TELECOM Digest Mon, 14 Feb 94 01:51:00 CST Volume 14 : Issue 83
Inside This Issue: Happy Valentines Day, Sweethearts!
Re: Questions About Voice Mail (Steve Cogorno)
Re: New York Telephone Issuing "New" Rotary Phones (David A. Kaye)
Re: Telephone Nunbers in France (Earle Robinson)
Re: New Hello Direct Catalog (Michael Schuster)
Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me (Warren Burstein)
Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me (
[email protected])
Re: A Small Town in Wyoming (Joseph R. Schumacher)
Re: A Small Town in Wyoming (Carlene Lanham)
Re: CLASS/Caller-ID/Bellcore/CCITT/ANSI Documents Sought (Robert Shaw)
Re: Shannon's Law (Sean P. Peacock)
Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area (Monty Solomon)
Why Caller ID Instead of ANI? (Lynne Gregg)
Re: Horrid AT&T 2500YMGK Sets (Fred Goldstein)
Internet Access (Jonathan Weinberg)
Re: What is This Number? (Ma Bell)
Two-Line Tropez 900MHz Now Available (Ken Jongsma)
Re: Party Lines (Paul Robinson)
Re: Guard Your Royal Database (Hackers Still With Us) (Paul Houle)
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:
[email protected] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Questions About Voice Mail
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 16:24:24 PST
Said by: Stan Schwartz
> - I have call waiting on the line. If I don't answer the second
> line, the call DOES NOT get forwarded to the mail box (it just rings
> at the caller's end);
> - If I "busy-out" the line (*70 or off-hook), since I have call waiting
> and the software is looking for call-waiting first, any incoming calls
> will get a busy;
> In short, the way the NYNEX reps explain this, since I have call waiting
> on the line, the only time a call is forwarded to the mailbox is if the
> phone is on hook and I don't answer. This doesn't sound kosher to me,
> since I've seen the way other systems work.
This is the way the reps WANT to place the order -- that doesn't mean
you have to take it :)
Ask them to install No Answer Diversion as well as Busy Diversion when
the set up your order. They will try to tell you it can't be done,
but it can. You also may want to get regular Call Forwarding, as you
can call forward your calls directly to the voice mail so it won't
bother you (sort of a Do Not Disturb function).
Steve
[email protected]
#608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am surprised you find reps who say it
cannot be done. Here it is quite common and is known as 'transfer on
BY/DA' (busy/no answer). For the former it transfers immediatly and
for the latter, after three unanswered rings the CO pulls the call
back from the subscriber and diverts it. The caller hears the slightest
pause in the ringing cadence as the CO quits ringing the one phone and
sets up the connection to start ringing elsewhere. 'Transfer on busy'
is quite similar to a hunt group, but apparently not entirely the
same. Does anyone know why? IBT gives 'hunting' for free but charges
a monthly fee for 'transfer on busy' (which can be had without the 'no
answer' part if desired, or vice-versa).
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: Re: New York Telephone Issuing "New" Rotary Phones
Date: 13 Feb 1994 18:06:41 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest]
Meanwhile, legitimate users of pagers and voicemail such as I
(computer consultant) may eventually need to go out and buy DTMF units
just to check on our messages. As it is now I tend to avoid
non-Pacific*Bell pay phones because the off-brands are often not
programmed to think of my voicemail's exchange as local or even in
operation, or they block after the first digit. As to drug buyers,
yeah, you have a point. Anyhow, rotary dialing hasn't come to the SF
Bay Area yet, and I hope it never does. It's just a nuisance.
Some of the big pager companies like Metromedia had established
policies limiting the number of calls, so at least they made more
money on the busy drug-dealer paging. One, and I want to say it was
PageNet, charges some extremely high amount for overpages, amounting
to thousands of dollars.
