TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Dec 93 01:04:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 843
Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
New Service From NY Tel - 'Reverse Directory' (Danny Burstein)
"Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous (Danny Burstein)
Prepaid Phone Pass by Bell Canada (David Leibold)
Use a 9600 Baud US Modem in UK? (Mike Carlton)
Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Steve Cogorno)
Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (John R. Levine)
Re: NPA Questions (Jean-Marc Fortier)
Re: NPA Questions (Carl Moore)
Re: NPA Questions (Brian Nunes)
Re: NPA Questions (Mike King)
Re: NPA Questions (David Leibold)
Re: NPA Questions (Paul Robinson)
Re: ATM News Groups Wanted (Harry Schroeder)
Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Todd D. Hale)
Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted (Doug Gurich)
Re: Caller ID in Software? (David Jones)
Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (Robert L. Ullmann)
Administrivia - A Few Lost Messages (TELECOM Digest Editor)
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 including Compuserve and GEnie.
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 of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email:
[email protected].
** Article submission address only:
[email protected] **
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.
TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (danny burstein)
Subject: New Service From NY Tel - 'Reverse Directory'
Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:03:04 -0500
Just caught the following public notice ad in {Newsday}, Dec 29, 1993
(tore it out without markking down the page number):
"Notice of proposed changes in Telephone company regulations"
"Notice is hereby given .... to be effective Feb 4, 1993 ... for Reverse
Directory Assistance:
RDA provides callers with the listed name, listed address, including
zip code if available, for a given business or government telephone
number.
The ad goes on to say that it will be available in the 'Downstate
Metropolitan LATA", and explains how useful it will be.
Charge is listed at $0.45 "per given telephone number."
Note a few points: This is ONLY for business and government listings.
Also, it's not clear from the wording what happens if you ask for a
residential or an unlisted number. Also unmentioned is what happens if
you call NYC directory assistance using a long distance carrier.
Take care,
danny (10288) 0-700-864-3242
[email protected] adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability,
intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If it works like the same service in
Chicago, it won't be reachable through directory assistance. You will
dial a seven digit number. That number will carry a toll charge of
45 cents per call/lookup, and on long distance calls, only the
regular toll charge (from wherever the person is calling) will apply. PAT]
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (danny burstein)
Subject: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous
Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:09:23 -0500
A new service offered in the NYC area by NY Tel (soon to be called
Nynex) is called "Anonymous Call Rejection." This tariff allows you
(at a fee, of course) to take calls coming from caller-id BLOCKed
numbers and reroutte them to a recording saying something like:
We're sorry, the person you called does not take calls from anonymous
callers. If you want to reach this person, please redial from an
unblocked line ...
For good measure, this also does -not- ring your phone until the
person tries again from an unblocked line.
Now, aside from the obvious problems of a friend calling from a line
which they don't know is blocked, and not knowing how to unblock it,
there's another issue.
Many of the COCOTS get their CNID blocked in an attempt to reduce
fraud (or, perhaps I should say, other people's fraud ...). So there
you are, sitting at the COCOT, trying to make the call, and wasting
quarter after quarter ...
[email protected] adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability,
intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No not really, because the call will
not supervise, thus the COCOT will not collect your coin if it is
properly programmed to return money for lack of an answer or in the
event of a busy signal, etc. PAT
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 22:14 WET
From:
[email protected] (woody)
Subject: Prepaid Phone Pass by Bell Canada
Bell Canada's Hello Phone Pass is the Canadian answer to such long
standing services as Talk Tickets and many other prepaid calling
schemes worldwide.
The idea of the pass is that it gives $20 worth of calling time via a
special 800 number. Each pass has a serial number which is used when
placing the calls and is entered via touch tones. There are voice
prompts to indicate how much time can be had on a call, and when only
a minute is left for the call. Another 800 number is used for
assistance.
The costs of placing calls through Bell Canada's phone pass (CAD$):
Calls within a province 50c/min
Calls within Canada, outside home province $1.00/min
Calls from Canada to U.S.A. $1.50/min
Calls from Canada to U.K. $2.00/min
Calls from Canada to Europe/Americas $2.50/min
Calls from Canada to Pacific/Asia $3.00/min
Each 50 cents is set up as a "unit" of calling time; thus a $20 pass
will have 40 units. Local calls are considered to be a call within
province, so these will cost 50 cents a minute using the pass (whereas
a payphone only gobbles up 25 cents for unlimited local time).
