. Its just that in the old days it was
usually too much to bother with on local calls unless the need was
present. PAT]

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

From: [email protected] (Steve Elias)
Subject: Re: Fax Networks
Date: 19 Dec 93 13:20:50 GMT
Organization: cisco Systems

Bob, the email->fax network that you have described is currently set
up on the Internet. It is called the tpc.int remote-printing experiment.

Mail to [email protected] if you would like to join the
experiment as a user and/or a server. There is also a FAQ file
available.

eli

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

From: [email protected] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:24:12 PST
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage

On Dec 2, 2:07, TELECOM Moderator quoted someone else:

> "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
> typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare."
> -- Blair Houghton

On the Usenet, nobody knows you're a monkey.

-- h

[Moderator's Note: Not only that, they are so liberal they don't even
care if you are a monkey or not. A few even openly admit to being

��
(continued next message)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area # 700 EMAIL 12-19-93 17:03 Message # -6871
From : TELECOM Digest
To : ELIOT GELWAN PVT RCVD
Subj : TELECOM Digest V13 #828

�@FROM :[email protected]
��(Continued from last message)
monkeys and say they are proud of it. For those of you who are unable
to benefit from the wisdom of the ancients shared each day in
news.groups (a fine example of what Abusenet is all about) you'll
be interested to know they have been on quite a rampage the past
couple weeks since they went into involuntary TELECOM Digest
withdrawal. "Put it back!", they screamed as only noisy, angry monkeys
can do. "It belongs to us! You only work for us; you don't own it!".
From the commotion, you'd have thought they found someone had stolen
the monkey-chow out of their bowls at mealtime. In a sense, maybe I
did. I wonder if I should reconnect them? After all, its not the
fault of the vast majority that a few of the monkeys are more vicious
than the others but it had gotten a little more than I was willing to
deal with. I'll accept comments in private email from *list subscribers
only* on whether or not Usenet should receive the Digest as before.
Consider this the Call For Discussion, Call For Votes and Call For
Sanity all at one time. If the mailing list members want to include
Usenet, I'll give it favorable consideration -- its YOU I am trying to
serve, although you must know by now how I feel about the net. PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #828
******************************

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