> just one rather effective harassment technique to use. The 7-Eleven now
> has a sign in their parking lot: "Gangbangers, drug sellers and drug buyers
> at this location go to jail! We call police!" PAT]
Perhaps if the 7-Elevens paid better wages the kids would be encouraged
to work for them instead of selling drugs. When I was their age I could
live on minimum wage. Today? Heh. It might pay the electric bill.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I started my working career in 1958
the minimum wage was *$1.05 per hour*, and that is exactly what my
employer, the University of Chicago paid me. I was a junior in high
school and I had a part time job as a switchboard operator when the
boards were located in the old phone room on the sixth floor of the
administration building, 5801 South Ellis Avenue. Since restaurants and
hotels were exempted from the minimum wage law, I was the rich one
among my buddies who worked washing dishes or sweeping floors in
restaurants; they got paid 65-85 *cents* per hour. After high school
when I went to work full time for UC as an operator they paid me $1.25
per hour I think, and that was enough to pay for my own apartment, but
in 1960 a nice one-bedroom apartment in Chicago along the lake cost
about a hundred dollars per month. Cigarettes were 24 cents per pack
at Walgreen's and if you bought them from a vending machine you put
in a quarter but got a penny back tucked in the celophane wrapper of
the package. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: 13 Feb 94 11:38:54 EST
From: Earle Robinson <
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Nunbers in France
Jean-Noel Marchalot says:
> Never heard about something called Minitel? Any idea about the
> penetration rate compared with Internet? (probably an order of
> magnitude larger).
Of course, I've heard of Minitel, since I live in Paris, and have to
use Minitel, but do it as little as possible due to the exorbitant
cost. Who wants to pay $12/hour to make a plane reservation on
Minitel when elsewhere one can call a toll-free number? And that
after wading through endless menus to keep you online longer -- yes,
that is done deliberately to maximize revenue -- and that all at 1200
bps using primitive graphics! It is cheaper to call CompuServe at
9600 bps, soon to be 14.4k bps, pay $8.95 per month for unlimited
access to plane reservations and other services like weather, for
which you have to pay upwards of $12 per hour on minitel, and with far
inferior graphics when maps are displayed.
Minitel is a success due to the lack of competition, and the unfortunate
ignorance among consumers that they are paying through the proverbial
nose.
> Sure, now they are still really lucky to enjoy a network that has
> evolved in 15 years from one of the most backward to one of the most
> advanced in the world. There must be some mysterious mechanism, beyond
> competition, that made sure that France Telecom would be a little
> responsive to the users' needs and the users do more than "bow and
> obey"?
In fact, the evolution to a modern network began over twenty years
ago, and the telephone network is indeed modern, though this is often
crippled for data communications through four to one compression on
many lines, so anything over 2400 bps is impossible.
As for users' needs, it is also true that France Telecom is more
responsive, mainly because of the spectre of competition looming on
the horizon. But, all that is at costs to the consumer which are
horrendous. For example, it costs me more to call my wife in the
country (Seine et Marne, in the Paris region, 85km) than to call from
New York City to Los Angeles. In fact, callback services to access
the USA have rates that make it cheaper to talk to New York or Los
Angeles than to call Bordeaux from Paris.
Now, Minitel is touting the coming new "high" speed: 4800 bps.
Elsewhere, 14.4 is now the norm and 28.8 is on the horizon.
er
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: Re: New Hello Direct Catalog
Date: 13 Feb 1994 19:31:18 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
In article <
[email protected]>, Thomas Lapp <thomas%mvac23.
[email protected]> wrote:
> I received the Spring 1994 Hello Direct catalog in the mail today,
> (800-444-3556) and it has a bunch of interesting gadgets in it. Some
> of the ones that caught my eye that I either didn't know existed, or
> else have never seen in catalogs before:
[lotsa neat stuff deleted]
An item that caught my eye is the charger/conditioner for cellphone
batteries. It uses intermittent negative pulses during the rapid-charge
phase, which I'm told will prevent loss of capacity due to gas build-up
at the electrodes. Is there truth to this, or is it another urban
myth?
Mike Schuster
[email protected] [email protected]
[email protected] GEnie: MSCHUSTER
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me
Reply-To:
[email protected]
Organization: worlds.com
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 10:43:38 GMT
In <
[email protected]>
[email protected] (John R Levine) writes:
> Along sort of the same lines, I note that after buying Contel, they
> quickly sold off a lot of the Contel properties.
I used to work for a company on Long Island (it was in Little Neck, I
think) called Network Analysts Corporation which not before I left was
bought by Contel. I'm curious if they are still around and who owns
them these days.
[email protected]
------------------------------
From:
[email protected]
Subject: Re: GTE is Annoyed With Me
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 23:56:01 GMT
Does anyone have any information on exactly what is going on with]
Contel in the High Desert? The information I have is that it is still
owned by GTE and they are planning to merge it into their GTE
California unit in June/July. Any details greatly appreciated.
