TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Jun 94 14:38:30 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 288 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Pager on a Watch? (Donald J. Miller) Re: Pager on a Watch? (Steve Cogorno) Re: Pager on a Watch? (D. Castillo) Re: Pager on a Watch? (Scott Coleman) Re: Pager on a Watch? (Leo Nederlof) Re: Pager on a Watch? (Michael D. Sullivan) Re: Pager on a Watch? (Dan Reifsnyder) Re: Pager on a Watch? (Jeffrey Rhodes) Re: Can ANI be Blocked From Call Recipient? (Tim Gorman) Re: Can ANI be Blocked From Call Recipient? (Mike King) Re: Can ANI be Blocked From Call Recipient? (Rich Padula) Re: Calling Card Suggestion (Carl Oppedahl) Re: Caller ID With a New Twist (Ross E Mitchell) Re: Caller ID With a New Twist (Phil Bullock) Re: Caller ID With a New Twist (B.J. Guillot) Re: Does PAT Work For US West? (Hugh Pritchard) Re: Does PAT Work For US West? (Ry Jones) Correction of Attribution - Re: What Did You Have For Dinner (G. Burditt) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dmiller@crl.com (Donald J. Miller) Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Date: 15 Jun 1994 08:17:45 -0700 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] David Lawrance (d-lawrance@uiuc.edu) wrote: > At one time, Motorola and Timex were marketting a pager built into a > watch. Are there still such beasts? Who sells and who supports? The Motorola/Timex watch was kind of large and klunky. Lately, however, there have been numerous commercials in the Atlanta area (and I assume elsewhere) for pager watches made by Swatch. The units displayed in the commercial, at least, look as stylish as regular Swatch watches. Don Miller Electronic System Products dmiller@crl.com ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 14:09:22 GMT David Lawrance said: > At one time, Motorola and Timex were marketting a pager built into a > watch. Are there still such beasts? Who sells and who supports? Swatch makes watches like this; they are availible at the AT&T Phone Centers. Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: castillo@unm.edu (D. Castillo) Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Date: 15 Jun 1994 06:26:01 -0600 Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque In article , David Lawrance wrote: > At one time, Motorola and Timex were marketting a pager built into a > watch. Are there still such beasts? Who sells and who supports? Swatch sells them. According to one of their ads, they're available at AT&T Phonecenters. (Haven't checked this myself, have yet to go to one of the ATT centers, seem awfully expensive from their ads.) castillo@hydra.unm.edu ------------------------------ From: genghis@ilces.ag.uiuc.edu (Scott Coleman) Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Date: 15 Jun 94 14:21:19 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana I once tried to track down the writwatch pager. It does exist, but none of the paging companies around here seems to want to carry them (I checked several). The reason is that they are apparently very fragile. One outfit was willing to try and order one for me. Since they didn't have one for me to look at, I requested a brochure and other information which I never received, promised callbacks were never made, etc. This was both from the local paging companies as well as Motorola itself, which manufactures the thing. After some time I just gave up on the idea. It's a cool idea, but if it's prone to breakage, and nobody wants to support it when it does break, the hassle of ownership would outweigh the benefits. I now own a standard Motorola display pager, which has been 100% problem fee and was less than half the price of the wristwatch model. And besides, I have a Casio Infrared controller wristwatch which I use for A/V and Home Automation equipment; I don't want to wear two wristwatches. ;-) Scott Coleman tmkk@uiuc.edu President ASRE (American Society of Reverse Engineers) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 12:48:35 +0200 From: Leo Nederlof Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Swatch has them. Until now I've only seen them in the shops in Switzerland, but I assume they will be marketed in other countries as well. What I've seen is only one type, black, the body slightly larger than a standard Swatch. Probably they will come up with trendy designs and coulours shortly. Unless nobody buys them of course ... Leo Nederlof Alcatel Bell Research Centre lned@rc.bel.alcatel.be Network Technology Group phone: +32 3 2407613 Francis Wellesplein 1 fax: +32 3 2409932 2018 Antwerp - Belgium ------------------------------ From: mds@access.digex.net (Michael D. Sullivan) Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Date: 15 Jun 1994 01:05:37 -0400 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Dunno about Motorola and Timex. Swatch markets several models of its "Piepser" watch/pager in conjunction with BellSouth's MobileComm paging service. Michael D. Sullivan | INTERNET E-MAIL TO: |also: avogadro@well.sf.ca.us