TELECOM Digest     Mon, 28 Feb 94 19:15:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 107

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

   Re: Area Code Closeness (Roger Fajman)
   Re: Area Code Closeness (Mike King)
   Re: Area Code Closeness (David A. Kaye)
   Re: Area Code Closeness (Carl Moore)
   Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email ([email protected])
   Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email (Steven King)
   Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It? (Tad Cook)
   Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It? (Brett Frankenberger)
   Re: Digital Cellular Phones (Henrik Rasmussen)
   Re: Digital Cellular Phones (Mike Borsetti)
   Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Michael Israeli)
   Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Tad Cook)
   Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Mike Wilcox)
   Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? ([email protected])
   Re: Lowest Number in the NANP? (Dave Levenson)
   Re: Need Information on ISDN Phones (Eric Bobinsky)
   Re: Air Cell (John D. Gretzinger)
   Re: These Cell Phones Don't Work - Why? (Henrik Rasmussen)
   Re: These Cell Phones Don't Work - Why? (Dave Levenson)
   Re: Another Misprogrammed COCOT (Jay Hennigan)
   Information Request For PBX-Computer Interworking (Masahiko Ohashi)

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. All
opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Roger Fajman <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994  18:34:31 EST
Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness


> Trivia comment/question: What places have *three* different area codes
> as part of their local calling area?

Lots of places in the Washington, DC area.  Everyone in the large DC
Metro Calling Area can dial the 202, 301, and 703 area codes as local
calls.  There are a number of places that can dial the 202, 301, and
410 area codes as local calls.  Ashton, MD, where I live is one such
place.

> What community in the USA gets local service into four area
> codes? There is one such place. By 'local', I mean no toll charges even
> though 1 + AC + 7D dialing is required.

Layhill exchanges in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC can make
local calls to the, 202, 301, 410, and 703 area codes.  So can Bowie,
Berwyn, Hyattsville, and Silver Spring, MD exchanges.

Local calls to another area code here can be dialed as AC + 7D or 1 +
AC + 7D.

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

From: [email protected] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 16:17:44  (PST)


In TELECOM Digest V14 #105, Pat noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By coincidence, it appears we have two
> persons named 'Mike King' in this issue, but the first one is Michael
> rather than Mike. At least I assume it is two different people; the
> net addresses are different. Yes, it messed me up at first in my
> editing of this issue also. Both responding on the same thread, yet!  PAT]

Yeah, it sort of threw me for a minute, too.  I've spent a good
portion of my life trying to train people not to automatically assume
my first name is "Michael," and I never thought Pat would do so.  So
when I started reading #105, and the last line on the screen was the
line in the contents showing the subject to which I had replied, with
that, um, other name, I began to wonder.

Not to worry, I'd *never* alias myself with the name for which Mike is
often a diminutive.  ;-)


Mike King    [email protected]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, as the circulation list for this Digest
continues to grow, I have a lot of identical names on it, but never before
do I recall two persons with the same name in the same issue. Did you
know that once every three or four years there is a convention in the USA
of persons named "John Smith". Everyone by that name is invited to attend
the convention held at some hotel. Can you imagine how crazed the hotel
switchboard operator must be by the time the convention is over? "Please
connect me with John Smith ..." Generally several hundred people by that
name attend the convention. Now you know why I am so crazy.   PAT]

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

From: [email protected] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness
Date: 28 Feb 1994 01:20:09 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  (415) 705-6060  [login: guest]


TELECOM Digest Editor questioned:

> Trivia comment/question: What places have *three* different area codes
> as part of their local calling area?

Mountain View, Calif, the home of Ames Research, where NASA puts
satellites together and all that.  It's in area 415 (San Francisco),
touches 408 to the immediate south (San Jose region), and 510 (the
East Bay Oakland area) to the east.  A call from Mountain View to
Sunnyvale in 408 is local, as is a call to Fremont in 510.

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

Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 15:10:31 EST
From: Carl Moore <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness


NO, when 219 hits Ohio, it hits the 419 area, NOT 216.

Thanks to the 301/410 split, some of the Maryland suburbs (such as
Silver Spring) in the DC area now have local service to four area
codes.  That is, all of 202 and parts of 301,410,703.  Local calls to
a different area code are dialed as NPA + 7D with the leading 1
optional.

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

From: [email protected] (jani)
Subject: Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email
Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology / Academic Computing Center
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 22:02:27 GMT


It's probably an Internet account not a Internet connection
which is ~$20 / month or so.