James
------------------------------
Date: 13 Feb 94 12:18:57 GMT
From:
[email protected]
Subject: Re: A Small Town in Wyoming
[email protected] (John Sullivan) wrote:
> Could it be that in this town, four-digit dialing is possible? Or
> does everyone just know what the exchange is? (The phone book at the
> next gas station showed Buffalo as 684, I think.)
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although four digit dialing might still
> be possible, it is unlikely. Probably everyone in town gives their number
> out that way, with the exchange assumed.
My home town (Granville, Iowa, population < 300 and falling) still has four
digit dialing. The listings fit on a page and a half.
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (carlene lanham)
Subject: Re: A Small Town in Wyoming
Date: 14 Feb 1994 03:43:35 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln
My question is this: is it possible to configure these new digital
switches for four-digit dialing? We're a small town where we occupy
only the 848-2xxx, 3xxx, and 41xx's. It would make things easier for
everyone.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sure it is possible. The switch is just
told to expect four digits only if the first digit is 2 through 9; to
expect eleven digits if the first digit is 1 and some variable number of
digits (one through thirty or so, detirmined by time-outs or # as the
terminator or carriage return) if the first digit dialed is 0. Of course
all this assumes your 'small town' does not have any local calling to
anywhere other than the town itself. If local calling includes some other
nearby village -- or even if it does not, but there is a lot of traffic
on the phone wires between the two points -- then at least a few people
in town are going to get sore at having to dial eleven digits to reach
a number five miles away where seven digits formerly was sufficient.
To get around this, I guess you could make all dialing require a time-out
or # to terminate the sequence at which point the switch would then
interpret what it had been given in the context of the entire string
of numbers presented to it. You say things 'would be easier for everyone',
but would they really? Does no one in town csll any other exchange in
the same area code beginning with a 2, 3 or 4? Do you see the problem? PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 14:55:57 +0100
From: SHAW <
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: CLASS/Caller-ID/Bellcore/CCITT/ANSI Documents Sought
[email protected] wrote in TD #72:
>
> + CCITT "Recommendations" regarding CCITT Common-Channel
> Signaling System No. 7. (Especially those relating
> to the above -- is caller-ID info. transmitted as
> part of a TUP or an ISUP? If the former, is it
> transmitted as part of an IAM or something else?)
Gopher into info.itu.ch on port 70 or telnet into ties.itu.ch
and logon as 'gopher'. Then go to
-> ITU Document Store (ITUDOC)/
-> SEARCH ITUDOC database using KEYWORDS in Titles <?>
search on 'signalling' and you'll get back some hits.
If that doesn't get what you want, send mail describing exactly what
you're looking for to
[email protected] -- that's the email address of the
ITU-T (ex-CCITT) Telecommunication Standardization Bureau's Electronic
Document Handling unit.
Cheers,
Robert Shaw Information Services Department
International Telecommunication Union
Place des Nations 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland
TEL: +41 22 730 5338/5554 FAX: +41 22 730 5337
X.400:G=robert;S=shaw;A=arcom;P=itu;C=ch
Internet:
[email protected]
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Sean P Peacock)
Subject: Re: Shannon's Law
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 04:43:03 GMT
[email protected] wrote:
> I'm the one who originally posted this question, for those who don't
> know. It's nice to know what Shannon's law says -- if you assume a 30
> dB SNR and 3100 Hz bandwidth, the law above works out to about 31
> kilobits per second. If you happened to get a quiet channel, say, 40
> dB SNR, the equation returns about 41.2 kilobits per second. However,
> this is still quite a ways off from a full-duplex, 28.8 kbps link, or
> 57.6 kbps total transfer rate. So my question still stands: How do
> they do it? Are they assuming a particularly quiet channel? Are they
> assuming more than the standard 3100 Hz of bandwidth is available?
V.32, v.32bis and v.34 modems use echo cancelling technology.
Essentially each modem knows what it sent and how long it will take to
echo so they ignore it. This allows each modem to use the full
bandwidth with only a slight loss in S/N ratio.
Sean
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 14:28:52 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Calling 911 on a Cellphone When Out of Area
> I would guess that the reason that "911 calls" are sent to a "fixed"
> location and then transfered to the proper local agency is due the
> wide geographic areas that most cellular systems cover.
