TELECOM Digest Wed, 5 Oct 94 11:02:00 CDT Volume 14 : Issue 387 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson US Cellular/Poughkeepsie Added to NACN? (Douglas Reuben) Re: Cell Phones froom Airplanes (Steve Cogorno) Infobahn CD-ROM (Ronald Luitwieler) Frame Relay vs. ISDN vs. T1 vs. ???? (Stew Pelegan) Re: British Telecom Caller ID (Martin Cook) Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud (Greg Monti) Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud (Jason Hillyard) Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud (Tim Gorman) Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not? (Paul J. J. Harrington) Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not? (Yves Blondeel) Paper Released on Costing Residential Broadband Networks (Steven Byrne) Re: Telecommuting Law (Eric Adamson) Re: Telecommuting Law (John E. Lundgren) 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 America On Line. 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: dreuben@netcom.com (Cid Technologies) Subject: US Cellular/Poughkeepsie Added to NACN? Date: Tue, 4 Oct 1994 20:44:07 PDT After the recent additions of the Vanguard Cellular northeast (and other?) properties to the NACN, I noted in passing that the Poughkeepsie, NY system (00503) still did not have automatic call delivery, even though it had Cell One/NY's "home rate" roaming (where you pay only your home airtime package's rates, no surcharges or daily charges, etc). This weekend I was in the Poughkeepsie system, and noticed that the standard NACN codes for Do Not Disturb and Call Forwarding are working, and that there is indeed automatic call delivery! All features like forwarding and call waiting work fine, and what I welcome as an increasingly common feature with CO/NY's partner systems, all unanswered calls have redirect (bounce back) to voicemail. (CO/NY for some reason doesn't offer No Answer Transfer, unfortunately, but if your NACN system does and Poughkeepsie IS indeed on the NACN, then NAT should also work the same way.) Call-delivery time is also excellent, with only a few extra seconds required to send your call to Poughkeepsie after someone dials your CO/NY number. In almost all cases, callers will not even be able to tell that your call is being sent to another system -- it's quite seamless to them. Compare this to the B side auto call delivery system, where as a NYNEX customer it can take from *35 to 40 seconds* from the time someone dials your local number to the time your phone starts ringing! Many callers complain about the delay, and/or the "Please hold on ... your party is being located" time-killer message, and a lot of them just hang up. I really don't like using the B side delivery system because it is so unecessarily slow (its not really a DOJ issue which causes the delay, SWBell/DC, an A-side B-owned company with the same switch that NYNEX, BAMS and SNET uses doesn't have this delay, nor does GTE/SF, so WHY on earth do NYNEX,BAMS, and SNET want to make callers wait so long just to get a hold of a roaming mobile?). But anyhow, I'm not sure if USCell/Poughkeepsie is truly on the NACN because I haven't gotten any NACN-type error messages from them yet. CO/NY may have just set up call-delivery there to be competitive with NYNEX (and to get me to stop whining! :) ). If anyone else from the NACN ventures there, please let me know if your calls are delivered to you too. Presently, you need to be careful in downtown Poughkeepsie, as the next system to the north, Vanguard/Kingston (01513), does not have a "home rate" program with CO/NY. If you receive a call and you accidentally register on the Kingston system, and you answer it, you will pay a daily $3 charge and $.99 per minute. As an aside, I noticed that the Kingston 01513 system is STILL giving you error recordings when you enter valid NACN codes, like *350, *710, etc. These codes to work and do effectuate a change on your home switch, yet Kingston is returning "KI-32" error recordings instead of correctly returning confirmation tones. I also noticed that McCaw's Cell One/Albany (00063) still is not doing redirects for unanswered calls. If your phone goes unanswered or for some reason you can not be paged but are still registered in Albany, then callers gets 3 or 4 rings, and then a weird tone, and then a standard "Not in Vehicle" NACN message. If the non-McCaw systems in the Hudson Valley can do redirects, why can't the McCaw system in Albany? I was under the impression that it's a matter of a software upgrade. I'd think they'd want to get Albany set up for this as quickly as possible! Finally, on a totally non-Telecom related note (sort of), did anyone else see the aurora over the mid-Hudson area of Sunday night? I saw it from about 12:30 to 1AM (and then had to