TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Mar 94 08:26:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 139

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

   History May Repeat Itself (Donald E. Kimberlin)
   Hush-a-Phone (Steve Brack)
   Seeking CATV List (John Conwell)
   Ripped By InfoAccess (Jacque Bussey)
   SIT Tones - Where in the Archives? (Paul Cook)
   Country Code for San Marino (Clive D.W. Feather)
   Clever Data/Fax/Voice Switch Needed (Jody Kravitz)
   Re: Appel a` Communications Pour CFIP'95 (*in French*) (Jan Ceuleers)
   Information Security Work Group Meeting (Michael S. Baum)

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Mar 94 02:34:00 EST
From: Donald E. Kimberlin <[email protected]>
Subject: History May Repeat Itself


In article <Digest v.14, iss.122>, [email protected] (Russ
McGuire) posted an announcement about Wiltel achieving an agreement
with EmTelCuba to build the first recent-generation broadband link
between Cuba and the U.S. by laying a new fiber optic cable between
Florida and Cuba.

I have a close interest in works of this sort due to my own personal
career work in such spheres, so I had some private communication with
Russ about this matter.  Wiltel seems to be playing down the matter,
in essence saying it's no biggie because the distance is short and
there's no earth-shattering technology to announce.  I don't see it
that way.  In fact, the Wiltel execs have achieved something even AT&T
for all its prestige and established ability couldn't do.  We have
here a case where David didn't slay Goliath, but did finesse a route
that Goliath couldn't follow.  And, in the longer run, we may see some
very old telcom history repeat itself.

That may in part have to do with a burden AT&T had to bear with the
Cuban government.  It's a telecomm lesson in dealing with what are
called "emerging nations."  The Cuban-American Telephone Company of
the pre-Castro era was a 50/50 AT&T-ITT venture that got expropriated
very early on.  Due to that very nature, Cuba's connectivity to the
outside world was largely hegemonized by the Yanquis at AT&T until
very recently.  Up until 1951, in the era when the means of providing
connectivity around the globe was HF radio, Cuba had only a few
channels via AT&T into the U.S. (via AT&T's Fort Lauderdale Overseas
Radio Station, and a few odd HF links to Spain and several of the
Caribbean nations, and that was about it.  In a breakthrough
technology for 1951, AT&T laid its Type SA Submarine Cable System
between Key West and Havana (78 miles) and provided at one swoop a
dozen stable, reliable analog voice channels.  (Those who know about
the more recent technology of submarine cables will recall that the
1957 TAT-1 across the Atlantic was the Type SB Submarine Cable System,
and may have puzzled what Type SA ever was.)

The U.S. was enjoying growing business with Cuba through the 1950's,
and telephone traffic was such that overflows had to spill off the
cable onto the HF radio, which was at that point intended to be a
"back-up."  With the advent of Operator Toll Dialing and the intimate
relation between Cuban-American and AT&T, the dial networks of the two
countries were completely open to each other, in terms of what
operators could accomplish.  People were becoming more and more
telephone-dependent, and the offered traffic between Cuba and the
world skyrocketed.  To handle this, AT&T and Cuban-American opened up
one of the few SHF troposcatter links AT&T ever used, a 900 mHz link
between Florida City (just south of Miami) and Guanabo (near Havana)
in the mid 1950's.  That link could provide 600 (and more, with
expansion) telephone channels, or one analog video link.  (In fact,
the entire tropo system, like all such links, ran both frequency and
space diversity.  This meant the redundant link could be used for
video at most times, not interrupting telephone use when video was
ordered.)  It was a heady time for the television networks when their
(then) landline video networks reached Miami, and it was possible to
"do a remote from Havana," and there were a few.  Having the new tropo
with the old SA cable for a "backup" also permitted shutting down the
HF radio operation from Fort Lauderdale.  It should have been some
very good business, indeed.

That's the way it was when revolution came to Cuba: More than 600
channels of telephone circuits out to the U.S., with dialing
capability and open access between the networks, plus the few bits of
HF to other nations that had been in place for a number of years.
And, that's the way it stayed for almost 30 years afterwards, with the
tropo to Florida City being the prime connectivity pipe for Cuba to
the outside world, controlled by an entity the Cubans had no reason to
admire; seen as both economically ex-colonial and politically unacceptable.
Yet, it was the only significant tool available.

