TELECOM Digest Thu, 26 May 94 13:56:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 254 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Bulk Call Display (Alan Leon Varney) Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? (Alan Leon Varney) Re: SMDI Question (Al Farnham) Re: RBOCS & Video Remote learning in Schools? (Robert Virzi) Re: DTMF Decoding Help Needed (John Lundgren) Re: Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range (John Lundgren) Re: Hunting Service From GTE (Jeff Hibbard) Re: Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router? (David Devereaux-Weber) Re: Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router? (Lars Poulsen) Re: Call Return (Hugh Pritchard) Re: Microsoft Telephony API (Guy Blair) Re: Internet Access from the Solomon Islands? (Don Newcomb) Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? (Nathan N. Duehr) 57x in Old Area 312 (Carl Moore) Announcing New FCC BBS - FCC World (avb@cais.com) 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. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. 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 edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** 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 partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. 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: Thu, 26 May 1994 08:29:47 +0600 From: varney@uscbu.ih.att.com (Alan Leon Varney) Subject: Re: Bulk Call Display Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article Paul Robinson writes: >>> So what interface are they using to receive the Call Display data? >> I believe there is just such a bulk interface available, called >> something like SMDA (Service Message Desk Accounting?). > I think you mean "SMDF" -- Simplified Message Desk Format. Some > attendant console systems have the capability to use it in order to > route calls automatically. I know the system we have at my other > office has it as an option. From the switch perspective, it's SMSI (Simplified Message Service Interface), an early version of the Voice Messaging Interface. Both of these deliver the number of a forwarding telephone (so they will know the client or "mailbox" they are representing for voice messaging purposes) unless the call is "direct" to the VM system. Some switches offer a Bulk Calling Line ID interface -- basically the same as SMSI/VMI. In fact, both pieces of information can be delivered if the message service is configured properly. The standard interface is RS-232 asynch, up to 9600 baud. Bellcore has requirements for BRI and PRI to provide the same information. Al Varney ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 08:30:13 +0600 From: varney@uscbu.ih.att.com (Alan Leon Varney) Subject: Re: CNID and ANI - Will They Become One and the Same? Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) writes: [someone wrote] >> With the FCC mandate for CNID service, is it not possible that the >> telcos will use this to drop ANI? > Considering that ANI is what they use to bill for toll calls, I would > think that such a move is, to put it mildly, unlikely. Not only that but, for many classes of calls (many PBX, forwarded calls, etc.), the CNID and ANI are different numbers. I would not like paying the toll charges when calling a local phone forwarded to China -- particularly if it was made without using my favorite INC :). >> Also it has been mentioned that "911 service requires special trunk lines >> and equipment". Clearly CNID does not and needs only a low-cost display. CNID may only need a low-cost display; 911 needs a lot of other things. Even if 911 used CNID, it's likely that a few dedicated 911 trunks would be required. At least they would after the first lawsuit claiming that congestion on "public trunks" in competition with a 911 call lead to injury/death. >> Will this make local 911 response a possibility? I'm not sure what this means -- 911 is a "local response" mechanism today. How would CNID change this???? > The hard part about 911 isn't delivering the ANI. The hard part is > creating a complete and reliable data base with accurate street > addresses in which the number can be looked up. .... > Whether the number comes from ANI or CLID is a nit. My friends down the hall (in AT&T Public Safety) would disagree. The hard part of 911 is EVERYTHING ABOUT IT. Getting it routed to the right PSAP, insuring there are adequate (but not too many) trunks from EVERY switch, getting a myriad of public agencies to cooperate, funding on an ongoing basis, providing operator HOLD or RINGBACK where needed, educating the PBX folks (and cellular), getting a myriad