get moving). It was a bright green color and spread all over the sky, from east to west, more or less. I've only seen it once before in my life (February 1989 in Greenwich, CT and Westchester County, NY), and each time it was a truly impressive sight. Hope a few others caught it! Doug dreuben@netcom.com / CID Technologies / (203) 499 - 5221 ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Cell Phones From Airplanes Date: Tue, 4 Oct 1994 22:00:25 PDT Linc Madson said: > I was under the impression that using a cellphone from any sort of an > airplane was a bad idea, if not outright illegal. Certainly a little > Cessna isn't likely to be up at 39,000 feet, but there are "small > planes" that can go well above 10,000 feet, from which altitude they > could easily reach a good many cells in a populated area like San > Francisco. Even from an altitude of just 3,000 feet, you're clear of > all the hills and buildings in most of the Bay Area. I have used a cell phone from a plane on occassion, and it wasn't very pretty. It worked OK, but the last time I was coming over the Altimont Pass, where cell coverage is fairly light. The cell handoffs were brusk; I got cut off a couple of times. The other party heared me fine, and I had a bit of static with occasional bursts of noise. I assume that the cell phone would not affect the plane's instruments, as the pilot gave me the phone to use :-) BTW, it was a Cessna King Air 8 Passenger. The main purpose of the cell phone is to control runway access. Our runway is FAA registered (Wallom Field, CA) and to ensure safety, access must be restricted. However, we needed to allow cross traffic, because there is a service road that crosses the runway. Believe it or not, when preparing for a landing, someone uses the cell phone that is present in all of the planes, and dials a special number. The PBX bridges this line right to the automatic gate, and we can control it remotely to close the access road. There are also warning lamps that go on at each entrance. Steve cogorno@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Oct 1994 11:45:59 GMT From: 104836@pc-lab.fbk.EUR.NL (Ronald Luitwieler) Subject: Infobahn CD-ROM Organization: Faculteit Bedrijfskunde, Erasmus University Rotterdam Dear reader, give me the opportunity to introduce myself. I am a student at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and I am currently working on a CD-ROM project. The goal of me and my group is to develop a marketing strategy for a new CD-ROM product (which is briefly outlined below). This CD-ROM offers the possibility to research the impacts of the 'Infobahn' on the environment (businesses, changing markets etc.). The CD will be on the US market early next year, and will be available in Europe (in a modified version) some time later. Our problem now is to get contacts throughout Europe who can help us with this project -- because somehow we have to research the 'market' (which we don't know at this point of time). So if you know people working in this area or people who may be interested in the product, PLEASE CONTACT ME! Brief description of the product: The NII Report is a CD-ROM project covering all aspects of US developments in broadband communications. A CD-ROM published 3 times annually, and accompanied by a book of articles with a overview/exec- utive summary. The book of articles will be around 250 pages. The CD-ROM will be structured around 4 levels of analysis: LEVEL 1: The overview - A summary of all the key developments, based on input from a number of commissioned expert studies. The overview will be around 50 pages of text. LEVEL 2: Commissioned reports - covering both analytic aspects of the NII and specific industrial sectors: (markets, regulation, government policy, technology, corporate strategy, costs/financing, telcos, cable TV, entertainment, nonprofit sector, satellites, drivers.) These commissioned reports will be provided by experts in each of these areas. Each report will be around 20 pages. LEVEL 3: Published articles - on the recommendation of the experts involved providing commissioned reports, there will be but reprint rights to the key articles in each of the twelve areas. In the beginning there will be a base of 100 articles, more in each edition. LEVEL 4: Sources - the huge capacity of the CD-ROM means that large number of key sources can be included in the publication. Key sources will include: Government reports and statements - Congressional papers, including bills, legislative records, reports, testimony - Corporate publications and speeches - Nonprofit reports and documents The report will include a paper publication to act as a portable reference manual and guide. However, its power and usefulness will come from its use as a CD-ROM product. This approach