David Leibold
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Mike Carlton)
Subject: Use a 9600 Baud US Modem in UK?
Date: 29 Dec 1993 19:34:14 -0800
Organization: USC Information Sciences Institute
I've got a friend who'll soon be moving to the UK (Durham actually).
She's got a Hayes compatible 9600 baud modem that she would like to
take with her and use there.
Can anyone tell me if she can expect it to work with the British phone
system? Is there a special initialization necessary for the modem?
Do they use the same standard phone jacks as used in the US?
Thanks,
mike (
[email protected])
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 12:17:28 -0800 (PST)
Said by: Mitch Wagner
> foot the bill for a second phone line. What is the cost of a second
> phone line, anyway? -- $50/mo. and maybe a few hundred dollars install
> charge, right?
This brings up an interesting point: What DO the various telephone
companies charge as their basic rate? Out here in PacBell territory,
we pay 8.95 for unmeasured service. What about other areas? Is this
low?
Steve
[email protected]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 23:26 EST
From:
[email protected] (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.
> I think that supposedly intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, social
> workers, and their employers) should find their OWN solution to that
> issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-network, and the
> rest of us, with their problems.
Funny about that. I think that supposedly intelligent people
(computer nerds, telemarketers, etc.) who feel that they want to know
who's calling before picking up the phone should find their OWN
solution to that issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-
network, and the rest of us, with their problems.
CL-ID is a solution looking for a problem. Or maybe the other way
around.
Pat: we've demonstrated many times in the past that nobody's going to
be persuaded by these arguments. Can we cut this thread off here?
Regards,
John Levine,
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Snip, snip, snip. Thread cut off.
How long will it be until it comes back around again? PAT]
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Jean-Marc Fortier)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
Date: 29 Dec 93 17:11:10 GMT
Reply-To:
[email protected] (Jean-Marc Fortier)
Organization: Ingres Corporation, A subsidiary of The ASK Group, Inc.
Bill Hofmann (
[email protected]) wrote:
> 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns
> in that corridor, are there any other localities which
> REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll
> calls, I guess)?
Toronto with the split 416-905 does the same thing.
in 416 to call 905 (local) dial 905 + seven digits;
in 905 to call 416 (local) dial 416 + seven digits;
in all cases long distance is 1 + areacode + seven digits;
if you dial (from 416) a 905 + seven digit number that is
not a local call you get an intercept message to dial 1 + area + seven.
Jean-Marc Fortier
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 12:18:41 EST
From: Carl Moore <
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
[email protected] (Bill Hofmann) writes:
> 1. Does any state publish 1 + NPA+ 7d AND 0 + 7d instructions? I have
> here that Delaware still does (302). Carl Moore's note in
> "history" yhat 213 does is incorrect.
Is the "1 + NPA + 7d" intended to refer to long distance within area
code? I have continued to see 1 + 7D for long distance within Delaware
(302); how do you arrive at your remark about 302? As for 213 (which
has 7D for long distance within it), I did write in the PAST tense
about its continuing to publish 0+7D for 0+ within it; because of your
apparent confusion, I have added "but for some time" to the next
version.
> 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns
> in that corridor, are there any other localities which
> REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll
> calls, I guess)?
Yes, the NPA + 7D scheme is seen for some other local calls: within
the DC area (area codes 301, 202, 703) across the 301/410 border in
Md. (and this affects some of the DC area suburbs, such as Silver
Spring) across 416/905 border in Ontario. But I think local from 215
area to other area codes (and from New Jersey to out of state)
requires 1 + NPA + 7D.
FYI, 510 allows 1 + 510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area area
codes. 510 does publish 7D, rather than 1+510+7D, for long distance
within it. But as I say in the history file, the suggestion exists
that any call within +1 be makeable as 1 + NPA + 7D.
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Brian Nunes)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:08:12 GMT
On Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:30:19 PST Bill Hofmann (
[email protected]) wrote:
> In reviewing the various sources (telecom postings, discussions with
> LECs, etc), I'm left with a few questions that folks out there may be
> able to help with:
(material omitted)
> 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns
> in that corridor, are there any other localities which
> REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll
> calls, I guess)?
