TELECOM Digest Fri, 16 Oct 92 02:33:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 785 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates (Gordon Burditt) Re: Cellular Antennae Extenders (Pat Turner) Re: E-Mail for Michigan Residents (Paul Robinson) Re: Phone Network Simulator (Paul Cook) Re: LEC Repair Disservice (was Happy With MCI) (Henry Mensch) Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations (Marc Unangst) Re: Calling Card Fraud on "48 Hours" (Ron Bean) Re: Another List of Cellular Phone Prices (Laird P. Broadfield) Re: Highway Call Boxes (Laird P. Broadfield) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 09:02:37 GMT > "Home based workers who use their phone lines for business more than > 50% of the time need a business line." > At first glance, this seems to be a pretty reasonable compromise on > class of service billing. How one determines 50% may be open to > discussion, but it beats the attitudes of some companies that want to > bill business rates if you so much as publicise your phone number. The way I read it, they could STILL want you to get a business line if you publicize your phone number. I think this is aimed at people who work at home (or do a lot of overtime work at home) and spend most of the day logged in to the company computer or have lots of telephone conferences with other workers. It just might manage to snag some lonely wife who calls her husband at work a lot and has a home business but never makes any phone calls related to that business. It might also snag some guy who takes a lot of work home with him, receives a USENET feed from UUNET (but he originates the calls) on his personal machine, calls in sick once every month or two, and makes few other calls. If they REALLY wanted to get picky, this could cover some poor guy who receives more telephone solicitation calls than he makes or receives personal calls. They might even be trying to define "a business call is a call which terminates at either end at a business line", which is one way they COULD measure it without listening to the calls. That could cause cascade reclassifications -- if my line has to become business, then people who call me a lot are at risk of being reclassified also. Eventually, there are no residential lines. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ From: turner@rsiatl.UUCP Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 18:36 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Reply-To: turner@dixie.com Subject: Re: Cellular Antennae Extenders Matt McConnell writes: > Do these cordless antennas really work? How so? The principal is sound, basicly one antenna pulls in a lot of the signal due to it's large "effective area" (gain) and transmits through the other antenna outside the car. To get the 3 dB increase that was claimed, the passive repeater would have to radiate a field just as strong at that that was passed through the windows. I have used this technique before with a Diamond X-500 (11.7 dB at UHF) installed upside down inside a steel building linked to a 11 element beam on the roof (13.2 dB gain) with a foot of 1/2" hardline (for low maintainance). It worked like a charm to enable the receptionist in another building to be able to talk with employees inside this one particular building which was partialy underground and had no openings facing the main office. Having said this, I would urge you to read the letters to the editor in the June 1992 issue of {Mobile Radio Technology}. Scott Wilson, a RF engineer and manager of Cellular Technical Support for Murata, tested several passive repeaters with a screen box inside a screen room using a spec-an. He found "barely measurable" emmisions from the passive repeater with the screen box door shut. Mr. Wilson does say that many people report improved results with the repeater and that this is the true bottom line. I personaly would prefer a mag mount antenna. While I am distrustful of "Currents of Death" arguments, I don't mind spending 30 dollars and time to change antennas to get a 10 dB or so increase in max. ERP and get the transmitter away from my eyes and brain. A side note on cellular power levels: Since I have a slug for my Bird Wattmeter in the cellular band, I decided to leave it in line to watch power levels as I change locations. At one point I was just uphill of a cellular site in TN and my phone was transmitting with three watts. As someone (Greg Youngblood?) mentioned aparentally some RSA's do not back off on power levels. Who was I calling? MCI, to report a 4W leased line had 78 dBrnco of noise. They tried to find the problem, but I couldn't even hear their feeble attempts to loop the line. I offered to do a tip tip - ring ring hard loopback and their tech got all kinds of crazy results. As the day warmed up the problem "was fixed". MCI's response was that the tech wasn't working the DAC right, and that they couldn't find any problems now. At one point I measured +1.5 dBm with a 3 KHz flat filter. MCI wasn't interested as they only spec C msg noise :-) The problem, of course, was the LEC's OSP not MCI, but they are the ones we have to deal with. I'll just have to wait until next time it happens and try my luck with the LEC, as I have since gotten the number for the serving CO toll test board. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:58:01 EDT Subject: Re: E-Mail For Michigan Residents On Sun 11 Oct 1992 02:07:11 GMT, Damon A. Koronakos (Damon@sunburn. stanford.edu) writes: > A friend of mine in Kalamzoo [Michigan] recently got an > IBM-compatible machine. I would like to be able to exchange > electronic mail with him ... See if he can find a local BBS in the area on Fidonet, which has a matrix area. If it does, he can use the matrix area to send a message to the local server which provides internet access for that fidonet region. If you are not sure, send a message to me on Fidonet and I'll find out who is in your area. My address is: Paul.Robinson@f417.n109.z1.fidonet.org Fidonet addresses are in the form z:f/n, for example, the BBS I use is 1:109/417 in the Washington DC area. (You can see how it matches up.) Zone 1 is North America. Other zones are for other parts of the world or for non-Fido networks. Fidonet is claimed as "fully integrated" which means anyone on Fido has an internet address. Whether the local sysop allows internet mail to reach them is another matter. Whether that sysop allows them to send internet mail is yet another. I've used all three types of Fidonet systems: no internet mail, incoming only and full e-mail. The other possibility are the pay networks. AT&T Mail has a lousy interface, a poor method of transferring messages, doesn't support Kermit or Zmodem, but only charges $3 a month for a mailbox. MCI Mail is probably the "premier" E-Mail service, and it has several options: Pay $36 a year and get an E-mail and telex address with no message unit charge, pay $10 a month and get the first 40 message units, or pay $25 a month and get the first 250 message units, plus you can add up to five additional mailboxes for $5 a month each to this account. I have studied my account on MCI often enough that I decided to change to the $10 a month plan since I'm not sending that many units, but I'm paying more than $10 a month in usage because of the number of messages I do send. MCI Mail includes telex send AND RECEIVE (which AT&T charges $25 a month to obtain) otherwise both are about the same pricing structure. Mr. Koronakos also says: > I don't know if Prodigy/Compuserve-type service provide email access > to the net, how much extra (if any) this costs, etc. Compu$erve does provide internet access but their rates are at least $12.50 an hour to send or receive messages, and I believe they also charge for messages sent. On the other hand Compuserve is offering a $7.50 a month special access plan which allows a certain number of messages sent per month. It was announced in this month's {Computer Shopper} that Prodigy is bowing to repeated demands of its customers that it will offer a gateway to Internet, first for customers using IBM computers, and next for Macintosh users. But a gateway cuts both ways. I wonder what happens when someone figures out how to have the ALT.SEX newsgroup sent to them as mail. (At this time, you can't, to the relief of a lot of people. :) ) Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone, nobody else is (stupid enough to be) responsible for them. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 18:16 GMT From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Phone Network Simulator andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes: > I want to test a modem's network interface without connecting to a > live telephone network. I've heard that there are devices with > several RJ-11 jacks that simulate network interfaces, but I don't know > where to look for them. Can you give me pointers to such devices? Sorry to blow our own horn again, but my employer now makes THREE different telephone demonstrators that realistically simulate telephone lines per Bellcore specs for North American signalling. The 49250 Phone Demo II simulates two lines, and handles tone dialing only. It has real dial tone, ringback tone, and ringing, and you just go off hook on one jack, dial any seven-digit phone number (or #) and it rings the other line. The price is $259.95, FOB Redmond, WA. The next one is the 49200 Telephone Demonstrator. It sells for $475.00, has four lines (each with its own two-digit phone number), handles both pulse and tone dialing, and is the one used in displays at many AT&T phone stores. Our new one is the 49300 Centrex Demo. It sells for $685.00, simulates four lines, has Caller ID (with number only) and can be programmed for any seven or ten digit phone numbers, and to simulate standard Centrex features in either a 5ESS or DMS environment. It can be programmed with a telephone, but due to the large number of programmable options, menu driven programming software (including serial cable) is available for $49.00. Contact Proctor & Associates at any of the addresses (internet, USPS, fax, etc) below for more information. Paul Cook 206-881-7000 Proctor & Associates MCI Mail 399-1080 15050 NE 36th St. fax: 206-885-3282 Redmond, WA 98052-5317 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 11:44:00 -0700 Subject: Re: LEC Repair Disservice (was Happy With MCI) Reply-To: henry@ads.com sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) wrote: > The specific problem: on calls to invalid numbers, the recording was > quite garbled. What the CSR at Ohio Bell thought the problem was: > 1) Are you sure it's not in your equipment? > 2) It's probably a problem with your long-distance company. > I honestly don't know how some people get jobs in the telecom industry. Ditto. I inquired about leased-line service to my home and gave up in disgust. I imagine there is some Pac*Bell trademark word that I could use which will make their eyes light up, but no joy was to be had that day ... henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / ------------------------------ From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) Subject: Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 03:08:36 GMT Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI In article