Washington, D.C. | mds@access.digex.net | 74160.1134@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: ryfe%interaccess@uunet.UU.NET (Dan Reifsnyder) Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Date: 15 Jun 1994 15:11:07 GMT Organization: IAC Reply-To: ryfe@interaccess.com I saw an advertisement on TV this weekend ... macho guy riding his huge motorcycle down the highway. His watch beeps ... a number shows up in a small lcd window on the watch ... (you see a stuffy-looking person on a phone somewhere) ... he apparently recognizes the number and ignores it. This happens two or three more times, until the person calling is a gorgeous woman ... he slams on the brakes and pulls over to a pay phone. Strange as it seems, the watch/pager seems to be made by Swatch (yep, the cheesy-colored plastic watch people). Hope this helps. Dan Reifsnyder ryfe@interaccess.com ------------------------------ From: jcr@creator.nwest.mccaw.com (Jeffrey Rhodes) Subject: Re: Pager on a Watch? Date: 15 Jun 1994 14:53:28 GMT Organization: McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc. Reply-To: jcr@creator.nwest.mccaw.com Seiko is offering the Seiko Receptor. This is an alphanumeric pager that receives messages and time adjustments from a Stratum 1 atomic clock (every thirty minutes). FM subcarriers are used, so some messages get missed while in a tunnel or basement. I get the daily stock market closing and WA lottery numbers as part of the Information services. It is offered in Seattle, Tacoma and Portland but should be in CA, NY and Washington, DC by year end. I have my cellular Voice Mail Notification call my pager number so I know when someone leaves me Voice Mail. A six month contract is $20 activation and $8 per month. Roaming is extra, but it will be neat to get off a plane in NY and have the time adjusted to local time automatically! Jeffrey Rhodes at jcr@creator.nwest.mccaw.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Except I think you are in for a slight disappointment. I think (am not positive) that the radio time adjustment only sends the seconds and minutes; those two parts of the time are the only things absolute about the time in the USA. In other words, whatever the hour may be in your time zone or mine, we still are at the same number of minutes and seconds. I think when you travel around the USA (or most of the world, if the radio signals go that far) you will still have to advance or retard your watch manually for the correct hour. If I stand corrected on this, let me know. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tim Gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Can ANI be Blocked From Call Recipient? Date: 15 Jun 94 09:50:24 EDT If you dial 0 and ask the local RBOC operator to dial an 800 number for you AND the local RBOC is off of a Northern Telecom operator system your ANI will not be passed on to the carrier the 800 number is sent to. In order to launch the 800 database query to find out which carrier gets the traffic the call must be sent out of the system and back in. The way this must be done does not pass the ANI. I have no knowledge of how AT&T's or anyone else's operator systems work. If you dial your interLATA carrier operator and ask them to dial the 800 number for you they will have your ANI. Whether this ANI is passed on to the 800 number recipient is based on the interLATA carriers switch and it's capabilities. If the call terminates back to a local RBOC the ANI is not passed on since terminating Feature Group protocols do not provide for ANI to be passed on a terminating leg. 0+800 is typically blocked from most classes of service. There is no reason for any 800 call to be dialed in this fashion from most classes of service and it needlessly ties up operator system capacity if allowed. Tim Gorman - SWBT ------------------------------ From: mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) Subject: Re: Can ANI be Blocked From Call Recipient? Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 05:17:35 PDT In TELECOM Digest, V14, #280, Ry Jones wrote: > RJ: 0 > USW: (bong) USWEST USWest, how can I help you? > RJ: My 8 key is broken, can you please dial a number for me? > USW: Yes, may I have the number, area code first, please? > RJ: 1 800 265 5328, please. > USW: Please wait... > ATT: Number you are dialing from please? > RJ: 206 xxx xxxx > ATT: Number you would like to call? > RJ: 812 xxx xxxx > ATT: What is your name please? > RJ: Ry. > ATT: Thank you. > IP : Hello? > ATT: This is AT&T, I have a collect call from Ry. Will you accept the > charges? > IP: Yeah. > ATT: Thank you. > The number that comes out on the bill of IP is whatever I told ATT. > ATT does *not* get the number from the USW operator. Period. I know Are you certain that AT&T is processing this call? I'd like to know how they can snag a call to 1-800-COLLECT, an MCI number. I guess it's possible that the USWest operator might be handing the call directly to an AT&T operator without actually connecting you to 800-COLLECT, but I'd think that would be illegal. Of course, in that scenario, I'd