Depending on your locale, the following calls may be non-toll:
NPA 310 (East Los Angeles) to/from NPA 714 (Orange County)
NPA 310 (East Los Angeles) to/from NPA 213 (Metro L.A.)
NPA 818 (L.A. Valleys) to/from NPA 213 (Metro L.A.)
NPA 714 (Orange County) to/from NPA 909 (Inland Empire)
NPA 818 (L.A. Valleys) to/from NPA 909 (Inland Empire)
Brian Nunes=*-*-*-*-*-*
[email protected] -*-*-1-213-656-9117
7985 Santa Monica Blvd. #109-473, West Hollywood, CA 90046-5112
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 14:43:32 PST
Virtually all the non-toll inter-NPA calls in the C&P service areas
near the District of Columbia (MD, VA, and DC) require the NPA to be
dialed. Dialing '1' is optional, though, and if the call is non-toll,
dialing '1' won't incur a charge. Toll call, however, DO require the
'1'.
These calls include 301<->202, 301<->703, 202<->703, 301<->410, and
possibly, 410<->202.
Mike King (
[email protected]) Usual disclaimers...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 18:28 WET
From:
[email protected] (woody)
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
416/905 requires NPA+7D for local calls between 416 and 905 (Metro
Toronto boundary), mandatory as of March 1994.
Washington DC metro area (202/301/703) already does.
Rochester Tel now requires 1 + 315 + 7D for local calls from its 716
points to local 315 NPA points.
And no doubt there will be more ...
David Leibold
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 21:31 EST
Subject: Re: NPA Questions
From: Paul Robinson <
[email protected]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
In the National Capital area, for interstate local calls between DC
and its Maryland and Virginia Suburbs, one must dial the 10 digit
number, e.g. 202 Nxx-xxxx, 301 Nxx-xxxx or 703 Nxx-xxxx. The ten
digit number will be accepted for all local calls even if it is the
same area code, so you don't have to reprogram a speed dialer if you
use a phone in a different area code than where you programmed it.
In Virginia, dialing 703 before a local number makes the call take
longer than dialing the 7 digit number alone. (Dialing the area code
on a local call used to not work at all). In Maryland, using 301 does
not add any extra time to the call setup, except it provides one
useful feature: if the number being dialed is outside the local area
you get a recording saying it can't complete your call; if you dial
that same call with 301 first, you get a recording telling you to dial
1 before the number.
The reason being that many exchanges that are non-local from Maryland
and Virginia Suburbs were local exchanges in DC or the other state and
before the area code was required on local interstate calls, you could
dial a number anywhere in DC or the VA and MD suburbs by dialing the 7
digit number. Callers outside of Washington could call someone in a
Maryland suburb by dialing either 301 or 202 and Virginia suburb
numbers worked on both 703 and 202.
> FYI, 510 allows 1+510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area
> area codes.
In Maryland, I know that you can dial 1 first even if the call is
local. I haven't tried testing the other two areas much, as I don't
get to Virginia more than once a month and I try to stay out of the
District of Cocaine as much as is humanly possible.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought that Our Nation's Capitol
was located in the District of Crime, not the District of Cocaine. I
know the street violence there is almost as bad as Chicago, maybe even
worse. Cocaine or crime, its not surprising considering the Congress
of the USA provides local Washington DC government. PAT]
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Harry Schroeder)
Subject: Re: ATM News Groups Wanted
Organization: Community_News_Service
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 13:33:50 GMT
Donald Army (
[email protected]) wrote:
:>>Are there any news groups on ATM??
:>>Thanks,
:>>
[email protected]
There is the comp.dcom.cell-relay group which has quite a bit of ATM
discussions. You might want to check there.
Harry Schroeder MCI Mail: HSchroeder
Internet:
[email protected] or
[email protected]
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks also to Rudof Meyer and several
others for providing identical answers not printed here. PAT]
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Todd D. Hale)
Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television
Organization: Novell, Inc., Provo, UT, USA
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 17:51:17 GMT
Also, about 500+ channels: they need not all be allocated. We could
only dedicate 100 or so, and use the rest for ON DEMAND programming.
Sure, that's only 400 or so households being serviced on demand, but
that can be overcome by splitting subscription areas into small enough
regions (mega mega bit backbones with 500 channel local bandwidth).