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

From: [email protected] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Get Paid For Receiving Commercial Email
Date: 28 Feb 1994 23:07:32 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group
Reply-To: [email protected]


[email protected] (Scott(Mac Info HQ)) publicly declared:

> Well, at $0.065/message and $200-$500/yr that menas 8-21 messages of
> unknown length you have to read each day. If each message takes only
> one minute to read (unlikely) that will be $3.90/hr. Personally, my free
> time is worth more than that.

And who says you have to read them?  My terminal program has a
wonderful scripting capability, and can capture them to disk in case I
need them later ... Heck, I can even automate it to call and "read" my
mail when I'm nowhere near the computer.

Still, $200 to $500 annually isn't much of a profit.  $41.67/month?  I
suppose it would pay a fraction of my phone bill.

The offer reeks of scam.  To anyone who looks into it, please tell us
what you find out.


Steven King -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group

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

Subject: Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It?
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 11:35:31 PST
From: [email protected] (Tad Cook)


[email protected] (Bob Schwartz) writes:

> This happened to me and I've never heard of such a thing.

> I have several lines and while talking on line line, which is hooked
> up to a fax machine and a phone (distinctly seperate stations), the
> phone integrated into the fax machine began to ring. then, right on
> que, the fax machine answered and my conversation was obliterated by
> fax tones The line has no special features such call waiting or three
> way calling.  It does however recieve from a remote call forwarding
> source, but I can't see how RCF would have any involvement.

> Has anyone seen or heard of such an occurance and how could it be?

I have no idea what a "line line" is, but I assume that you are
talking on the same line that the fax machine is hooked to, and that
either you are behind one of those line sharing devices, or the fax
machine has that feature.

What is happening is that either your line sharing device or the fax
machine is using a cheap filter for detecting CNG tone from the
calling fax machine.  The feature is so poorly implemented that it
"falses" on a voice during the phone conversation, signals the fax
machine, which then starts trying to handshake.

Get a dedicated fax line.


[email protected] (if it bounces, use [email protected])| [put "attn Box #215"
Tad Cook    | Packet Amateur Radio:  | Home Phone:  | on fax or cover pg!]
Seattle, WA | KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 206-527-4089 |  FAX: 206-525-1791

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

From: [email protected] (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: It's Impossible, Isn't It?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 23:23:16 GMT


[email protected] (Bob Schwartz) writes:

> This happened to me and I've never heard of such a thing.

> I have several lines and while talking on line line, which is hooked
> up to a fax machine and a phone (distinctly seperate stations), the
> phone integrated into the fax machine began to ring. then, right on
> que, the fax machine answered and my conversation was obliterated by
> fax tones The line has no special features such call waiting or three
> way calling.  It does however recieve from a remote call forwarding
> source, but I can't see how RCF would have any involvement.

Once possibility is that the ring detefctor on the fax machine might
be of very low quality.  Detecting a ring should be trivially easy
(look for a high voltage AC signal), but some boxes will trip on any
relatively high voltage transient, and/or on any 20 Hz signal.

If that is the case, a voltage spike or some sound on your conversation
could cause the fax machine to think it has received a ring, and answer
the call ...


Brett  ([email protected])

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

From: [email protected] (Henrik Rasmussen)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones
Date: 28 Feb 1994 02:54:59 GMT
Organization: The University of NC, Chapel Hill, the Experimental BBS


> Bill Bauserman   [email protected]

Note the above domain: are GTE and Sprint still related in some way?

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

Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 16:43:43 PDT
From: Mike Borsetti, Cellular One/San Francisco <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones


[email protected] writes:

> Most cellular companies I have dealt with have set up (or are setting
> up) their network to allow the digital user to drop to analog, but not
> vice versa.  That is, if you have a dualmode phone and the call starts
> as analog or switches to analog because no digital channels are
> available, then that call will remain analog until it ends, it will
> not switch back to digital.

By personal experience, I can say that this is not the case on
Cellular One's San Francisco's digital (TDMA) cellular system.  If for
any reason you are in analog and the cellsite you're about to be
handed off to has a digital channel available, you'll be assigned to
it.

I'm curious as to why a cellular company would deny analog to digital
handoffs, as it would seem that it is in everyone's best interest to
maximize digital usage.