Another incident made the hurt deeper.  The rift in relations between
the countries, while not disrupting the technology, did cause problems
in matters of money.  Since AT&T and Cuban-American were partners in
operating the links, each had a literal "open account" with the other,
with settlements of revenue shares that could no longer be made.
Meantime, calls originating from Cuba were given unlimited access to
the U.S.  network with automatic dialing.  As the reach of that U.S.
network expanded, fingers in Havana could reach wherever in the world
a U.S. operator could reach, and matters of paying for it weren't
considered.  For about ten years, there were no settlements, and no
meaningful communication between AT&T and the new regime in Cuba.
However, the balance due AT&T was getting larger and larger.

I was working in the AT&T offices in Miami the day word came down that
we were to cut off the trunks from Cuba.  Nothing like that had ever
been done before.  (In the world of international telecommunications,
attempts are even made to keep some channels open during war, just in
case the politicians should decide to try to talk out their
differences. This doesn't mean that circuits are never shut down; it
doesn't mean the technicians engage in friendly chat on them, but more
often, some are kept up without publicity, at least so long as the
physical plant holds up.  The general public may not have access to
them, but the governments do.)  So, it was high drama in the Miami
Testroom on that day.  It only took about three hours for the telegrams
to arrive from Cuba, asking what was wrong.

Western Union was still operating with Cuba on its old submarine
telegraph cable, the second oldest in the world.  That cable has a
special history of its own, more of which fits later in this story.
AT&T had, of course, covered all its political bases and had the plan
laid about how to handle this largest of "unpaid phone bills."  The
response was to tell the Cubans no more free access could be had; that
if they wanted service reconnected, it would have to be on the basis
of all future calls being paid on the U.S. end.  That is, all calls
sent-paid into Cuba, and all collect outbound, so AT&T could get its
share of the revenue from somewhere. They'd have to agree to that, and
leave it that way indefinitely.  It didn't take long for the Cubans to
agree, of course, so by later in the afternoon, the circuits were back
up, with operators at Miami enforcing all outbound calls from Cuba as
collect on the U.S. end.  That situation remained for many years.  It
was, of course, just another hurtful Yanqui action as seen by the
Cubans.

As the satellite era grew upon the world, the Cubans saw an
opportunity to bypass the Yanquis, if they could only get the needed
funding and connectivity.  During the years of closeness with the
USSR, some Molnya earth stations had been installed, but these were
largely limited to communications with Russia, and not useful for much
connectivity into other parts of the world.  Finally, by the 1980's,
alternatives seemed feasible.  The Cubans invited the world to bid
providing them with new links to the global community.  AT&T had
reason to want to replace the now-aged analog tropo system.  It was
occupying 900 mHz spectrum Southern Bell should by then have for use
of the growing cellular mobile telephone business.  AT&T proposed a
fiber optic cable between Florida and Cuba, but lost out to a bid from
Italcable, Italy's highly entreprenurial international carrier.  The
Cubans accepted a deal with Italcable hauling their telephone trunks
out by satellite to Italy and from there to the world.  The U.S. and
AT&T were stuck with the old tropo, and the SA cable, when it was
functional.  The SA cable would often be out of service for several
years at a time, because whenever it got damaged (fairly often by a
ship in the shallow waters of the Florida Strait), a whole, protracted
negotiation via third parties would ensue about what nation's
cableship would be permitted in Cuban waters and who would pay the
bill.

And that situation prevailed until Hurricane Andrew ended the life of
the Florida City tropo antennas.  (Most Americans saw the wreckage on
TV as part of the Hurricane Andrew stories.) Now things were changed.
While the U.S. had lost most of its connectivity to Cuba, the Cubans
did not lose the world.  It was being handled through Italy.  (By that
point in time, the Cubans claimed that some $80 million was due them
in unsettled accounts that were frozen in the U.S., as well.)  AT&T
was indeed strapped by the way things had gone for three decades.

Enter Wiltel on the scene.  It turns out that John Williams, the
leading founder of Wiltel's parent company, was born in Cuba in 1918,
and that his family had business interests there until the revolution.
Finally, there was someone in the U.S. who was "sympatico" to talk
with -- someone who could reason the Latin way.  Where AT&T's hegemony
couldn't work, Williams' personal diplomacy could.  It wasn't too
difficult for Wiltel to offer an arrangement that restored a link the
Cubans wanted, but do it in a way they could tolerate.