Joseph.Bergstein@p501. f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) writes: [Tale describing the 911 dispatcher improperly interpreting the ANI information and dispatching the ambulance to the wrong address, due to the PBX configuration being used.] Ham radio operators frequently run into this when making a call to the police or the 911 dispatcher through a repeater autopatch. Usually, the ham making the call will be nowhere near the actual termination point of the line, since they're calling through a radio link. I've heard many stories of police/fire department/EMS showing up at an antenna tower or a mountaintop repeater site because that's where the ANI said the call originated from. If you know, or suspect, that you will be connected to a E911 dispatcher who has ANI info for the number you're calling from, but you aren't at the physical termination point of that number, it's usually a good idea to explicitly tell the dispatcher that the ANI info is wrong and that you're really at location. Hams also find it useful to tell the dispatcher that they are calling over a radio link, to impress upon them that the link is half-duplex and that they must say "over" or "go ahead" when they're finished speaking. Unfortunately, some E911 dispatchers will ignore both these items and dispatch to the wrong location anyway, but at least you tried. Marc Unangst, N8VRH mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ From: norvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod@uunet.UU.NET (Ron Bean) Subject: Re: Calling Card Fraud on "48 Hours" Organization: ARP Software Date: Thu, 15 May 1992 10:03:51 GMT polk@girtab.usc.edu (Corinna Polk) writes: > The CBS show "48 Hours" ran a show last week on scams and their lead > story was on calling card fraud and how prevalent it was in bus and > train stations, and in airports. They had a camera hidden on a bank of > phones and had a reporter go in to use a phone and gave the operator > her calling card number vocally. It was unreal to see all the people > who leaned in towards her as she began to recite the digits. Maybe we should have cards that just play the DTMF digits into the phone, like those electronic Christmas cards that play music. They could be programmed electronically, or maybe by punching holes in the card to break wires inside. Then you'd just have to worry about people with tape recorders and parabolic micrphones ... You could also have your business card play your 800 number, or give one to your kid that plays your home phone number (like the gadget that was described here recently). Humorous Christmas card anecdote: A few years ago a woman I worked with got one and the switch inside broke and it wouldn't stop playing. They finally stuffed it under a sofa cushion so they wouldn't have to listen to it. I heard this story on a Monday, and it had been playing all weekend! (Imagine flipping through your rolodex and some guy's card starts beeping at you ...) zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: Another List of Cellular Phone Prices Date: 15 Oct 92 20:55:26 GMT In FZC@CU.NIH.GOV writes: > Three cellular phone offers appear in Luskin's {Washington Post} ad, > October 9: > Motorola "tote" Cellular Phone, "Transportable from car-to-car, > Antenna & Cigarette Lighter, Full 3 watts, No Installation Required, > Certain Cellular Telephone Company Restriction may apply." $0.01 > (That is correct, one cent.) > [Moderator's Note: I think that was a typographical error and meant to > say 'cigarette lighter adapter plug', ie. you can charge or operate > the phone from the car battery. Even though those two you mentioned > did not include a cellular company contract in them, are you certain > that somewhere in small print it was not otherwise mentioned in the > ad? PAT] As the Moderator says, I'm sure these include a contract, but the question is: "what is the minimum dollar value of the contract, i.e. if you bought one, and never used it, what would you pay by the end of the no-cancel period?" Or, at least, that's the key question for those of us in Kalifornia, where the PUC has decided we're not smart enough to understand such arrangements, and must therefore pay $300 or so for that same bag phone. (And higher cell rates, too, but that's a function of everyone and their nine-year-old having a cellphone.) Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes Date: 15 Oct 92 21:03:07 GMT In hwc@louis.pei.com (Hon Wah Chin) writes: > I used one last Monday on 101 in Menlo Park. It automatically called > CHP. I described my location and they read back the ID number painted > on a sign next to the phone, so I don't know whether they had the ID > transmitted or from my location description. The most interesting > thing is that the hanger for the handset (with noise canceling mike) > did not appear to move for off-hook indication. I wasn't in a mood to > investigate further but hypothesized some kind of magnetic sensor to > activate an internal switch. Um, wait a minute. Admittedly, these could be different manufacturers, but here's what I recall from my one use: When I opened the door, there was a handset hanging in a dead hook (as Chin said) but there was also a big flashing button that said "Press Me" or some such. When I pressed it, the instrument made DTMF noises, waited through some clicks (connection now established?) and then (perhaps in response to the other end?) made *more* DTMFs (*not* seven digits, as I recall). My guess was that the second set was after a connection had been made to CalTrans, but before a human was on, and it identified the instrument. Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #785 ******************************