Mike Borsetti

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

From: [email protected] (Michael Israeli)
Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP?
Date: 28 Feb 1994 23:23:50 GMT
Organization: Net Access - Philadelphia's Internet Connection


> According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number
> 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'.  The number 201-200-0001
> has been disconnected.  I didn't try any others in that prefix.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let
> us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their
> number?  What about at the other end of the line, any from the 919-999
> range?    PAT]

Here in the 610 area code, and also in the 215 area code, the numbers
00XX often seem to be some kind of "test" numbers.  One will be 'being
checked for trouble', another 'busy', another a strange busy signal.
Is it possible that when you call a number that has been disconnected
that your call is actually FORWARDED to that number?


Michael Israeli - ([email protected])

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

Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 94 11:40:19 PST
From: [email protected] (Tad Cook)


[email protected] (Dave Levenson) writes:

> According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number
> 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'.  The number 201-200-0001
> has been disconnected.  I didn't try any others in that prefix.

the Moderator responds:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let
> us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their
> number?  What about at the other end of the line, any from the 919-999
> range?    PAT]

The highest dialable number in the range is 919-995-9999 in Buxton,
NC.  It appears to be a working number with ring-no-answer when I
called.

The lowest is 201-200-0002, which is a trading desk at a brokerage
house in Jersey City, New Jersey.

These two exchanges are 386 miles apart.


[email protected] (if it bounces, use [email protected])| [put "attn Box #215"
Tad Cook    | Packet Amateur Radio:  | Home Phone:  | on fax or cover pg!]
Seattle, WA | KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 206-527-4089 |  FAX: 206-525-1791

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

From: [email protected] (Mike Wilcox )
Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP?
Date: 28 Feb 1994 21:27:25 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation , Folsom


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

> According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number
> 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'.  The number 201-200-0001
> has been disconnected.  I didn't try any others in that prefix.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let
> us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their
> number?  What about at the other end of the line, any from the 919-999
> range?    PAT]

From 916-351 (Folsom, CA)

201-200-0000 "Being Checked For Trouble"
201-200-0001 "Has Been Disconnected"
201-200-0002 Answered at a business
919-999-9999 "Cannot be completed as dialed. 9161T"

One interesting note about the recordings on the 201-200 numbers: The
first recording read the number as two oh oh oh oh oh oh.  The second
recording read the number as two oh oh zero zero zero one.


Mike Wilcox   [email protected]
Intel Folsom  Folsom Information Technology
Telecomm and Network Services


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did you notice that the intercept machine
is smart enough to normally pronounce three trailing zeros as 'thousand'
and two trailing digits as 'hundred' but in the event of a four zeros
it does not say 'zero thousand'. Here, the lady says 'oh! oh! oh! ooooh!'
sort of like something else was going on when the recording was being
made. :)  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 22:18:40 -0500
From: Jonathan <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP?


I tried 201 200-0700 and got the same checked for trouble recording.
The phone company explained that:

(1) it was a local recording in NJ;
(2) the recording is a generic recording that doesn't mean very much; and
(3) the number doesn't belong to anybody, or, if it does, then they wouldn't
do anything about it.

In general I am really confused about incorrect recordings.  It is
annoying when the recording is wrong.  And the phone company doesn't
do anything about it because as far as they are concerned I have the
wrong number.  One time the recording (for somebody in one of my
classes who had moved while we were working on a project together)
referred me to a number outside my area; I called it and the person
had no idea who the person that I was trying to reach was; I called
the phone company and explained how important that it was to contact
this individual, and they put in a repair report; the next day, the
maintenance center called me back and said that the recording was the
way that the customer ordered it.

Maybe the customer or the service rep made a mistake filling out the
original service order?

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

From: [email protected] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Lowest Number in the NANP?
Reply-To: [email protected]
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 00:04:57 GMT


[email protected] (Dave Levenson) writes:

> According to NJ Bell's automatic intercept service, the number
> 201-200-0000 is 'being checked for trouble'.  The number 201-200-0001
> has been disconnected.  I didn't try any others in that prefix.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not try 0002, 0003, etc and let
> us know your findings. I wonder if they know the significance of their
> number?

I don't particularly want to disturb folks in Jersey City just because
they have interesting telephone numbers.  I don't know if they'd find
it interesting.  I did, however, try 201-200-0002 and it was a
ring-no-answer on Saturday afternoon.  That probably indicates that
the number is working ... and therefore that it is the lowest working
number in the NANP.