Perhaps I missed this discussion earlier in the thread??
BTW, when I say on demand programming, I refer to anything from local
to world news to sports news to movies to sitcoms to WHATEVER. Can't
wait, myself. Imagine sitting down to local news and hitting some
NEXT story button when you're ready to move on. Or, select a set of
stories from a table of contents and play it through. Etc, etc ...
Todd D. Hale
[email protected] [email protected]
Unofficially speaking, of course.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 14:30:34 CST
From:
[email protected] (Doug Gurich)
Subject: Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted
> I am looking for recommendations for introductory books on
> telecommunications. I'm familiar with Pierce's "Signals" but would
> like something more recent.
One such book that I have read recently, and would eagerly recommend,
is called, "Guess Who's Listening at the Other End of Your Telephone?"
by Barry H. Harrin. It provides an insider's look into the management
of the telecommunications industry.
Told in a humorous, entertaining manner, the book details Mr. Harrin's
true life experiences in the telecommunications industry. The stories
provide a good "behind the scenes" look at such companies as AT&T,
Southern Bell, Claydesta/Fiberline and NTS Communications.
Some chapter titles are:
Ma Bell's Indoctrination
Management-New York Style
Welcome to Southern Fried Bell
Attack of the Clay People
Bringing Civilization and Fiber Optics to Texas
The Texas Dial Tone Massacre
Pirates of the Potomac
This is a great book for learning how the industry has evolved in
recent years. It especially provides a good look at how the decision
makers work and the things they will do to get ahead in the business.
I very much recommend it. It is available from Commanche Press at 906
Lightstone, San Antonio, TX 78258 and is $19.95 plus $3.00 S&H.
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (David Jones)
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software?
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:05:49 -0500
In article <
[email protected]>
[email protected] (P D H)
writes:
> I take it that a lot of people are interested in which modems do
> include the hardware feature and have cooresponding firmware to deal
> with it. I would suspect one reasonable way to deal with it is when
> the "RING" message comes from the modem, the second one can include
> the caller-id info. Then your host software can choose to do with it
> as it wants.
Let's get down to specifics:
The ZyXEL U-series modems do caller ID. Here's a typical terminal
trace:
RING
TIME: 29-12-93 21:08:26
CALLER ID: 416 555 1212
RING
I've tried this out on my ZyXEL, and it works fine for me. I have
heard reports of problems with some exchanges, but my modem works fine
in 416-463.
David Jones, M.A.Sc student, Electronics Group (VLSI), University of Toronto
email:
[email protected], finger for more info/PGP public key
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 02:50:17 GMT
My opinion: clearly, it is very bad news if the 911 service ignores a
call and it turns out to be a real emergency.
I'd suggest a city bylaw that states that there is a mandatory $5000
service charge for false alarms generated by automatic devices. (NOT A
FINE, note; just an ordinary bill for city services; this makes it
much easier to enforce.)
I understand that U.S. cities typically have this sort of rule for
false fire service alarms, whether automatic or not.
Robert Ullmann
[email protected] +1 617 693 1315
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 00:48:55 -0600
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <
[email protected]>
Subject: Administrivia: A Few Lost Messages
Due to a bug in my script here a few of the messages you sent me on
Monday and Tuesday were lost in processing. I've finally figured out
*why* this happens at irregular intervals; now the trick will be to
find the solution, but I think I can. So if you wrote to the Digest
on Monday or Tuesday of this week and your message has not yet
appeared *as of this issue and what appears above* then it got sent
to dev/null in error, and I ask you to submit it again with my
sincere apologies. I know, I asked you this same thing a couple
weeks ago and part of the growing pains around here involves making
some serious modifications to message processing because of the
huge volume of stuff arriving which has to be sorted and picked
through, etc. So anyway, mostly it was whatever you sent me on
Tuesday. Replace it if you can please, as we wind down another
year here together.
There will be a couple more issues of the Digest this week to wind
things up, then publication will resume sometime over the weekend
with Volume 14. Sometime over the weekend the Index of Subjects
and Authors for volume 13 will be compiled and added to the exist-
ing indexes of same in the archives. A new archives roadmap or
directory will also be published. In addition, I have a special
report on Digicom modems for you to read, and that will be mailed out
in the next few days. See you again tomorrow.
PAT
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V13 #843
******************************
******************************************************************************
Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253
