TELECOM Digest Sun, 11 Oct 92 23:21:44 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 772 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Operator -- Live or Memorex? (Lauren Weinstein) Question For Michigan Residents (Damon A. Koronakos) ADPCM Speech Encoder/Decoder IC (Neezam Mohd Bohari) Personal Communications Services: Washington Post Co. (Nigel Allen) Questions About Token Ring Bridge (yyang@access.digex.com) Seeking Information on SS7 Packets (Raum Pattikonda) "Movie On Demand" Service Tested (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (Arnold de Leon) Fiber to the Home (Leonard Erickson) Private PBX Installation (Don Smith) Craig Shergold (Ken Dykes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 11:07 PDT From: lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Operator -- Live or Memorex? Greetings. The first few times, I couldn't put my finger on what was bothering me about the calls. Something had changed when I called the AT&T (0-0) operator, possibly sometime within the last couple of weeks. After a few more calls I realized what seemed odd. Operators were answering with "This is (name) with AT&T -- how may I help you?" But the pause between the first and second phrases was often a wee bit too short -- like an audio edit that had been made a little too tightly. And listening carefully, I realized that the volume level between the opening phrases and my conversation with the operators sometimes varied just a litte. That was it -- the opening phrases were recorded! Apparently the ID and "how may I help you" were (presumably digitally) recorded separately, and were being played back in sequence, with the operator actually cut in and listening at the end of the second phrase. When I asked a couple of operators about this, they immediately confirmed that the intros were recorded. They said that this was being done to give them a bit more rest time between calls. This makes sense--it allows the operators to rest their voices a little while not delaying the handling of any calls. It doesn't actually increase call capacity (since the operator position must be free before the recordings are played, since the caller must already be attached to that position before the playback). Another benefit of the system is that it assures a uniform answering message from each operator which includes their name. So, the next time you call your 0-0 operator, listen carefully. Is the greeting live, or is it ...? --Lauren-- [Moderator's Note: Actually this is not new. Illinois Bell operators have used these recorded greetings for a few years now. In many cases they do not have to speak at all as in the case of a call to DA where the recording greets the caller, the caller gives his request and the operator merely types it in, then the computer announces the number the operator selected from the listings. I thought AT&T had been using this for quite awhile also, although not with a standard response in the system. (It was up to each operator to record what they wanted to say there.) PAT] ------------------------------ From: damon@sunburn.stanford.edu (Damon A. Koronakos) Subject: Question For Michigan Residents Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University. Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:07:11 GMT Hi Michigan hackers out there.. A friend of mine in Kalamazoo recently got an IBM-compatible machine. I would like to be able to exchange electronic mail with him if possible. Does anyone have any suggestions about how I might establish net access for him? Is there something like netcom.com in the Bay Area in the Kalamazoo area (a cheap service which provides net access)? I don't know if Prodigy/Compuserve-type services provide email access to the net, how much extra (if any) this costs, etc. Any suggestions much appreciated!! (pls send replies to damon@cs.stanford.edu). Damon Koronakos baa-clone@cs.stanford.edu ------------------------------ From: neezam@seas.gwu.edu (Neezam Mohd Bohari) Subject: ADPCM Speech Encoder/Decoder IC Organization: George Washington University Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:58:30 GMT I am looking for an ADPCM Speech Encoder/Decoder I.C in small quantity (two or three pieces). This IC is basically compresses the toll quality voice signal (like in telephone line) and decompresses later on. The input signal is serial digital PCM data stream from Compander I.C and it generates the compressed bytes in parallel, so you can feed it to PC bus etc, and vice versa. So far, I had came across with NEC Electronics product ic # uPD7730 (old version and its production is discontinued). # uPD77C30 new version, but currently not available, even for sampling (as far US regions is concerns). The best I can do is to place an order and wait the next 16 weeks, which is something I can't stand for. If any of you out there know where-how I can get this I.C. please inform me as soon as possible, or had some extras or spare regardless the old version or new one I AM WILLING to buy from you (please consider a gift anyway). Those folks who know any cross-product for this IC PLEASE help me. e-mail neezam@seas.gwu.edu phone : (202) 296-9577 Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Personal Communications Services: Washington Post Co. Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 23:43:02 EDT Here is a press release from the Washington Post Co. and American Personal Communications. Washington Post Co. Receives FCC 'Tentative Pioneer Preference' for Personal Communications Services Contact: Guyon Knight of the Washington Post Co., 202-334-6642, or Albert Grimes, 410-825-4221, or W. Scott Schelle, 202-296-0005, both of American Personal Communications WASHINGTON, Oct. 8 -- The Washington Post Co. announced today that its affiliated limited partnership, American Personal Communications (APC), has received from the Federal Communications Commission a tentative pioneer's preference for Personal Communications Services. This preference, if finalized, will give APC one of two or more licenses for a market area yet to be defined by the FCC. APC had applied for a pioneer's preference for the PCS licensing area encompassing the Washington/Baltimore markets. The pioneer's preference decision today will be subject to further comment, and a final decision on the preference grants will be made at the time PCS services are authorized by the FCC, a step expected to occur in the first half of next year. APC is a partnership of The Washington Post Co. and principals of Schelle Cellular Group, Inc. Since November 1991, APC has been operating personal communications systems in Washington, D.C., northern Virginia, and the Baltimore region under an experimental license authorized by the FCC in February 1990. Wayne Schelle, chairman of APC, said: "Personal Communications Systems will be one of the major international growth industries of the 1990s. The FCC's actions represent a significant step in enabling American manufacturing and service companies to be major factors in the new business. We're delighted we have been able to participate in this industry from its inception." Martin Cohen, vice president of The Washington Post Co., said: "This tentative award from the FCC reflects the creative and thorough work done by the APC staff, especially in the area of technological innovation. Market and field testing, which are ongoing, also are contributing greatly to the advancement of the process." Personal communications services embrace a range of wireless telephony products that will be relatively inexpensive, small in size and that will provide a range of voice and data services. They immediately will use digital technology, which permits clearer conversation with less interruption and more privacy than traditional radio phones. Alan Spoon, chief operating officer of The Washington Post Co., said he was very pleased and excited by the tentative pioneer preference award, but cautioned that the FCC's rule-making process still must be completed in a timely manner to permit the new industry to roll out. ------------------------------ From: yyang@access.digex.com (yyang) Subject: Questions About Token Ring Bridge Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 03:51:17 GMT I have some problems bridging two IBM token rings together. We have two token ring network running at two different buildings. We try to use fiber optic cable to bridge them together. The problem is the cable come out of the LAM on both side is T1 type. Is there a device that converts it into fiber optic? We have AS/400 and PCs on both rings. What kind of hardware and software do we need to do the bridge? I'm not very familiar with bridge and router. Are there any books and technical references that discuss in details about bridge hardware products as well as software protocals? ------------------------------ From: raum@isoa3.ba.ttu.edu (Raum Pattikonda) Subject: Seeking Information on SS7 Packets Organization: Texas Tech University Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 18:36:50 GMT I am not very familier with SS7 protocols. I would like to know if the SS7 packets contain the calling card number information for the calls made using the calling card. Can someone also please sugest a good book on SS7. Thanks in advance. Raum Pattikonda Internet: raum@isoa3.ba.ttu.edu Dept. of Computer Science Texas Tech University ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 21:42:05 EDT Subject: "Movie On Demand" Service Tested (Washington Post Business Digest, October 9, 1992, Page F2) Three communications giants launched a $10 million, 18-month test south of Denver that may determine the future of home movie viewing. Spokesmen for AT&T, Tele-Communications and US West said to determine what people will watch and how often, 300 Littleton, Colo., residences are being hooked up to one of two services: a "movie-on-demand" service called Take One, or an enhanced pay-per-view service called Hits at Home. ------------------------------ From: arnold@Synopsys.COM (Arnold de Leon) Subject: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface Organization: Synopsys, Inc. Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 06:15:47 GMT I just had a second line installed at our house. Since a second line has never been installed here before PacBell installed a new network interface box for the second line. The house is 39 years old. I had decided to do my own inside wiring. My plan was to simply tie in the second line to the existing wiring on the second pair (yellow and black). When I opened the old network interface I had trouble finding the yellow/black pair. I eventually found the yellow wires connected to a screw connector. There is also a wire running from this connector to the new network interface. The wire does *not* go to any of the connectors used for phones. Is it some sort of ground? Was it used for powering Princess phones? On the old cables I could not find the black wire. Was it standard practice to clip it? Every jack inside that I've opened has it. I haven't checked in the crawl space yet for a junction. I did find one cable at the old network interface that had all four wires (It appears that there are three runs to feed the jacks into the house). It appears to have been a more recent addition. It had the yellow/black wires simply unconnected. I was able to use that to bring the second line into the house. Can I simply take the yellow wire from the other cables and use them for the second line? I am assuming that I can find the black in the sheath. Should/can I ask PacBell to move both my lines to the new network interface box? It's so much easier to work with. The old boxes were obviously from the days when MaBell owned everything. Any general comments? Any recommended reading for someone doing inside phone wiring? Arnold de Leon arnold@synopsys.com NCS Synopsys Inc. (415) 694-4183 700 E. Middlefield Road Mtn. View, CA 94043-4033 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 06:25:45 PST From: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Fiber to the Home In TELECOM Digest V12#763 deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) writes: > Using your 5000 phone lines per (I'm guessing you mean) fiber pair, at > 64kb/s for a phone line, you're talking sending 160Mb/s to each house. > Let's use 155Mb/s, since that's an STS-3 SONET/SDH rate. Anyone know > what an STS-3 FOT is going for these days? I don't have any > up-to-date information (and if I did, I probably wouldn't be allowed > to post it), but I'd guess that $30k/link (both ends) is correct > within an order of magnitude. Even if using ring architectures and > ADMs can drop your costs by a factor of two (unlikely to impossible), > you're talking $15k electronics costs per house. > Even if the cost of overlaying the fiber itself goes to zero, you've > just incurred a $15k per subscriber incremental cost. At a 50,000 > line CO, that's an investment of $750 million dollars. For capacity > which will, basically, sit there until people figure out how to use > it. On the other hand, how *cheap* could a 64kb/s interface be? That's all it'd take to supply a "regular" phone line. And in the quantities involved, I'd expect the cost to drop *fast*. For the sake of argument, call it $50. (I've seen RS-232 to fiber adapters in that range). At this price, the PUC could likely be talked around. And if you need extra capacity, instead of running more lines, you replace the interface box at the user premises. I'm not sure whether the CO end of the fiber would be better served by a box capable of handling a range of line capcities, or by a dedicated box. Either way, at some point, in the course of upgrading, it'll be necessary to "move" the fiber to a different box. While this is not as simple as splicing copper, I doubt that it'd be *that* expensive. The hard part is dealing with the fiber between the user and the exchange. In urban areas, boosters can be avoided. In the suburbs we have a problem. Because I can't see an amplifier that will uniformly handle all the different signals that could be present on a fiber given my scheme above. But I don't really know enough about fiber to know if my feeling is correct on this point. uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson Internet: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 15:17:06 -0400 From: smith@parrot.maya.com (Don Smith) Subject: Private PBX Installation Looking at a Panasonic KXT-1232 Key system that uses the KXT-7000 series phones. We would like to know any advantage/disadvantages of the system. Any recommendations on other Key systems would be welcome. Send E-mail to smith@maya.com Thanks, Don Smith ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 17:21:43 EDT From: ken@Thinkage.On.CA (Ken Dykes) Subject: Craig Shergold Modem tax? did someone say modem tax? :-) -ken, thinkage ltd. >From: bscott@isis.cs.du.edu (Ben Scott) >Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny >Subject: Craig Shergold >Date: 3 Oct 92 23:30:02 GMT This just in -- FCC official Craig Shergold has announced new regulations to add a fee to phone lines used for telecommunication, including bulletin boards and public network services. Critics say he is still bitter from a childhood experience during which he was buried underneath several tons of get-well cards, largely due to the well-meaning efforts of computer users all over the world, and this has sparked his current crackdown. Everyone reading this message would be affected by a tax on modem lines! It's vital that we make ourselves heard, and stop this FCC ruling. Please, forward this message to as many bulletin boards and services as you can, and encourage everyone you know to sign petitions against this plan. Send them to Mr. Shergold at the FCC in Washington, DC. (United Wire Services, July 2002) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #772 ******************************