The net result will be CUBUS-1, not a great technogical feat, but
indeed, a great international relations feat.

CUBUS-1 will be, in a way, a repeat of another submarine cable between
Florida and Cuba 135 years earlier; one most of the world knows
nothing about. That cable was the second long international one in
1858, just months after the landmark (but short-lived) cable laid
across the Atlantic by the Anglo-American Cable Company with Cyrus
Field as its American figurehead.  Within months of the laying of the
1858 transatlantic cable, entreprenurial Englishmen had another one
operating from Punta Rassa, Florida to Havana.

The immediate question is: Why?  Who wanted to connect the then
mosquito-infested southwestern part of Florida to another country?
There was hardly any population there, yet here were people, literally
living and working in a tent town, setting up a telegraph line to
another country.

It turns out that (as in a later Alascom case not well publicized
across the Bering Straits during the Cold War era), the engine of
trade was operating.  Cattle ranchers in Florida were shipping stock
on the hoof from the outpost of Fort Myers to Havana, lightering them
down the Peace River and its tributaries to Charlotte Harbor for
embarkation to Cuba.  A telegraph cable along the route made good
business sense.

And, connectivity back north along the Peace River, to gain entrance
to the growing U.S. telegraph network made sense, too.  Cuba and the
U.S. had electrical communication many years before other capitals
around the world did. In fact, it made so much sense that within a
very short time, the cable route from Punta Rassa was extended beyond
Havana to Kingston, Jamaica, providing connectivity there, as well.
(Using the limited technology of 135 years ago, a long piece of the
submarine cable was merely laid out on top of the ground crossing
Cuba.  That method was later used worldwide for a number of early
submarine telegraph cables, crossing large stretches of dry land by
just laying the cable on the ground.)

As Western Union grew into international telegraphy, it purchased the
Punta Rassa-Havana cable, bringing it ashore on Key West to provide a
terminal for that small fishing village, too.  When Key West grew
large enough, the portion from Punta Rassa was abandoned, since Fort
Myers and Key West were developing their own communication routes to
Miami and Tampa as those cities grew. So, the Western Union maps
showed a Havana telegraph cable that terminated at Key West and Punta
Rassa was forgotten.  Today, there's a small bronze marker in Key West
that says it was the terminal for the "first telegraph cable to Cuba."
It's one of those partial truths of corporate history books, and
forgets the much earlier history of the _real_ "first cable to Cuba."

What does CUBUS-1 portend beyond Havana?  Might it be extended to
Kingston?  Might it even provide a jumping-off place for Cuba to
become a telecommunications hub for the Caribbean?  It's much too
early to know now, but history does have a way of repeating itself,
doesn't it?

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

From: [email protected] (Steve Brack)
Subject: Hush-a-phone
Organization: University of Toledo
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 01:40:14 GMT


A few days ago, someone mentioned the Hush-a-Phone case. I was wondering
what that case was about.


Steven S. Brack           [email protected]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605    [email protected]
MY OWN OPINIONS           [email protected]

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

From: John Conwell <[email protected]>
Subject: Seeking CATV List
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 1994 15:40:20 EST


I am interested in following the discussions on this List, but am also
curious about a possible List specifically for Cable TV, or land-line
video transmissions.  If anyone knows of such a list, I would
appreciate the information.  Thanks :}

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

Date: 18 Mar 1994 18:24:04 GMT
From: [email protected]
Subject: Ripped By InfoAccess
Organization: Arkansas Children's Hospital


Has anyone had any DEALINGS with InfoAccess? For some reason 4
EXPENSIVE calls to this service was added to my phone. Although NO
calls to it were made from our phones! There are only two people in my
house, me and my wife and neither of use dialed this number. We called
them to see about the charges and they said the calls were made from
our phones and that we need to write a letter to the information
provider and complain. In the mean time how can I handle this $50
charge with the Phone company? I refuse to pay it but if its mixed in
with my phone bill how can I NOT pay it without having my phone service
interruped?

If anyone has any ideas please email me:

[email protected] or
'root@[144.30.128.156]' (include the [] in the address)

Thanks in advance!!