allows the simultaneous development of a powerful menu-driven structure, which allows even neophyte researchers easy access to any part of the report; and massive searching capabilities, both within and across issue areas. It also offers export capabilities: ties to the 'Write' program, cutting to the clipboard, pasting into other applications, or saving to file, or printing. ------------------------------ From: spelegan@csc.com, [Stew Pelegan]@csc.com Subject: Frame Relay vs. ISDN vs. T1 vs. ???? Date: 5 Oct 1994 14:52:28 GMT Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation - System Sciences DIvison Reply-To: spelegan@csc.com We have a commercial customer who's asked us to setup a BBS system for them. They've asked us to recommend a telecom option for them to use that best suits their needs. They'd like to start out with 8 lines going into the BBS with the ability to move up to 16, 24, etc. They'd like their customers to have one 800 number to call to reach this BBS, no matter where they are in the US. Their customers will have off-the-shelf modems, ranging from 1200-14.4 baud. My initial recommendation was for T1 if they expected heavy usage (>$3K/month in long distance charges). But I've seen enough articles recently about ISDN and frame relay to be hesitant in putting my recommendation in stone. I know very little about telecommunications, only what I've picked up during conversations with long distance carrier sales people. My brief education on ISDN tells me that if I wish to implement this scenario, people who want to call into our customer's BBS will have to have a special terminal and their local Ma Bell has to offer ISDN. I'm even more cloudy on Frame Relay. Can I have one 800 number with Frame Relay? Do you need a special terminal/modem to dial into a frame relay network? How does it compare to T1? vs. T1 cost? vs. T1 reliability? Please correct any assumptions that I've made T1, ISDN, and Frame Relay. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Stewart Pelegan Environmental Services Computer Sciences Corporation (301) 572-3784 ------------------------------ From: cook@SHAGGY.gfms.bt.co.uk (Martin Cook) Subject: Re: British Telecom Caller ID Date: 5 Oct 1994 12:20:13 GMT Organization: BT Development & Procurement Reply-To: cook@gfms.bt.co.uk Julian Thornhill (jth@ion.le.ac.uk) wrote: > Does anyone know how the caller ID system that British Telecom is > going to introduce in November works? More specifically, how is the > information delivered to the phone? I am told that it differs to the > US system. The following is an extract from part 3 of the uk.telecom FAQ, which is in turn based on an earlier posting to that group my myself: Q: How does Caller Display work? {*} [For a more detailed discussion see 'Caller Display and Call Return' by William Dangerfield, Simon Garrett and Melv Bond in British Telecommuncations Engineering; Volume 12 part 3 (October 1993). Also See Supplies Information Note (SIN) 227.] The system described here is that developed by BT for use on the UK PSTN. It is based on the Bellcore 'CLASS' standard. This has the benefit of allowing CPE manuafacturers to base their UK models on those developed for the North American Market. Most of BT's customers are connected to System X, AXE 10 or TXE4 exchanges and these exchanges are digitally interlinked using CCITT C7 signalling. C7 provides a way of passing the number of the calling number to the distant exchange (this information is used during call tracing). When a call is made to a customer with Caller Display the distant exchange requests the number of the caller originating the call from the exchange at the other end of the C7 link. If the call is not routed totally over C7 links (e.g. the caller is on an old analogue exchange), or the caller is on an interconnected network for which no agreement for the exchange of additional call information is in force, the number will not be complete. In this case customer with Caller Display will get a 'Number Incomplete Message' If on the other hand the caller has deliberately withheld the number, by use of the 141 prefix the Caller Display Customer will get a 'Number Withheld' Message. If the number is complete, and not withheld by the caller the number is routed on to the Caller Display customer over the local access network. For this purpose a V.23 sender has to be installed at every exchange concentrator. When a line is about to receive a call the polarity of the line is reversed prior to the ringing current being applied. If the customer has Caller Display additional messages are interspersed between the polarity reversal and the application of the ringing current. First a tone alert signal is sent and then an alternating series of '0's and '1's lasting 250ms is sent by the V.23 sender to assist the CPE in detecting the imminent arrival of the Caller Display message. The Caller Display message itself contains the following information: - The number of the caller - Reason for absence of number (e.g. number withheld) - Time and Date (Can be used to auto-set CPE clocks) - Caller/Name Text (Intially only used for designating calls from payphones) - Reason for absence of caller name - Call type The Caller Display message takes roughly 0.75 seconds to send, after which the normal ringing current is applied to the line. Martin Cook, E-mail cook@gfms.bt.co.uk Tel +44 1473 224594 Fax +44 1473 255130 Software Engineer, Test Management Applications, BT Development & Procurement. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Oct 1994 18:43:41 EDT From: Greg Monti Subject: Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud On page C1 of the October 4, 1994, {Washington Post} is a story noting that Ivy James Lay (aka "Knight Shadow") was arrested in connection with the theft of 50,000 telephone calling card numbers. The card numbers were sold and were eventually used to make $50,000,000 worth of free calls. He's out on bail. The Secret Service said that Lay had used software which he installed at his workplace, a telephone switching facility in Cary, North Carolina, to capture calling card numbers as they were dialed. Numbers of Sprint, AT&T, and local company cards were stolen along with MCI card numbers. Some of the stolen numbers were ordinary credit cards that allow calls to be charged to them. The story says that other search warrants were served and that further arrests (of 9 to 12 others) are expected. The story implies that AT&T, Sprint and MCI all noticed an increase in fraud charged to cards that had been used in Spring, 1994, from phones in the Charlotte, North Carolina, area. The companies reported the fraud pattern to the Secret Service in May. Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division National Public Radio Phone: +1 202 414-3343 635 Massachusetts Av NW Fax: +1 202 414-3036 Washington, DC 20001-3753 Internet: gmonti@npr.org ------------------------------ From: upsetter@mcl.ucsb.edu (Jason Hillyard) Subject: Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud Date: 5 Oct 1994 00:08:25 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara > But a hundred thousand calling cards and fifty million dollars in > traffic???? At what point are certain publishers/editors on the > Internet going to wake up? Computer crime is growing expotentially. > I think it is time to have another massive crackdown, similar to > Operation Sun Devil a few years ago. Let's start getting really > tough on hackers and phreaks. I wonder if the long distance companies will ever wake up. This kind of crime is only possible because of the utter lack of security inherent in calling cards. Why are the long distance companies so cheap when it comes to implementing secure billing systems? In your reference to Operation Sundevil, which part of the crackdown would you like to see repeated? The illegal Secret Service raids? People having their equipment seized without any charges pressed? The insignificant number of convictions? Jason ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Oct 94 07:18:00 PDT From: Tim Gorman Subject: Re: MCI Employee Charged in $50 Million Calling Card Fraud TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > traffic???? At what point are certain publishers/editors on the > Internet going to wake up? Computer crime is growing expotentially. > I think it is time to have another massive crackdown, similar to > Operation Sun Devil a few years ago. Let's start getting really > tough on hackers and phreaks. While I am very, very disappointed that a fellow telecommunications employee would stoop to such crime, I must also point out that the problem here is not the amount of crime but the amount of this individual crime. Any response to this type of crime should be tempered by this realization. Tim Gorman tg6124@ping.com ------------------------------ From: phrrngtn@dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk (Paul J. J. Harrington) Subject: Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not? Date: 5 Oct 1994 14:37:13 GMT Organization: University Of St. Andrews sp@questor.org writes: > Why not make all the Usenet newsgroups available on a sub-carrier on > local tv-cable systems? I don't know if it has been done yet, but cable may be a good place to use multicast IP and there is a mechanism for getting Usenet via multicast: Muse (archie for usenix-muse.ps). for more details/objections c.f. endless past discussions on Usenet over radio, teletext, satelite, CD ... Pat wrote: > different called the (lowercase 'i') internet, but it seems to be