In Massachusetts we call *SP (*77) to reach the state police and the
call usually gets routed to the nearest state police barracks. They
forward the call to the local police if it is out of their
jurisdiction.
Near the New Hampshire border your call might get routed to the New
Hampshire state police instead of the Massachusetts police so one can
call *MSP (*677) to reach the Massachusetts State Police. I think that
calling *777 reaches the New Hampshire state police from inside
Massachusetts.
FYI, here is a list of some of the star code for Cellular/One Boston:
*SP Mass State Police
*CG Coast Guard
*611 Customer Service
*811 Credit
*FYI Information
*1030 WBZ Traffic
*1045 WXLO Traffic
*COIN News
*1SC Sports
*STI Smart Traveler
*LOT Lottery Info
*TV4 WBZ TV 4 Weather
*HELP Emergency Roadside Assistance
*SUN NYNEX Weather
*TIME NYNEX Time and Temperature
Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405
[email protected]
------------------------------
From: Lynne Gregg <
[email protected]>
Subject: Why Caller-ID Instead of ANI?
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 12:42:00 PST
> It can only restrict what the LECs do as local service providers,
> and the IXCs as local/intra-state carriers (and of course, what any
> person inside the state is able to do).
FYI, no IXC, to my knowledge actually passes CPN (calling party
number).
> Ethan, there have been lots of proposals to use ANI (CAMA/FG-B/FG-D)
> as CallerID. I don't know anyone who has proposed the use of Caller
> ID delivery mechanisms as a method of delivering ANI. (Actually, ISDN
You can play games with ANI, but CAN'T use it in delivery of
Calling Number Services, since there's no PRIVACY flag tied to ANI.
Now, I'm stumped as to why you'd want to do the reverse (use CPN as
ANI), since ANI is most readily available, but CPN isn't.
Regards,
Lynne
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 09:28:26 -0500
From:
[email protected]
Subject: Re: Horrid AT&T 2500 Sets
I concur with Randy Gellens that today's ersatz 2500 sets are cheap
and flimsy. But I noticed something interesting at a local hardware
store. A display case filled with AT&T telephone sets (the usual
cheap kind with chirpers instead of bells) was accompanied by a few
new AT&T "Signature" telephone sets. One was shaped sort of like a
2500, though a bit squashed; another was in the Trim-Line(tm, no
doubt) format. Upon examination, I saw a mechanical bell ringer
adjustment on the bottom of the 2500-style. Even more unusual, the
set must have weighted ten pounds! It didn't even feel like a flimsy
set with a lead weight, just heavy.
And it was clearly marked AT&T Property for Lease Only, or some such
words. The store said it was not for sale, either. It was a series
that AT&T made only for rental customers. Since it's a rental,
they're responsible if it breaks, so it's made better.
I wouldn't mind buying one of these sets, but I suspect most of us
don't really want to rent. I'm surprised that AT&T isn't making these
available to rental PBX customers; maybe they can be had if you ask,
but maybe they're only sold to residential customers.
I know that Cortelco (ITT brand phones) still makes industrial-grade
2500 sets, but they aren't sold at consumer outlets. Maybe I'll call
up Graybar and get me some. You'd think that retailers would
recognize a good niche market for quality telephones. Hasn't Japan
Inc. taught them anything? :-)
fred
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 10:53:30 EST
From:
[email protected]
Subject: Internet Access
I am thinking about getting a SLIP/PPP connection to the Internet for
my company. I have a few questions, which I was hoping that someone
here could help with. Here goes:
1. Do any providers support 28.8 kbps (V.fast) connections at this time?
2. If I get a dialup IP account as opposed to an online connection, would
I still have to setup a separate EMAIL gateway for my MS Mail users to
exchange mail with the net? (I have a 50-User Novell Network).
3. What is the best MS Windows based TCP/IP software to use a dialip IP
connection?
4. Does anyone have any recommendations of service providers in the NYC area?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Jonathan Weinberg Network Insight
------------------------------
From:
[email protected] (Ma Bell)
Subject: Re: What is This Number?
Date: 14 Feb 94 04:37:51 GMT
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
In <
[email protected]>
[email protected] (Rattlesnake
Stu) writes:
> carlene lanham (
[email protected]) wrote:
>> And, I've heard that some exchanges have a number that you call and it
>> will repeat back to you your own phone number. Does anyone know
>> anything about this number? What might it be?