of TELCOs and vendors to agree on standards, receiving/making daily updates from multiple LECs, etc. So maybe the database is a problem -- but it isn't the only (or hardest) one to handle. Al Varney ------------------------------ From: AL.FARNHAM@hq.doe.gov Date: 26 May 94 09:56:00 -0400 Subject: Re: SMDI Question Here is the message format for an SMDI link between a switch and a Message Desk (Voice Mail System). The link is normally 1200bps full duplex without handshaking although some new implementations run at 9600bps. The Bell spec is TSR-TSY-000283. SMDI Message protocol: The system checks messages that it receives from the Message Desk for adherence to the following message protocols. Incoming messages - (Voice Mail System to Switch): There are two kinds of incoming messages the switch can accept from the message desk: OP:MWI(SP)nnnnnnn!(D) RMV:MWI(SP)nnnnnnn!(D) where: nnnnnnnnnn = station number (can be 7 or 10 digits) (D) = control-D (End Of Transmission) (SP) = space The first message activates the message waiting indication. The second deactivates the message waiting indication. For example, if Station B (DN 234-2000) forwards calls to the Message Desk and receives a message, the Message Desk activates message waiting indication for Station B with the following message: OP:MWI 2342000!(D) After Station B retrieves the messages from the Message Desk, the Message Desk deactivates message waiting indication for Station B with the following message: RMV:MWI 2342000!(D) Outgoing messages - (Switch to Voice Mail System) There are two groups of messages from the switch to the message desk. Call details - These message types give items of information concerning calls which the Message Desk received: (CR)(LF)MDgggmmmmannnnnnn(SP)yyyyyyy(SP)(CR)(LF)(Y) (CR)(LF)MDgggmmmmannnnnnn(SP)(SP)(CR)(LF)(Y) (CR)(LF)MDgggmmmma(SP)yyyyyyy(SP)(CR)(LF)(Y) MWI change failure - The request to change the Message Waiting Indication failed because it was either invalid (INV) or the switch unable to perform the change when requested (BLK). (CR)(LF)MWInnnnnnn(SP)INV(CR)(LF)(DL)(DL)(Y) (CR)(LF)MWInnnnnnn(SP)BLK(CR)(LF)(DL)(DL)(Y) where: (CR) = carriage return (LF) = line feed (SP) = space (DL) = delete character (ASCII value FF) (Y) = control-Y ggg = message desk number (001-063) mmmm = message desk terminal (0001-2047) nnnnnnnnnn = forwarding from station number (can be 7 or 10 digits) yyyyyyyyyy = calling station number (can be 7 or 10 digits) a = type of call where D = Direct Calls, A = Forward All Calls, B = Forward Busy Calls, N = Forward No Answer Calls For example, Station B (DN 234-2000) forwards all calls to the Message Desk. Station A (DN 678-1234) calls Station B and forwards to Message Desk number 002, terminal 009. The switch sends the following message to the Message Desk: (CR)(LF)MD0020009A2342000 6781234 (CR)(LF)(Y) Hope this information answers the question. Regards, Al ------------------------------ From: rv01@gte.com (Robert Virzi) Subject: Re: RBOCS & Video Remote learning in Schools? Date: 26 May 1994 14:54:19 GMT Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA In article , Gerry Moersdorf wrote: > Does anyone have an opinion on what the RBOCS are trying to do by > pushing TV remote learning grants and equipment to school systems? > The schools in our district don't even have telephones in classrooms > let alone a LAN for a client server teaching tool. To me the priorities > are all turned around. What possible business could RBOCS build with the > "poor" school districts? Well, I have an *opinion*, which is probably worth what it cost you. ;-) Telcos want to get into the data highway business, whatever that means. There is much concern over the potential for creating a "data underclass" that threatens the entire enchilada. By showing a willingness (to congress, the FCC, the press) to support not just wealthy communities, the telcos could be buying a great deal of good will. The goal is to turn this good will into a multi-billion dollar business. Of course, these are only my opinions, and do not in any way relate to what my employer may or may not be doing in this arena. Bob Virzi rvirzi@gte.com Just another ascii character +1 (617) 466-2881 ------------------------------ From: jlundgre@ohlone.kn.PacBell.COM (John Lundgren) Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding Help Needed Date: 26 May 94 16:05:02 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network DANIEL FINKLER (dfinkler@world.std.com) wrote: > west_c212@orion.crc.monroecc.edu writes: >> I am writing a program that needs to decode telephone touch tone >> signals. The problem is that I am having trouble