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

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

From: [email protected] (ERIC BOBINSKY)
Subject: Re: Need Information on ISDN Phones
Date: 28 Feb 1994 16:03 EST
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center


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

> In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Beverly
> Taylor) writes:

>> In article <[email protected]>, The Network Group <0004526627@
>> mcimail.com> wrote:

>>> I need to know a source for ISDN phonesxxx -- excuse me: voice
>>> terminals.

>>> I have heard that AT&T has a few of these but haven't heard of any
>>> other manufacturers such as Northern Telecom or others. Apparently the
>>> Northern product for Meridian Digital Centrex is not an ISDN phone.

>> We have used TelRad, Fujitsu, and AT&T ISDN sets.  They're all used to
>> run on an AT&T 5ESS.  We're very satisfied with all of them and have
>> only found these three will work with our CO switch.

>   I believe Bellcore lists vendors that support the National-1 ISDN
> interface.  These should all work with the 5ESS switch (on 5E8 and
> later).

We've got a couple of ISDN videophones from BT up in one of our labs --
email me if you want more details.


([email protected])
Eric A. Bobinsky   Communications Systems
NASA/Lewis Research Center   Cleveland, OH  44135  USA
+1 216 433 3497  +1 216 433 8705 (Fax)

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

From: [email protected]
Date: 28 Feb 94 16:13:02-0500
Subject: Re: Air Cell


In Volume 14 Issue 99 Stu Jeffery mentions a company using mobile
phones from an aircraft.

I presume he is talking about the air plane being in flight at the
time.  This would fly in the face of an FCC regulation that
specifically prohibits the use of a land based cell phone while in
flight.

I too would be interested in that company to see how they got around
that regulation, or do they have phones that work on both systems.


John D. Gretzinger

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

From: [email protected] (Henrik Rasmussen)
Subject: Re: These Cell Phones Don't Work - Why?
Date: 28 Feb 1994 03:09:35 GMT
Organization: The University of NC at Chapel Hill, the Experimental BBS


About two years ago an incompatability developed between Astro-Net
switches and technophone Cellular telephones. This problems caused the
Technophones to not recognize they were being paged, so an incoming
call never rang the phone. I was told Astro-Net had to make a software
mod and Technophone had to make a hardware mod to correct what was
apparently a fault on both ends.

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

From: [email protected] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: These Cell Phones Dont Work - Why?
Reply-To: [email protected]
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 01:54:50 GMT


I still use a 666-channel cellular telephone.  It works okay on
Cellular One, New York City CGSA.


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

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

From: [email protected] (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: Another Misprogrammed COCOT
Date: 28 Feb 1994 18:57:12 -0800
Organization: Disgruntled postal workers against gun control


In article <[email protected]> Carl Moore <[email protected]>
writes:

> A COCOT I saw on a trip I just took across Vermont had (usual)
> roblems with 10xxx access code (I used 1-800-321-0288 instead of
> 10288) and also had this problem with use of the Orange Card:

> I was able to call 1-800-(Orange Card Number), get the resulting tone,
> then punch in the ten-digit code and the ten-digit number I was
> calling, then get the next burst of tone, but then got "DISCONNECTED"
> on the display I saw.

Yep.  Many COCOTs cut the tone pad after too few digits to use calling
cards.  Sounds like this one dumps the call as well.  A Radio Shack
pocket dialer is one workaround, and if you preprogram your calling
card number into it, you avoid having to worry about "shoulder
surfers" observing you keying in your card number.

Speaking of COCOTs, I've observed that many of them scramble the
dialed digits on the tone pad.  That is, when dialing an 800 number, I
can hear DTMF tones in the handset, but the tones are _not_ the digits
I am dialing.  However, I reach the correct number.  Once the number
is dialed, I get a synthesized "thank you", and thereafter the tone
pad sends the correct tones.

Does anyone know why this is done?


Jay Hennigan    [email protected]   Santa Barbara CA

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

From: [email protected] (Masahiko Ohashi)
Subject: Information Requested For PBX-Computer Interworking
Organization: Fujitsu Nagoya Communication Systems Ltd.
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 1994 05:35:37 GMT


Hello all!

I'm researching standards of pricvate branch exchange (PBX) - computer
interworking. I hear that International Organization for Standardization
(ISO) starts her work for these standardizations and the first meeting
was held at Korea in October last year.

Will anyone tell me the result of the ISO meeting and/or schedule of
PBX-computer interworking standardiztions?

Thanks in advance.

Ohashi - Fujistu Nagoya Communication Systems
(e-mail : [email protected])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #107
******************************


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

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

You are viewing proxied material from infinitelyremote.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.