Most exchanges have their own ANI numbers, but finding them can be a
chore. I gave the ol' telco a call the other day. Nobody seemed to
know the number, although they gave me a few numbers that I could try
-- I even spoke with a technician! You might try giving them a call in
your city; just tell them that you're installing a multi-line system
in your business and you need to do some testing. And if that doesn't
yield anything, you can always use a 1-800 ANI number. The one I use
is: (800) 775-5513. Please don't abuse it; they'll just change the
number and then none of us can use it.
Ma Bell [*][0][#]
[email protected] Elec. Engr. Major
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 18:35:20 EST
From: Ken Jongsma <
[email protected]>
Reply-To:
[email protected]
Subject: Two Line Tropez 900MHz Now Available
Paging through the latest Hello Direct catalog, I noticed hat they are
featuring a new model Tropez cordless phone that is designed for two
lines. The base does not have a dial pad, in that respect it is
similar to their single line DL model. The handset has a small LCD
display that will display Caller-ID.
The price? $349. ($319 if you order before an unspecified date.)
Hello Direct can be reached at 1-800-HI-HELLO or +1 408 972 1990.
Usual Disclaimers.
Kenneth R Jongsma
[email protected]
Smiths Industries
[email protected]
Grand Rapids, Michigan +1 616 241 7702
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 22:13:20 EST
From: Paul Robinson <
[email protected]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Party Lines
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
[email protected], writes:
> two party lines may be shared on a device ("Frequenz-Weiche" in German),
> don't know what it'd be called in English.
Subscriber Carrier.
This was usually used in places where a single house (in the U.S.)
wanted a second voice phone line but there were no extra pairs available,
and it would split the signal into two (voice) lines on one wire.
Since phone service in Europe is so frightfully expensive, I can
understand where such a scheme would be used to create the equivalent
of Party Line service.
Paul Robinson -
[email protected]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 13:18:49 -0500
From: Paul Houle <
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Guard Your Royal Database (Hackers Still With Us)
In comp.dcom.telecom TELECOM Digest Editor notes:
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was an instance several years ago of
> obscene calls made to Queen Elizabeth II which were traced to an interna-
> tional origin here in the United States. It took a cooperative effort
> between British Telecom, AT&T, and Illinois Bell to catch him, but they
> finally did. The story has been here in the Digest in the past. PAT]
Heck, about eight years ago there was a phile going around
listing lots of what were described as "phun numbers". These were
everything from various modem dialups to tone sweeps, and there was
one number that claimed to be for Queen Elizabeth. Anyway, let's just
say that, uuuh, a phriend of mine who wasn't particularly mature at
the time called the number. Somebody answered, "Buckingham Palace."
And my phriend asked to speak to the Queen and the guy said "That's a
good joke, can you tell me another one." He hung up and my phriend
called back, and asked to speak to the Queen, adding that this was a
very expensive long distance call from America (well, maybe it was
expensive, but he wasn't paying for it). He said, "I know, but it's
three o'clock in the morning." My phriend apologized and never called
back.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've seen lists like that. They usually
include the phone number for the Pope as well. About twenty years ago
some phreak went on one of those public tours they give of the White
House, and I don't know how he did it but he managed to rip off a copy
of the internal telephone directory listing all the direct dial centrex
numbers for top staffers and one Richard Nixon. Even though the White
House had a plug-style 'cordboard' handling the calls to 202-456-1414,
for many years there have been centrex lines there as well served out
of the Executive Office Building on its phone system. In other words,
you could dial 202-456-1414 and ask to speak with the Resident President
then in power and get politely transferred to one of his telephone
representatives (actually highly placed flunkies authorized to respond
in the Resident President's name in limited situations) or if you knew
about it, you could dial 202-XXX-2591 and ring the phone on his desk
direct in those days.
Well!! This bird made copies of the appropriate page in the directory
and sent them off to a couple dozen radical newspapers, anti-war
groups and others. It was published in quite a few 'underground'
newspapers at the time to everyone's delight except of course the
Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company employees assigned to the EOB
and White House telecom office who suddenly had the task of changing a
lot of phone numbers in a hurry. Poor President Nixon ... he alluded
to 'the problem' in one of his press conferences once during the
interim of a week or so between when the listing first was made
public and the time it was in all the papers and the telecom office
wised up and began changing all the internal centrex numbers. PAT]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V14 #83
*****************************
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253