finding a DTMF >> decoder. If anyone know where I can get ahold of one I would >> appreciate it. > You can use USRobotics courier modems' touch tone recognition feature. > They can recognize DTMF tones, including A,B,C,D. Also, ZyXEL modems can recognize DTMF. There is a ZyXEL FAQ at nctuccca.edu.tw. Under /pc/zyxel/ directory. There are other sites also. John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs Rancho Santiago Community College District 17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706 VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com \ jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: jlundgre@ohlone.kn.PacBell.COM (John Lundgren) Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Wanted With Ten Mile Range Date: 26 May 94 16:11:55 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network Guorong Roger (hu_g@isis.cs.odu.edu) wrote: > Is there any kind of CORDLESS PHONE which can be used for ten to > twenty miles distance (not a cellular phone, not the regular cordless > phone which can only be used within the house). The telephone should > still use the regular telephone switching system. The master piece of > the phone should be installed at home, and the handset could be bring > ten to twenty miles away from the home but be still access the phone > at home. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are, but they are not legal for use > in the USA. About the closest you can come to this legally in the USA is > to use a manual phone patch attached to a CB radio or some other type of > legal radio service. I have a phone patch here for example which I have [stuff deleted] > and hard to find here in the USA. If you've got the money, you might con- > sider setting up a little two meter arrangement of your own with a private > phone line attached, etc. PAT] The important point here is that the amateur radio service is for recreational non-commerial use only, and the hams tend to police themselves fairly well, especially in metro areas where the bands are crowded. And, naturally, the phonempany co doesn't want people to bypass their cellular service. So getting a legal ten mile phone is not easy. John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs Rancho Santiago Community College District 17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706 VOI (714) JOHN GAB \ FAX (714) JOHN FRY jlundgre@kn.pacbell.com \ jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu ------------------------------ From: jeff@bradley.bradley.edu (Jeff Hibbard) Subject: Re: Hunting Service From GTE Date: 26 May 1994 10:18:25 -0500 Organization: Bradley University stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In many states, GTE does not offer hunting to residential customers > at any price (here in Washington State is an example), even though the > RBOC in the same area does. Both are also true in Illinois. GTE here doesn't offer hunting on residential lines at any price; Ameritech lets you have it for free. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 May 94 10:15:18 CDT From: David Devereaux-Weber Reply-To: David Devereaux-Weber Subject: Re: Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router? Most routers _are_ UNIX computers. However, the routing software within them is not trivial. The purpose of requiring a router is to prevent traffic from going to or coming from the outside network. A router looks at each packet, examining the protocol and destination. Only packets whose protocols and addresses are OK are forwarded. This reduces unnecessary traffic from the Internet to your network, and from your network to the Internet. Despite the cost of a router, you will be better off in the long run to buy it. Further, using a commercial router will reassure your Internet provider -- they may even require it. However, on lines slower than T1, many network implementors are using lower cost bridges from companies like Combinet instead of routers. Internet access can be provided on a 56 KBPS line, but that is slow. ISDN is better, T1 is better than that, and so on. It depends on how may schools and computers you intend to connect, how many users will be using the network, and how much the schools can afford. Explore any benefits which may acrue to you because of your status as an educational institution. Is Ameritech your local telephone provider? They may be willing to set up a pilot ISDN project. They may be offering fiber to the schools as a deregulatory incentive to state legislators. If a router will be required, give several vendors a call. They may be able to give you some pointers to foundations who may be able to help out. Who is your local cable television provider? You might want to explore connectivity through them. Who are you thinking of using for your provider? Are they local to Terre Haute? If so, a cable television connection may be feasible. David Devereaux-Weber, P.E. weberdd@macc.wisc.edu (Internet) The University of Wisconsin - Madison (608)262-3584 (voice) Division of Information Technology (608)262-4679 (FAX) Network Engineering ------------------------------ From: lars@Eskimo.CPH.