believe the AT&T oeprator would have your ANI information. Mike King mk@tfs.com ------------------------------ From: Rpadula@aol.com Date: Wed, 15 Jun 94 00:28:34 EDT Subject: Re: Can ANI be Blocked From Call Recipient? MNeary.El_Segundo@xerox.com wrote: > In Los Angeles, one of the local TV channels has an 800 "tip" hotline. > They repeatedly reassure viewers "you don't have do give your name". > I'll bet that 99% of the population here thinks this means that their call > can be anonymous. Well, here's a better one. This Sunday's issue of {Parade Magazine} (June 12) has a big debate on decriminalizing marijuana use. Naturally, they are conducting an opinion poll on a 900 number (charge is 75 cents). However, one of the questions is "How often have you used marijuana?" Gee, I wonder where THAT data will end up? Rich ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Calling Card Suggestion Date: 15 Jun 1994 18:13:13 -0400 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In lailert@ucssun1.sdsu.edu (Supak Lailert "spk") writes: > Sam Spens Clason (d92-sam@misfits.nada.kth.se) wrote: >> How big a part of all calling card frauds could be avoided if the PIN >> wasn't actually printed on the card?! >> So, stop printing the PIN on calling cards, that would not make them >> as easely used if stolen or just glimpsed at. > As I called MCI early this week to request for a new calling card, > they give me an option not to have the PIN printed on my card. Nice > move, MCI. Huh? I memorize my card number. Then it does not matter what is or is not written on it since I don't carry the card. Why would any one carry the card around? If you feel you *must* have something with you carrying the number, why the card? Again, I don't get it. Why not write the number on something else, so at least it is not immediately recognizable as a telephone calling card number. And maybe change one of the digits or something, in a way you can easily remember to undo. In jmadams@freenet.scri.fsu.edu (John Adams) writes: > The problem, or angle, is that a crook can stand at one payphone and > simply watch what numbers you press on the keypad. Perhaps this easy > tactic is the reason for the wave of "voice cards" (a la Sprint) where > you speak the name of a preprogrammed voice sample/digit sequence to > place a call? Yes, I think you are right about Sprint's reason for this. At Pennsylvania Station in New York City, all the Nynex pay phones have a metal shroud around the keypad, making it *very* difficult for someone to shoulder-surf. I expect this will become commonplace in busy places. All the more reason to get 800 numbers that terminate at the places you call often. (You don't have to be the telephone customer at the terminating end; I have one to call my Internet provider, who has only a 212 access number, for example.) If a surfer sees the 800 number they will not get much benefit from it. Portions excerpted from The Phone Book from Consumer Reports. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers) Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 ------------------------------ From: rem@world.std.com (Ross E Mitchell) Subject: Re: Caller ID With a New Twist Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 21:14:27 GMT Along with a professor from Clark University, I have written an article for MIT's Technology Review about a solution to telephone privacy issues such as those raised by Caller ID. The service to be offered by US West appears to offer all of the features we recommend under a general privacy theory which we have dubbed "Dynamic Negotiation." The guiding principle of Dynamic Negotiation is that individual users of the phone system should determine the extent to which they wish to sacrifice their privacy in a dynamic and interactive fashion. Per-line blocking is the default, with selective unblocking available. Per-call blocking is available for users desiring to change from the per-line default but retain the option to selectively block. At the same time, Anonymous Call Reject is available as a free option. Any calls which are rejected route to an instructional message on how the call can be completed. (There is no charge to the calling party and the called party's phone, of course, does not even ring.) This approach solves everyone's privacy concerns: called parties can ensure that they are not disturbed by people who do not choose to identify themselves; callers need not take any special action to protect their privacy when calling, but have the option to release their numbers at will in order to complete their call, or to change their default to release except when explicitly blocked. With the per-line blocking default, callers do not release their numbers without knowledge and consent, since they must take an affirmative action to enable number release. The message provided when calling a number which rejects blocked-number calls provides an instantaneous and effective training mechanism for the uniformed caller. We also recommend Call Trace to permit capture of harrassing caller