TELECOM Digest Fri, 1 Apr 94 13:33:00 CST Volume 14 : Issue 159 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Long Distance Dialing in Delaware (Wilmington News Journal via Carl Moore) Re: Bellcore Goes Crypto (Greg Trotter) Re: Bellcore Goes Crypto (George L. Sicherman) Re: Windows or DOS Caller ID Program (Fritz Friedlaender) Re: Windows or DOS Caller ID Program (Todd Inch) Re: Windows or DOS Caller ID Program (Nazli Meliha Roth) Re: Predictions About Future A/C Splits (David A. Kaye) Re: Predictions About Future A/C Splits (James Taranto) Re: Observations About Area Code Splits (David Esan) Re: Will Widespread Use of Cell Phones Reduce Crime? (Jeff Haran) Re: Will Widespread Use of Cell Phones Reduce Crime? (102030@pwfl.com) Re: Will Widespread Use of Cell Phones Reduce Crime? (Ed Mitchell) Re: Will Widespread Use of Cell Phones Reduce Crime? (Laurence Chiu) Re: Direct Modem / Cellular Links (Daniel Goemans) Re: Direct Modem / Cellular Links (Lynne Gregg) 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: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * 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: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** 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: Fri, 1 Apr 94 11:54:21 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Long Distance Dialing in Delaware This appeared on page 1 of the {News Journal}, Wilmington, Delaware, on March 31, 1994. Notice that 1 is being dropped for 555-1212. About 2/3 of the way through this article, it says "zeroes and ones as second digits in local numbers"; I don't know the meaning of this remark, because: 1. Some Bell Atlantic areas already use N0X/N1X prefixes. (New Jersey; 215 in Pa.; 410/301/202/703 in Md./DC/Va.) 2. As you know, Delaware is way down near the bottom in being crowded w/r to telephone numbers. (And in the history file, I do ask what will become of "no N0X/N1X prefixes unless NNX is running short".) ------------------ Long-distance dialing in Del. just got longer By JANE BROOKS, Staff reporter WILMINGTON -- Beginning April 1, people making long-distance telephone calls within Delaware should start dialing 11 digits. It's no April Fools' Day joke. Dial 1 (or 0 for collect), plus area code 302, plus the seven-digit number of the party you are calling. After April 1, however, you can drop the 1 prefix when calling directory assistance within the state. Just dial 555-1212. But should you forget to add the area code or dial the unnecessary 1 for information, have no fear. The phone company will be forgiving. The network will accept old and new dialing patterns for nine months. And there will be plenty of advertising reminders before the new methods become mandatory. Why change dialing patterns? There's no immediate problem in Delaware, but the nation is running out of phone numbers. Until now, all area codes had 0 or 1 as the middle digit, for instance, 302 and 610. As the population and telephone service grows, so does the need for more area codes and the subsequent need for different middle digits. Also, Bell Atlantic will begin using zeroes and ones as second digits in local numbers next year to open up a multitude of new number series. Eleven-digit dialing is designed to help computers distinguish area codes and local exchange numbers. The Delaware Public Service Commission approved. So, on Jan. 7, 1995, you fingers will have to walk a little longer from Wilmington to Dover, from Dover to Delmar. Bell Atlantic-Delaware suggests you start now. Rates will not be affected. ------------------------------ From: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter) Subject: Re: Bellcore Goes Crypto Date: 31 Mar 1994 01:39:03 GMT Organization: Home of the TimeLords... In article vantek@aol.com writes: > LIVINGSTON, N.J. (MARCH 22) BUSINESS WIRE - March 22, 1994 -- A new > company which is employing Bellcore-developed technology is expected > to have a far-reaching impact on electronic record keeping and on > controversies ranging from authenticity of business records to false > retouching of digital photographs. [...] > Surety Technologies welcomes developers and corporations who are > interested in testing the system and serving as beta sites for Digital > Notary software. Call Surety Technologies, Inc. at (201) 993-8178; > fax number is (201) 993-8748. Information is also available on the > Internet at infonotary.com. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ My system can't seem to find this place ... and whois at internic seems clueless as well. Anybody have any updated information? greg ------------------------------ From: George.L.Sicherman@att.com Subject: Re: Bellcore Goes Crypto Organization: Save the Dodoes Foundation Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 14:25:59 GMT In , vantek@aol.com wrote: > The new company, Surety Technologies, Inc., will offer its Digital > Notary service that can affix a tamper-proof time-stamp seal to any > electronic document. ... > At the core of the time-stamping technology is an innovative > application of software that generates a characteristic "digital > fingerprint" for any document. ... When a > user seals a document, computer software generates the document's > fingerprint and sends it as a "time-stamp request" to a Digital Notary > server, which immediately sends back a "time-stamp certificate" for > the document. ... Isn't the server a critical weakness? The details are missing, but it sounds as if the server encrypts the hashed document with the date and time, using a private R.S.A. key. To validate the document, the public would decrypt the cipher with the corresponding public key. If you obtain the private key, by bribery or other means, you can forge all the documents you like. For the service