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Can a Unix Box Work as an Internet Router? Organization: CMC Network Products, Copenhagen DENMARK Date: Thu, 26 May 94 11:35:48 GMT In article xxmcleis@indsvax1.indstate. edu writes: > can a computer (ie Unix) function as an Internet router, Certain UNIX systems include enough routing code that they can be configured as routers. In general, however, this requires you to install add-on hardware and software to drive multiple line interfaces. This complicates both the network setup and the system management of the unix system. In particular, I suspect that since you are emphasizing your lack of money, the UNIX system in question is a PC-based unix system, for which you do not have source code for the system itself. > or must we buy one of these routers like CISCO or WellFleet? > If so, what's the *cheapest* router available? Routers come in all sizes and price classes, depending on what you want to connect to. One of the least expensive is the Rockwell NetHopper, which is designed to connect a local area network to the Internet over a dial-up modem connection. Including the built-in V.32bis/V.42bis modem, the list price is $1695. > Can a Unix box connect to a digital comm line (56k)? Starting in August, we will be shipping a version of the NetHopper with a synchronous line interface. This can be connected to either a leased DDS-56 line, a switched-56 line, or an ISDN BRI line running at up to 112 Kbps. I don't think pricing has been set yet. These units can also be used to connect two LANs at different locations using either Internet Protocol or Novell IPX or both. Where the other options that you have mentioned require significant investment in learning how to set them up, the NetHopper is very simple to install and configure. The initial configuration asks you a few simple questions (name of this box, management password, IP address, remote IP address, remote phone number, and the like) and leaves you with a working system, which you can then tune if you want to. Before I get accused of too blatant advertising, I hasten to mention that there are other, similar products. The May 31 issue of {PC Magazine} has a comparative test of several routers in this class. Claimer: I am one of the engineers working on the NetHopper products. Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@RNS.COM Rockwell Network Systems Internets: designed and built while you wait Hvidovre Strandvej 72 B Phone: (011-) +45-31 49 81 08 DK-2650 Hvidovre, DENMARK Telefax: +45-31 49 83 08 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 May 94 10:38 EST From: Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Call Return I used Call Return once. It didn't quite work as advertised. I was at home, and just missed a call which I was sure had been from my wife at work. Instead of using our speed-dial, I chose to dial *69, Call Return. I reached the firm in the basement of her building! The building's owner has his own offices in the basement, and apparently Call Return saw the "main" number for the building -- even though each firm in that three-level building has its own phone system (not quite -- there's an intercom capability between floors, possibly meaning a single PBX for the entire building). I re-placed the call, using the speed-dial. The original call I'd missed had indeed been from my wife at work; moreover, she was annoyed that I'd "wasted" 75 cents trying Call Return. Hugh Pritchard, Hugh_Pritchard@MCImail.com ------------------------------ From: blair@salem.intel.com (Guy Blair) Subject: Re: Microsoft Telephony API Date: 25 May 1994 23:57:48 GMT Organization: Intel Corporation In mpinones@netmon.mty.itesm.mx (Marco A. Pinones) writes: > I would like to know if there is any advance on Microsoft efforts to > provide a "standard" programming interface for PBXs and telephony > services. I sent mail to people at Ericcsson about this and they told > me they are working on it. Does somebody know if other companies are > working on it? Marco, THere are over 40 vendors developing Service Providers for the Telephony API (TAPI) developed by Intel and Microsoft. There is a list