numbers to parties who have chosen to accept all calls, regardless of privacy bit setting. In our article we call for federal regulation of Caller ID, but simply in order to permit the creation of a level playing field. In our view, government must not determine for us the appropriate level of privacy protection, but must mandate systems which permit us to do that for ourselves, just as we have always done in non-electronic interaction. I'm delighted that at least one phone company has seen the valid privacy concerns raised on both sides of this issue, and I would appreciate your comments concerning Dynamic Negotiation. Assuming I can get approval from MIT, I'd be happy to post the final article when it is ready for publication. Ross Mitchell - Systems Consultant - rem@world.std.com Newton, Massachusetts Tel: (617) 965-7010 Fax: (617) 630-0024 ------------------------------ From: pbullock@xmission.com (Phil Bullock) Subject: Re: Caller ID With a New Twist Date: 15 Jun 1994 11:07:44 -0600 Organization: XMission Public Access Internet (801-539-0900) Kevin Bluml (kevin@gath.cray.com) wrote: > US West in Minneapolis/St. Paul area has a interesting version of the > Caller ID bag of services. It seems to handle many of the previously > noted concerns fairly well - Here is a synopsis: [Deleted to conserve space; list of custom calling features was listed]. > All in all seems to be a good combination of features. This same system was turned on in Utah June 7, 1994. So far it seems to be working fine. ------------------------------ From: st1r8@elroy.uh.edu (B.J. Guillot) Subject: Re: Caller ID With a New Twist Date: 15 Jun 1994 17:31:00 CDT Organization: University of Houston In article , kevin@gath.cray.com (Kevin Bluml) writes... > Call Trace - $1.00/use (For Harassing/Obscene calls - Info > forwarded to US West Security for > future use - Can't be blocked) In Houston (SW Bell), Call Trace originally was $1/month with a charge of $8.00/use. Then, they switched it so that it was free/month but with a charge of $10.00/use. We just got Caller ID two weeks ago, so I don't know if that makes any difference or not, but it appears that Houston is being charged 10 times more than we sould be. Oh, and we actually tried using it once to see how it worked. Get this ... SW Bell said that they cannot do ANYTHING with the information obtained from Call Trace UNTIL there are at least *THREE* traces done back to the same number. In other words, it would cost you $30.00 to do what you might be able to do for $1.00 in your area. Regards, B.J. Guillot ... Houston, Texas USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 'Call Trace' is a complete ripoff service which is not needed at all. Furthermore, whether or not telco can legally charge you to trace and stop people harassing you is open to debate. If you are getting that type of phone call simply notify the Annoyance Call Bureau at telco. You *do* have to cooperate with them, and that usually means that prior to beginning any sort of trace or investigation you will need to sign a form which (a) agrees that the results of the trace are to be turned over directly to the police by telco, and (b) that you agree without any conditions attached to prosecute whoever is responsible, and (c) that you will not discuss the trap on your line with *anyone under any conditions* while telco is conducting the investigation. That means you do not tell co-workers, you do not tell roomates or lovers, you do not tell other family members not living there and already aware of it, etc. It is well established that most harrassing calls (ring your number and hang up without speaking, etc) are from persons you know at least casually, if not better than that. Telco will not serve as your private detective agency in this regard. If you wish to have this invasion of your privacy and the harassment stopped, they'll help you stop it alright; but no playing games in the process. My personal belief, backed by what a couple of attornies have said to me is that telco's contract with you for the service entitles you to the peaceful and undisturbed use of what you are paying for. You do not have to pay extra (ie some fee for each use of 'Call Trace') in order to have peace and quiet in your household. You are already paying telco for a service alleged to be in good working order. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Hugh Pritchard <0006348214@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Does PAT Work for USWest? Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 12:04:00 GMT On 10 Jun 1994 21:59:51 GMT, rjones@chinook.halcyon.com (Ry Jones) wrote: > OK ... I think PAT is a Bellcore dude! Now when I do the 0 trick to > turn off ANI on collect calls, 1 800 collect functions correctly. > (ANI *is* passed) ... Pat has no time. In a response to a question from Lynne Gregg (Digest #283, "How Many Readers Are There of This Digest?"), Pat admits he spends five hours a day on the Digest, in addition to his day job. And how is Bellcore involved? Bellcore is neither an LEC nor an IXC. Pat, in that same Note, continues, "My single biggest drop-off point on the mailing list is mcimail.com, where I (yesterday) delivered the Digest to 78 names. ... Then of course there is Usenet, and the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup." So, maybe an MCI employee or stock owner among all those thousands of readers saw Ry's posting, and brought it to the attention of the 1-800-COLLECT people. (Ry had mis-identified the 1-800-285-5328 [1-800-COLLECT] operators as "ATT"; 1-800-COLLECT is an MCI service.) > HOWEVER, if I have the 0 operator dial the oncor 800 operator, I am > still able to fool them. What is an "oncor" 800 operator? Hugh Pritchard, Smoke N' Mirrors, Inc., hugh@snm.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, for my full time job I am a shill for the telcos. My assignment is to post messages on Usenet and various BBS's and commercial services in such a way as to spread Hate and Discontent among the other participants. I post messages about measured service and stuff like that, getting the others to argue and fuss among themselves. The more they argue and fuss with me about measured service, etc, the more they stay on the phone, thus the more they pay for a phone bill each month. Once a month the telcos scrutinize the phone bills of modem users. They send the bills to some agency in the far east for review and analysis, just as that dude explained in comp.dcom.telecom.tech the other day. His technical analysis of what happens was brilliant and right on the mark. For every hour of time the subscriber spends connected to Usenet as a result of something I posted, the telcos give me a commission. The more Hate and Discontent I can spread on Usenet in a month's time, the bigger my commission for that month. I'll tell you, getting that big fight going on Usenet about a year ago regards the establishment of c.d.t.t. made me quite wealthy. They give me an extra premium if I say something that is an Outright Lie, and of course there is a yearly bonus for any technical inaccuracies which appear in the Digest itself; that's why you see so many of them here, and never see any in c.d.t.t. By the by, an Oncor 800 operator is an operator for the Oncor Long Distance Company, a fine established firm with a reputation similar to that of AT&T (back in 1905). ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: rjones@coho.halcyon.com (Ry Jones) Subject: Re: Does PAT Work For USWest? Date: 15 Jun 1994 00:29:56 GMT Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc. Ry Jones (rjones@chinook.halcyon.com) wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you go entirely through a manual > operator you are still able to defraud them, eh? PAT] Nope ... no fraud. Until 05 31 94, I worked for the uber-SB that provided Oncor with their network access, etc. Oncor is one of the biggest independents ... and still, everyone spells it "encore". No, no, Oncor. ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Correction of Attribution - Re: What Did You Have for Dinner Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 03:43:28 GMT Dear Mr. Moderator: How the heck did my name show up on the article quoted below? It seems to have been written by Paul A. Lee, and the first I heard of it was just now when I spotted my name. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon In article , Gordon Burditt wrote: >In TELECOM Digest Volume 14 Issue 264, our Editor wrote (in part): > >> Why the two most recent well-known cannibals in the USA both came from >> Wisconsin -- within fifty miles or so of each other -- I do not >> know. Maybe it is something in the atomosphere. >As a relatively recent transplant to the Milwaukee area, I'm prompted >to offer this hypothesis: Maybe these two guys were driven mad by the >*taxes* here in Wisconsin (the highest in the country, according to a >1992 survey). Perhaps the "ultimate eating disorder" could be one of >the results of the high tax rate. After all, I've seen widespread >sociopathic behavior in the way people here _drive_ ... >(I hope I can forfend being flamed by hundreds of Wisconsin natives by >emphasizing that most of the folks here are as genial, friendly, and >helpful as any I've met anywhere ... as long as you keep them out of >their cars!) >Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 >Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 >Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 >INTERNET [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, sorry about that! Seems those danged '>' marks got out of synch again. You had commented in this thread I think (was it the part about the Packer Grill in Boulder?) and somehow Mr. Lee was careless in his attributions when he followed up later in the thread. Then when I ran it here, the digest-making software did something inappropriate to it also. So, let this be an official apology; you did not say what was attributed to you in that thread which for some reason won't go away. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #288 ******************************