Jacque Bussey

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

Date: Mon, 20 Mar 94 08:17:00 EST
From: Proctor & Associates <[email protected]>
Subject: SIT Tones - Where in the Archives?


I thought there was a reference to SIT tones in the telecom archives
somewhere, but I can't find it.  These are the three tones that one
hears at the beginning of a toll network announcment (We're SORRY!
All circuits are BUSY now ...)

Does anyone have the specs on these?


Paul Cook   Proctor & Associates
206-881-7000  [email protected]

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

Subject: Country Code For San Marino
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1994 01:42:38 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[email protected]>


San Marino is a small country physically inside Italy. To the best of
my knowledge, it is always phoned as just another area code within
Italy (i.e. +39 541).

I have a note in my files that San Marino has been allocated the
country code 295 but is not yet using it. HOwever, I recently saw a
posting, here I believe, that it has been allocated 378.

Can anyone tell me which is right?


Clive D.W. Feather     | Santa Cruz Operation
[email protected]          | Croxley Centre
Phone: +44 923 816 344 | Hatters Lane, Watford
Fax:   +44 923 210 352 | WD1 8YN, United Kingdom

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

Date: Mon, 20 Mar 94 00:08:44 PST
From: [email protected] (Jody Kravitz)
Subject: Clever Data/Fax/Voice Switch Needed


I would like to share a single POTS line (without distinctive ringing)
between a dial-in modem, a Fax machine, and an answering machine.  All
of the devices I've seen require incoming data calls to either be in
"answer mode" (squirting carrier), or to press some magic key on the
keypad at just the right time.  My existing UUCP callers cannot
accomodate that.

What I really want is something that makes the voice callers do
something special, leaving the fax/data determination to the
presence/absence of tone.  Simple and elaborate schemes are welcome.


Thanks,

Jody

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

From: [email protected] (Jan Ceuleers)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1994 07:05:16 GMT
Subject: Appel a` Communications Pour CFIP'95 (*in French*)
Organization: K12Net Belgium


I quote Jean-Marc Jezequel:

> Colloque Francophone sur l'Ingenierie des Protocoles

These French are incredible. Do they really think protocol development
has anything to do with the language the developer happens to speak?


Origin: Experimenter Board, Antwerp, Belgium (2:292/857)
Gated from FidoNet at 2:29/777  <[email protected]>

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

Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1994 08:07:41 EST
From: Michael S Baum <[email protected]>
Subject: Information Security Work Group Meeting


This is posted for information purposes only:

American Bar Ass'n
Section of Science and Technology
Information Security Committee

Please correspond to:              Michael S. Baum, Esq.
                                  33 Tremont Street
                                  Cambridge, MA 02139-1227
                                  Tel: 617/661-1234
                                  Fax: 617/661-0716
                                  Net: [email protected]


          Notarization and Nonrepudiation Work Group
        INFORMATION SECURITY COMMITTEE, EDI/IT DIVISION
               Section of Science and Technology
                   American Bar Association

You are cordially invited to participate in a meeting of the
above-referenced work groups of the Information Security Committee on
Thursday-Saturday, April 14-16, 1994 in Washington, DC.  These
interdisciplinary work groups will continue to address conventional
and electronic notarization and certification authority issues.  The
meetings are focused around the work product of its respective
participants and will be highly results driven.  During this session,
an extra day will be allotted to facilitate accelerated production of
the work product.

At the last meeting (January 19-20, 1994), further progress was made
on the development of "Model Certificate-based Public Key Guideline/
Rules of Practice" ("Guideline").  It was decided that the Guideline,
as a first step, should reflect the requirements for "higher assurance"
implementations.  Also, following nearly a year of discussion and
debate, a proposal was approved (by majority vote) recommending that
the Section support, in principle, the creation of an entity to
provide specialty certification of attorney-notaries engaging in
professional services related to transnational electronic commerce.

Joe Potenza, Section Chair has kindly agreed to permitted us to hold
the meeting at his law firm in downtown Washington, DC.  Please
observe the hosts office's strict non-smoking rule.  The meeting
agenda and logistics are attached.  I look forward to seeing you in
Washington, DC.