a > hard concept for many people to grasp. The Internet is one of several > networks cooperating on the internet. The internet is all of us no > matter what site or network (i.e. Fidonet, Bitnet, UUCP -- is it still To which I respectfully say 'Bzzt, wrong answer'. An internet is a network of networks. The Internet is an internet which runs IP. The 'internet' which which you mention is usually called 'The Matrix' (or is that 'the matrix') -- a term coined by John S. Quarterman. Paul Harrington, phrrngtn@dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk +44 334 463261 Division of Computer Science, St Andrews University, Scotland KY16 9SS ------------------------------ From: yves.blondeel@fundp.ac.be (Yves Blondeel) Subject: Re: Usenet Newsgroups on TV Cable - Why Not? Date: Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:27:51 Organization: FUNDP, Namur, Belgium In article sp@questor.org writes: > Why not make all the Usenet newsgroups available on a sub-carrier on > local tv-cable systems? (** extract from responses I got to a related question a week ago **) Continental Cablevision (Cambridge Massachussets) and PSI Cable Internet (Performance Systems International) started providing corporate IP connections via CATV in March 1994. Individual connections to homes will start mid-October. Boston College is working with them to provide the same throughout the campus. The system is in test now and will come online as Project Agora in September 1995. CABLEVISION in New York (City) is working on providing a multimedia front-end for their subscribers that includes Internet as well as online service options such as Compuserve and America On Line, etc ... Yves Blondeel yves.blondeel@fundp.ac.be ------------------------------ From: Steven=Byrne%CFP%BTCE@smtpgate.dotc.gov.au Date: Wed, 5 Oct 94 11:09:34 EST Subject: Paper Released on Costing Residential Broadband Networks Pat: I thought TELECOM Digest readers may be interested to hear about the release of some recent work of ours about costing the deployment of residential broadband networks. I would be grateful if you could pass this on to the readers of the Digest. Thanks, Steven Byrne Principal Research Officer Communications Futures Project ____________________________________________________ Australian Communications Futures Project ____________________________________________________ The Communications Futures Project (CFP) has recently released another in its series of Work-in-Progress papers. The paper, reporting on work the CFP has undertaken to examine the cost of deploying residential broadband services in Australia, is now available free in either hard copy form or on-line for anonymous FTP in a variety of formats (see below). A summary of the paper follows: COSTING NEW RESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS CFP Work in Progress Paper No. 5 This paper reports on one aspect of work being undertaken by the Communications Futures Project on likely market and network developments for information services in Australia over the decade from 1995 to 2005 and beyond. It presents the results of an examination of the costs of providing residential information services using a range of delivery platforms. It was foreshadowed in CFP paper DELIVERY TECHNOLOGIES IN THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS WORLD that the CFP would undertake further analysis of the relative costs of providing these services on a range of delivery platforms. This paper reports preliminary results of this analysis. It presents broad estimates of the costs of rolling out various delivery platforms, although much of the discussion in this paper focuses on HFC networks. METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE The approach taken in this paper involves estimating the costs of the various components of each of the platforms. An estimated cost per household was derived for 1994 for each of the platforms identified in the earlier work. That is: wireless platforms * direct broadcasting to the home by satellite (DBS) using digital signals, and * microwave multipoint distribution systems (MDS) cable-based systems * optic fibre systems, particularly hybrid optic fibre - coaxial cable (HFC) systems, and * the asymmetrical digital subscriber line (ADSL) system using existing twisted pair telephone lines. Estimates were made of the likely movements in component costs over time and between different geographic areas. Using a spreadsheet based model cost estimates were then derived for all households in different geographic areas and in Australia in total for each year form 1995 to 2005. This approach is part of a structured modelling approach to costs to be revealed more fully in a subsequent paper. For hard copies, either: write to: Research Manager Communications Futures Project Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics GPO BOX 501 CANBERRA ACT 2601 AUSTRALIA or fax (+61) 6 274 7170 or telephone (+61) 274 6016. or email Steven=Byrne%cfp%btce@smtpgate.dotc.gov.au For on-line versions of the paper, look in the directory 'cfp_documents' on the following anonymous FTP site: happy.dotc.gov.au View the file !index!.txt to see what is available in the CFP directory, and in what formats. Steven Byrne. Communications Futures Project. Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics. Canberra, Australia. Internet: Steven=Byrne%cfp%btce@smtpgate.dotc.gov.au ------------------------------ From: Eric Subject: Re: Telecommuting Law Date: Tue, 4 Oct 94 21:05:58 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) I seriously doubt that even if a federal law mandating telecommuting were to reach the floor, it would be poorly received by all parties, and would readily be voted down. The possibility of incentives being offered would likely be welcome by most parties involved. The social impact of telecommuting will be deep and has far-reaching implications. I have heard mostly environmental arguments for telecommuting, and it seems quite reasonable that even with the resulting increase in power con- sumption from computers & networks, this would be much more efficiently used power. The mammoth task will be to predict the impact on industries that are supported by the business sector. If telecommuting were accepted, and taken to an extreme, which is highly unlikely at present, we could expect to see revenues dropping for oil companies, garment manufacturers, and food franchises. While prices may favor the consumer as demand falls, this would likely be short-lived, and would be offset eventually by layoffs, and a resulting drop in the GNP. This is, of course, a very narrow look at what could be expected, and as I am only an armchair economist, I cannot account for all the factors involved. I DO, however, feel that the social impact would be positive. People do not need the workplace as a means of forcing them to socialize. Given the extra time that telecommuting offers, they would readily seek other, more beneficial forms of socializing. The mere ability for working parents to more easily accomodate the needs of their children, is likely to have a more positive social benefit, by allowing the family unit to function more naturally. I seriously doubt that the effect of removing adults, who are already developed and in no need of further socialization, would outweigh the benefit of having hildren who have received the proper amount of love and attention from their parents, in their formative years. Of course, telecommuting is not a valid alternative to a great majority of occupations, and it is obvious that the benefits of telecommuting would be enjoyed by only a relatively confined portion of society, who, unfortunately, can already considered among the advantaged. So, it's not exactly a social panacea, but it is definitely the direction of things to come. (My apologies for not starting a new thread ... I didn't realize I would have this much to write! Perhaps those who reply would consider starting one, as I have definitely strayed from the point of the initial post. My apologies, again.) Eric Adamson ------------------------------ From: jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu (John E. Lundgren) Subject: Re: Telecommuting Law Date: 03 Oct 1994 18:33:02 -0700 Organization: California Technology Project of The Calif State Univ russell@tekelec.com (Travis Russell) writes: > In article , rwarren@Cayman.COM (Ralph > Warren) says: > Failure to comply to this law will result in fines. I have heard fines > up to $25,000 for non-compliance. Telecommuting is one of the options > that a company in Los Angeles can provide, but is not a requirement. Our college district is subject to a $25,000 fine *per day* for non-compliance. I've heard rumors that we have been fined, but I've nothing on paper. I personally think that telecommuting and higher bandwidths, either by fiber or ADSL, will change the way we work. Right now, we've had to suffer through several years of commuting detours while the I-5, the main thoroughfare thru L.A. and Orange Counties, gets widened and HOV lanes added. I think that I will live to see the same freeway lanes turned into parking lots when people have taken advantage of the telecommuting and other options. (I'm not holding my breath, though.) John Lundgren $$$$$$ jlundgr@eis.calstate.edu $$ jlundgr@ctp.org $$ jlundgre@rsc.rancho.cc.ca.us $$$$$$ Standard Disclaimers apply. $$ Rancho Santiago College - 17th St. at Bristol - Santa Ana, CA 92706 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #387 ****************************