of companies in in a Technical Note included with the TAPI SDK you can get (free of charge) off CompuServe (GO WINEXT) or via anonymous ftp from ftp.microsoft.com \devtools\tapi. The list includes products, estimated release dates and contact names/phone numbers/email addresses. Service providers from PBX vendors, analog add-in board vendors, isoethernet, switch to host link, client server, ISDN, etc. have been announced and demonstrated this year. If you have specific questions, either post them on GO WINEXT or send to telephon@microsoft.com. I can try to help you as well. Regards, Guy Blair Intel Architecture Labs ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 10:19:29 -0500 From: don newcomb Subject: Re: Internet Access from the Solomon Islands? Organization: Naval Oceanographic Office In article TELECOM Digest Editor notes: > In response to your side note, I certainly hope your comments were not > driven by any cannibalphobic attitudes on your part. If the Solomon Islands > do join the Internet and get a news feed, will someone issue a Call For > Votes on a newsgroup devoted to cannibalism? I wonder where such a news- > group would go in the Usenet hierarchy? Probably under rec.food.cannibalism. Pat, how dare you?! Don't you know it's not called "cannibalism" any more; that is a term of oppression! The Politically Correct term is "human recycling." Have a nice day. Donald R. Newcomb * newcomb@pops.navo.navy.mil Naval Oceanographic Office * drn@fiddle.noo.navy.mil Stennis Space Center, MS 39522 * Voice: (601) 688-5998 FAX: (601) 688-5485 * DSN: 485-5998 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You have a nice day also, and thank you for sharing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: nduehr@netcom.com (Nathan N. Duehr) Subject: Re: How Can I Ring Up Myself? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 10:21:50 GMT Joseph Herl (jherl@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu) wrote: > Our family is moving to a new house next week, and we will have the > same telephone number at both places for several days. How can I call > between them? Pat replied with information regarding how to ring back a phone in the Illinois area. For the the information of others on the net, in the Denver, Colorado area use the same technique described by Pat except with a 99x prefix and do not dial a 1 before the prefix. I live in the North Glenn/Westminster area and 996 works here. It appears that it works in exactly the way as Pat described his to work. Regards, Nate Duehr nduehr@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 May 94 6:07:50 EDT From: Carl Moore Subject: 57x in Old Area 312 In old area 312, I found all 57x in use and all of them moving to 708. And you mention 1-57x (with that leading 1)? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, in the old, old, old days of 312, it was just 571, get new dial tone, click, get high pitched tone, dial 6, hang up, get ringback, go off hook, end ring back. Needless to say, we had no 312-571 exchange in those days. No matter what your number was, that did it. In the more recent 'old 312' times, even though we had a 312-571 prefix, doing it as 1-571 (and as per above) worked. Then finally it changed to the present scheme where it became 1-57x-last four, etc. Another excursion into weird numbers here are the 'prefix-1-prefix' num- bers. I don't know if those are around in other than Illinois Bell terri- tory or not. For example, 708-329-1329 or 708-677-1677; and there are lots more. After the area code (312 or 708) dial the prefix, then a one, and the prefix again. Quite a few respond with a high-pitched tone, and others respond with a rapid busy or reorder tone. All the old 9954/9955 loop-arounds are dead though; they were all killed after that scandal several years ago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: avb@cais.com (FCC World) Subject: Announcing New FCC BBS - FCC World Date: 26 May 1994 17:57:39 GMT Organization: Capital Area Internet Service The Washington, DC telecommunications law firm of Smithwick & Belendiuk proudly announces the launch of a new BBS -- FCC WORLD -- featuring information on the Federal Communications Commission. We feature FCC documents on-line (many you cannot find on Internet), texts of important FCC Reports and decisions (IVDS, PCS Auction info -- on-line now!), Forums on hot FCC issues, free Classified ads and more! The best thing -- its free and without a daily time limit. Give it a try at 202-887-5718 (14.4 baud)! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #254 ****************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------