Sincerely,

Michael S. Baum
Chair, Information Security Committee
   and EDI/IT Division


                INFORMATION SECURITY COMMITTEE
                       April 14-16, 1994

                       Tentative Agenda

Thurs., April 14    Major Theme: Outline, Scope and Purpose

8:30- 9:00  Continental breakfast and registration.
9:00- 9:30  Participant introductions, meeting logistics and questions.
9:30-10:30  Presentation of updated Guideline outline and contributions
10:30-10:45  Break.
10:45-12:30  Discussion of proposed Guideline outlines.

12:30-13:30  Lunch & informal presentation - TBD
13:30-15:00  Identifying outstanding issues re: outline, scope and purpose.
15:00-15:15  Break.
15:15-16:45  Survey and record points of agreement/disagreement.
16:45-17:00  Wrap-up.

Friday, April 15    Major Theme: Tone, Style and Content

8:30- 9:00  Continental breakfast and registration.
9:00-10:30  Presentation of contributions by authors.
10:30-10:45  Break.
10:45-12:30  Discussion of purpose and style of various sections.

12:30-13:30  Lunch & informal presentation - TBD.
13:30-15:00  Break-out session on Guideline contributions.
15:00-15:45  Break.
15:15-16:15  Status report and discussion of Clipper Resolution;
            Discussion on digital signature legislation.
16:45-17:00  Wrap-up.

Saturday, April 16  Major Theme: Work Product!; Notarial Matters

8:30- 9:00  Continental breakfast and registration.
9:00-10:30  Break-out sessions on Guideline.
10:30-10:45  Break.
10:45-12:30  Additional presentation by contributors to the Guideline;
            Review of outline and contributions; Discuss work assignments.

12:30-13:30  Lunch & informal presentation - Bertram Cottine, Esq.
13:30-15:00  Discussion of corporate form for the accredited certifying
            organization for attorney-notaries.
15:00-15:45  Break.
15:15-16:15  Resolve work assignments; meeting review; appointments.
16:45-17:00  Wrap-up.

          NOTARIZATION AND NONREPUDIATION WORK GROUP
                INFORMATION SECURITY COMMITTEE
                        April 14-16, 1994

Meeting Details

Papers: All prior participants who plan to attend must submit their
agreed upon contributions as soon as possible to:

           [email protected] and to [email protected].

Please bring a copy of the contribution to the meeting in both paper
form and on disk.  First-time participants (who plan to attend the
April meeting) must submit a brief paper (~3 pages in length) relevant
to the subject matter; or discuss their planned contribution to the
Committee (please contact Michael Baum for details).  A binder of
prior papers will be presented to new participants during registration.
Prior participants are requested to bring their Work Group binders.

Meeting Location:        Banner, Birch, McKie & Beckett
                        1001 G. St., N.W. - 11th Floor
                        "Floating Conference Room"
                        Washington, DC  20001-4597
                        Tel: 202-508-9100 (Attn. Lisa Jones)
                        Fax: 202-508-9299

    SMOKING ANYWHERE IN THE BUILDING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED

Meals: Continental breakfast and refreshments during the breaks
will be served as well as a light lunch (at cost).

Hotel: The closest hotel to the meeting is the Grand Hyatt Washington,
1-202-582-1234. The next closest hotel is the Holiday Inn Crowne
Plaza, 1-202-737-2200.

RSVP: Please confirm your intention to participate to Ann Kowalski,
Section Manager, Section of Science and Technology (ABA Chicago,
Phone: 312-988-6281 or [email protected]) as soon as possible.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #139
******************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area # 700  EMAIL                   03-21-94 11:08      Message # 7208
From    : [email protected]
To      : ELIOT GELWAN                                  PVT  RCVD
Subj    : Re: origins of conscious

�@SUBJECT:Re: origins of consciousness, cont'd
From [email protected]  Mon Mar 21 11:10:04 1994
Received: from moose.uvm.edu by uu9.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via
SMTP;
       id AA25151 for eliot.gelwan; Mon, 21 Mar 94 11:10:04 -0500
Received: from localhost by moose.uvm.edu (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03-UVM/CSO)
         id AA82182; Mon, 21 Mar 1994 11:08:05 -0500
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 1994 11:08:05 -0500
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Originator: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Precedence: bulk
From: [email protected]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: origins of consciousness, cont'd
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0b -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

Family IS the definition of chaos!
-Bob



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

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.