company to let the key fall into the wrong hands would be like a bank's letting a safe-deposit key fall into the wrong hands. That's bad for the bank's reputation and is not supposed to happen -- but it does. The lesson for us is that an authentication is no more reputable than the people doing the authenticating. In the computer age, everybody's reputation is on the line! P.S. I've never committed all the area codes to memory (though ASCII codes are another story), but anybody who thinks the Moderator's wits are crumbling just isn't reading carefully. The only warning symptom I've ever seen is his continuing to put out this Digest when he could be out enjoying life as a coal miner in Kentucky. Col. G. L. Sicherman gls@hrcms.ATT.COM [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you Colonel. Tell me this: any ideas how Colonel came to be pronounced 'kernel' rather than 'call-on-nell'? Or put another way, why is it we make popcorn and have left over kernels rather than left over colonels? And even though this is April Fool's Day, there *was* at one point in the Army an actual person of Colonel in rank whose last name was Korne. At least it was not spelled 'corn'. And why do we call it the kernel in Unix instead of the colonel? PAT ------------------------------ From: fritzj@ecn.purdue.edu (Fritz Friedlaender) Subject: Re: Windows or DOS Caller ID Program Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 21:46:45 GMT If you have a modem that supports caller ID (e.g. PP14400 - the mini- tower and internal version, NOT the pocket version) it is easy to store the CNID data on a PC. Get Kermit (for instance), at zero cost, and run a "log file". This file will contain all the "ring" entries, and the Caller-ID information, usually between the first and second ring. Just be sure that your communications program is running and Caller-ID enabled in the desired format, IF available on your modem. See several very recent postings on the minimum conditions needed to make this work (in essence, if your Caller-ID box works, so will this scheme with the appropriate modem). Same information. FJF ------------------------------ From: Todd Inch Subject: Re: Windows or DOS Caller ID Program Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 14:22:10 PST In volume 14, issue 154 it is written: > In article Paul Robinson > writes: >> Steve Lindsay , writes to TELECOM Digest >> as follows: >>> Does anyone know of a little DOS or Windows shareware program >>> that will act like the one of those caller-ID boxes? If, as others have said, most modems with Caller-ID can output formatted, human-readable text, why not simply use Windows' "Accessories Terminal" or Kermit or whatever to monitor the modem output? Most such communications programs will log output to a file as well. Of course this won't run in the background and pop up in the forground when a call comes in or have other fancy features, but the price is right. ------------------------------ From: Nazli@panda.dnr.state.mi.us (Nazli Meliha Roth) Subject: Re: Windows or DOS Caller ID Program Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 00:22:58 +1000 Organization: Michigan State University > I am in the same situation as the original author. I have Caller-ID > service at my home, and I have a stand-alone Caller-ID box that > usually displays the numbers of callers in my local area codes (508 & > 617; BTW, I've never seen one from outside those areas ... yet). > However, I have a Practical Peripheral PM14400FXMT modem, and it > supports Caller ID, and I, too, would like a Windows utility that > basically acts like my stand-alone Caller-ID box. I want the utility > to display incoming caller information in real time, and also have to > ability to log this data to a file if I want. I should be able to > scroll thru some number of recent calls, etc, etc. You may do well by just loading up some decent terminal application (or terminal.exe if you are desperate), typing in the AT command that starts up your Caller-ID support and let it run in the background. I have a SupraFaxModem v.32bis and plan on doing this when (and if) I ever get the service. ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: Predictions About Future A/C Splits Date: 31 Mar 1994 12:52:46 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Linc Madison (LincMad@netcom.com) wrote: > The following area codes could all at least TRIPLE the number of > exchanges in use without requiring a split. Any split is thus quite a > long ways off. > 707 - Napa/Eureka, California It's funny that you call this Napa/Eureka, since Santa Rosa is the largest city. Anyhow, I don't think they'll be splitting anytime soon, because aside from the Santa Rosa area there is no growth in the Redwood Empire. Eureka has only grown 3,000 people in 10 years, Napa about 10,000, and Ukiah about 2,500. Cell phone penetration is not big in that region, nor is voicemail. Paging is okay, but has none of the intensive growth seen in metro areas. It's not a fad there. I'll admit it is unusual to see a California area code amost 300 miles long and about 100 miles wide, but nobody's there! ------------------------------ From: taranto@panix.com (James Taranto) Subject: Re: Predictions About Future A/C Splits Date: 31 Mar 1994 00:59:43 GMT Organization: The Bad Taranto In article , LincMad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) wrote: > The splits in 703 and 214 in particular may put to the test the > sanctity of the "you must dial 1 for all toll calls, and you must be > able to dial all local calls without a 1" arrangement. That arrangement is hardly sacred. In NYC, for example, we have to dial 1 for all calls between 212 and 718. Cheers, James Taranto taranto@panix.com ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: Observations About Area Code Splits Date: 31 Mar 94 15:42:25 GMT Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY In article LincMad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) writes: > I was looking at David Esan's 1/15/94 NPA-NXX list and noticed quite a > number of surprising numbers. There were a couple of instances where > I hope the answer is that a previously-effected split is not yet > reflected in the number of exchanges shown for the old area code. For > example, 212 shows 639 exchanges, and 168 for 917. I hope that the > total for 212 still includes the prefixes now in 917 and/or the Bronx > prefixes now in 718. Your hope is in vain. When the Bronx was moved to 718 there were more than 700 exchanges in 212. There were 99 exchanges that moved and 212 must have added a few. When 917 was created, I understood that all cellular, fax, modem, etc. numbers would be moved there. This does not seem to be the case. It looks more like all new numbers will be there, while the old numbers remain in 212. > Colorado's 303 is also one I hope is wrong: it shows 601 prefixes against > 184 in 719. Atlanta's recent split apparently isn't yet (fully?) reflected: > 404 shows 590 and 706 shows >308. I stand by my numbers. The numbers given will reflect the deletions caused by a split, when those deletions go into effect, usually three to six months after the end of the permissive dialing period. I can not speak for why NPAs were split the way that they were. It is possible that they were done in the hope that the NPAs would survive until Time T, when overlays would be more common and available. It makes sense on a map to draw a circle around Atlanta and say: This will be 404, the rest will be 706. It makes no sense from a telephonic viewpoint. The 303 split should have a been a overlay. The majority of the people in Colorado live in or near Denver. And yet that wouldn't have been polically expedient in those days. You can easily see why most the splits were done in the manner they were, circles drawn on the map. Dallas and the 'burbs remain 214, the exurbs go to 903. Houston goes by itself. Toronto, but not the surrounding area. Detroit, but not the 'burbs, Chicago but not the 'burbs. Do these splits actually split? Do they make sense for the future? No. Houston is now going to split while the surrounding NPA (409) has only 323 exchanges. 708 is going to split, just a few short years after the first split. 303 and 404 are bound to be split in the next few years. There will continue to be explosive growth in the West. I have seen studies that suggest the mountain states could quadruple their populations in the next 20 years. (Where the water is coming from I fear to find out.) This could mean an increase in telephone services of 6 to 8 times, as the newcomers will not add just one line, but several, and services will increase. David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ From: jharan@cwa.com (Jeff Haran) Subject: Re: Will Widespread Use of Cell Phones Reduce Crime? Organization: CWA Communications Products, Los Gatos, CA Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 01:02:06 GMT In article howard@hal.com writes: > A friend suggested to me that, sometime in the future, almost everyone > will carry around a cellular phone almost all the time. She thinks > this will significantly reduce the amount of crime, because it will be > very easy to report a crime or other suspicious behavior that one > observes. I'm skeptical, but it seems like an interesting topic for > discussion. There is an interesting sci-fi novel that you might still be able to find on the bookshelves that discusses this very topic (among several others), sort of. "Earth" by David Brin. Interesting method of reducing crime, but not a universe I want to live in. My problem is at this point I think it is a future scenario that is just about unavoidable in the not so far distant future, and I figure I still have quite a few years left. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Earth" discusses things that even a few years ago were unthinkable. But a lot of things which were unthinkable years ago are gradually becoming 'thinkable' ... solutions are being found for problems that are as frightening as the problems they solve. Yet they seem to be the only solution; the only real workable answer. Consider Chicago: what little civilization remains in large parts of the city is rapidly vanishing. Gangs rule in large parts of the south and west sides. Twelve children killed in the past two weeks in various incidents of gun battles between rival gangs ... the murder rate here is 25 percent higher than a year ago. Ditto Miami and Los Angeles to name two areas here: the inner cities are rotten to the core. I lived in Chicago for almost all my life and I would never want to go back into the city again. I cringe when I have to ride downtown to the post office where I still have my PO Box I've had for 25 years. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 15:57:06 EST From: E102030@PWAGPDB.pwfl.com Subject: Re: Will Widespread Use of Cellphones Reduce Crime? Widespread use of cellphones will probably not reduce crime but it will give ball-less individuals another opportunity to not make a difference. Appropriate avoidance of physical involvement in violent situations is certainly a responsible behavior. However, not calling 911 because it does not involve 'me' is reprehensible. I'm glad I don't live in Chicago. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm glad I don't live there any longer also. First of all, 911 does not work from cell phones here. You can dial the oh-operator and ask to be extended if you wish. However, contrary to what you might hear when listening to a police scanner with the constant backlog of calls (the Chicago PD dispatchers *never* quit talking; *never* drop carrier -- seriously, there is a constant backlog of calls being given out), even though on all sorts of minor matters when the police are sent somewhere and the complaintant is given as 'citizen refused' or 'Mr. Good Citizen' as they sometimes mock the callers to 911 when talking on the radio, your number is recorded and they can get back to you if they wish -- which is fine, except! Try reporting a serious crime which you witnessed. If the criminal is caught, *you* will be subpoened to come to court and give your eye-witness account. *You* will be hounded and harassed by the ACLU attorney appointed to represent the defendant. *Your* integrity will be called into question. Defendants have the right, as I believe they should, to confront their accuser ... that's you if you were the one calling 911 to report it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ed Mitchell Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 12:06:49 PST Subject: Re: Will Widespread Use of Cell Phones Reduce Crime? In Seattle WA, the 911 dispatchers have said that they often receive up to 30 calls from cellular phone users when an accident occurs on a major highway. This results in a massive overload of the 911 system. The result is that US West Cellular announced last winter that they would begin charging 50 cents for each 911 call, in addition to airtime charges, to discourage overuse of the system and to help fund additional 911 dispatchers to answer the phone. The Seattle Times article that reported on this also mentioned that the enhanced 911 system, which provides addresses of the caller, is going to become worthless in a world full of portable telephones. Clearly, this is a major problem to which some great minds will need to give a lot of attention. Lastly, use your own judgment in terms of reporting a crime. Ensure your own safety by not putting yourself in danger (an injured rescuer is worse than no rescuer since now there are at least two parties to rescue). Do report medical emergencies and serious vehicle accidents. Minor fender benders do not need a police response. Your state may wish that you report motorists with disabled vehicles along freeways. A few years ago, I read where a mother and daughter, parked will off the right side of the road, in broad daylight, hood up, flasher on, were slammed from behind by a drunk and killed -- if someone had called a tow truck or 911, perhaps they would not have been waiting beside the road so long. A couple of months ago, a woman was raped in her own vehicle on I-5, right in Seattle. She'd been on the side of the road, flashers on, for FOUR hours in the darkness of evening. State records showed that no patrol car had passed by. You should have called! Ed Mitchell edmitch@microsoft.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing you do not want to do in Chicago is get out of your car for any reason on the Dan Ryan expressway where it runs through the center of the CHA housing projects on the south side. In general, avoid the Dan Ryan (I-94) whenever possible because they also shoot at the cars from the highrises nearby. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Will Widespread Use of Cell Phones Reduce Crime? Date: 31 Mar 1994 17:42:33 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access In article , Andrew Robson wrote: > The Half Moon Bay Review (a local paper in CA) carried an article on > the front page about a bank robbery foiled by a cell phone. > When the getaway car roared away, a local citizen was offended by the > reckless driving. He didn't know about the robbery, he just wanted > safe driving on the local streets. He followed long enough to call > the licence, a description of the car, and its direction to 911. > There are only three roads out of town, with no turn off for several > miles. The robber was arrested a couple of minutes later. Out of interest, I presume that when you call 911 from your home phone you reach a dispatch service which is local to your community. So if you call 911 from a cell phone, which dispatch service do you reach? Laurence Chiu | Walnut Creek, California | Tel: 510-215-3730 (work) | Internet: lchiu@crl.com | [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In a lot of places, including the Chicago metro area you don't reach anyone. 911 goes to intercept telling you in an emergency to dial the operator for assistance. In other place where there is only one central dispatch, it goes there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: goemansd@kirk.usafa.af.mil (Daniel Goemans) Subject: Re: Direct Modem / Cellular Links Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 21:19:25 GMT Organization: United States Air Force Academy In article bobfromtn@aol.com (BobFromTN) writes: > These products are for direct links between RJ11 jack and the cellular > phone. Perhaps other/better products are available? With that link, does anyone know if you then need an MNP-10 standard modem *in addition* to the link (to package data) ... or does the link package the data accordingly on its own? Daniel Goemans USAF Academy ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: Re: Direct Modem / Cellular Links Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 13:15:00 PST From: bobfromtn@aol.com (BobFromTN) > A competitor's product is made by AXCELL, but I have no other information > about this product. I've used the AXCELL (Spectrum) product under the Fujitsu label. The Spectrum product performs very well and worked with a number of devices from PC's to fax machines. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #159 ****************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------