TELECOM Digest Fri, 13 Jan 95 01:41:30 CST Volume 15 : Issue 30 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die! (John Leong) COCOTS in Jail (Wm. Randolph U. Franklin) Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Stephen O. Pace) Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? (John R. Covert) Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? (Wally Ritchie) Re: Microwave-Data Problem (Wally Ritchie) Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now? (Wally Ritchie) Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID (Jonathan Bradshaw) Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (Jan Mandel) Re: Cellular NAM and ESN (John R. Covert) Re: Multiple ESN's per NAM (John R. Covert) Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers (Robert Hall) Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers (Jeffrey Bhavnanie) Need Recommendation For Long Range Cordless Phone (John Akapo) Data Over CB? (Michael Libes) Computers and VCR's (Anthony Hologounis) Biographies on Line (TELECOM Digest Editor) 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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. 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: John Leong Subject: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die! Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 17:54:21 -0500 Organization: Comp Svcs Directors, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA If there are any Canadian readers out there, particularly in B.C., I would really appreciate some help .... Recently, I bought a little piece of land in Francois Lake (nearest town: Burns Lake in Northern B.C. Nice place. Contemplating of may be spending some times out there. When I inquired about hooking up telephone service, it was suggested that I should look at putting in 3 lines - one for phone, one for fax and one for other services. Hmmm ...? "Gee, what about ISDN?" "Son, this is the land for real man. Real man don't believe in those whimpy digital stuff ... and by the way, you will also be privileged to join a rare group of Canadians that still enjoy the pleasure of a party line shared with 4 very nice neighbours ... all with teen age kids that simply love telephones!" O.K. ... I lied ... they never said any of the above except for the strange suggestion of three lines. But the bottom line is that the only service I can get is an ancient shared party. Most of the people out there, including my brother-in-law, are loggers. However, some of these lumberjacks are amazingly well in touched with the computing world and quite a number of them have serious home machines. My brother-in-law has a 486 Toshiba lap top and he has also recently got himself a P90 desktop too. Yup, he know all about PCI bus, high performance graphic accelerators, OS/2, NT ... and even "Bob". Learned all that in between cutting down tress and digging ditched. They certainly has also heard about the Internetnet and are real eager to get on it ... but on a party line? This really raises the issue of universal access for the Internet, Information Superhighway or what have you ... if there is not even universal service for decent basic phone services to run your boring modems. In the U.S., I would try to beat up on the phone company and also gripe to the PUC who takes care of consumer interest. Is there an equivalent to PUC in Canada (particularly in B.C.) other than the CRTC? Any information and suggestions would be most appreciated. Regards, John leong Technical Director, Computing Services Carnegie Mellon University [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way I always heard it back in my CB radio days was that real men knew how to peak their radios ... and now they tell me real men (where PC's are concerned) know how to read and write direct in machine language ... no need for compilers, etc. :) I don't know what the law is about this in Canada, but if you were here in the USA you would be in a bit of a bind since our telecom laws forbid hooking *any kind* of peripheral equipment -- even an answering machine or an extension phone *you own* -- to a party line. The thinking is if your device goes out of order, the other parties may be inconvenienced by the interuption in service. In fact I think instances of party line service in the USA, where it still remains, is one of the few exceptions to the rule of telco not owning any customer premises equipment any longer. In the case of party lines, telco still owns the instruments and the wiring, and repairs it without charge as needed. This is because telco could get hassled if one of the other parties goes without service as a result of your problem. There are not too many instances where telco kept control of premises equipment; I think party lines are one instance and apartment/office building front door entry service (the kind that is a sort of hybrid centrex, with the subscriber's common equipment in the central office, and some of telco's stuff on the customer premises) is the other exception. I know existing front door entry service was grandfathered. Even though telco can't sell it any longer they have to maintain the subscribers who have it. I don't think telcos in the USA can take on new party line customers either; they just have to sit and wait patiently to get rid of the ones they have had all along. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) Subject: COCOTS in Jail Date: 12 Jan 1995 22:52:51 GMT Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA Reply-To: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) (Continuing to report telecom-related numbers from the newspapers) ... Some long time ago there was a discussion about how prisoners in jails were often ripped off by being forced to use COCOTS. Our local paper recently had some interesting numbers on this for a local jail. The COCOTS are run by AT&T. There are 800 jail cells, and the county received $180K in commissions last year, or over $200 per cell. That's just the kickback to the county, not the total profit. Also, since this is AT&T, things might be better for the prisoners than if, say, *nt*gr*t*l had been running the phones, tho maybe not if AT&T had to bid for this. Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting that AT&T has their COCOTS in jails because as a rule they are not interested in the corrections industry business where regular long distance is concerned. They were more than happy to pass off the fraud and the grief to Integratel and others like it who don't have much to complain about since they get so much per call (which in turn they blame on high fraud rates they are stuck with, etc). PAT] ------------------------------ From: sewilco@fieldday.mn.org (Scot E. Wilcoxon) Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access Date: 12 Jan 1995 18:08:25 -0600 Organization: FieldDay In article , Gerald Serviss wrote: >> the cell ID as an approximate location of the caller. In metro areas > Let's consider a metro area as the previous poster suggests. In our > most dense operations that I am familiar with the smallest cell radius > is 500 meters. This gives an area of 785,000 meters-square or about > .25 miles-square. If you consider that in a metro area where this > cell would be located is built up and that the average number of > floors covering this area is just say four (source ... PFA) you have > one square mile of area that this caller could be located in. Even if .25 miles square is about 2 to 4 square blocks (depending on the size of your city blocks). That's a better location than "unknown", and it does not take long for a car to check streets for trouble. The built up area is only a problem for finding the caller, and does not complicate call routing much as most dispatch and patrol areas are not sensitive to altitude. > In a suburban setting where there are lots of jurisdictions and cell > placement and thus coverage is dictated by traffic patterns there are > just as many problems. The use of the strongest signal is no guarantee > of routing the call correctly, especially if you are in a building. No guarantee is necessary. In an emergency, "close" is better than "none". And neighboring jurisdictions often do have radio links, and should have telephone links (if a central site is going to direct 911 calls, they'll at least all be connected to the central site, so it's just too bad if that's not a switching center which can interconnect the region). > I think that the FCC exemption is based on good engineering and the > realization that today we do not have the capability to locate the > caller easily, if at all. Yes, the FCC does properly recognize the engineering problems. I recognize the problems in a 911 operator trying to help someone when all they hear is the sounds of a fight or shooting. I recognize the problems in having to ask the State Patrol operator to connect me to the city police (which they do routinely and quickly) while four large enforcers for the drug house across the street are getting out of their car five hundred feet down the sidewalk from me. [ Just then the squad car responding to my unrelated call came around the corner :-] Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org +1 612 936 0118 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 19:54:19 +0600 From: pace@shell.com (Stephen O. Pace) Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access Organization: Shell Oil Company In serviss@tazdevil.cig.mot.com (Gerald Serviss) writes: > In theory, 911 access for cell phones is a good idea. The problem is > reducing that theory to practice. I was watching the news last night, and apparently Houston just turned on cellular 911. At one point, the camera was pointed behind the operator's screen, and you could see that she received quite a bit of information about the caller, including cell-phone number, name and address of phone owner, carrier (GTE or Houston Cellular), general location (on a detailed map of Houston), and possibly other things (I didn't record it, otherwise I would have gone back and provided a little more detail). I don't know how accurate the location it returns for you is, but I could probably dig that information out of the {Houston Chronicle} or my cellular carrier if anyone is interested. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 16:07:31 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? jbaker@halcyon.com (James Baker) wrote: > Is there still a technical reason for the two second delay at the > beginning of a phone call? > I understand that some old analog switches could be fooled into > billing the call incorrectly or not at all if certain tones were > present within the first two seconds of ringing. No. There was a deliberate grace period built in to AT&T's toll billing so that you would have enough time to move the receiver from your ear to the set to hang up and not be charged if the call answered during this time. It had nothing to do with "certain tones" and everything to do with not allowing modems to quickly transmit data during the grace period and then disconnect. /john ------------------------------ From: writchie@gate.net Subject: Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? Date: 13 Jan 1995 04:37:50 GMT Reply-To: writchie@gate.net In , stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article , jbaker@halcyon.com (James > Baker) says: >> Is there still a technical reason for the two second delay at the >> beginning of a phone call? >> ... the FCC requirements for auto answer stuff is to wait two seconds after >> ringing before answering the phone (or at leaset before sending any >> signals into the phone wires). > I believe the actual requirement is that there be two seconds of > silence *after answering*. The FCC doesn't care when you answer. One > of the reasons for this is requirement is to prevent a device which > purposely answers the call, exchanges data for 1/2 second or so, then > hangs up right away, which would avoid toll charges in some situations. > A device could be designed to do this repeatedly to transmit an > unlimited amount of data (albiet slowly) without charge. I think that > any modern switch would be immune from this type of fraud. Silence is NOT a requirement of Part 68. The exchange of user data is the issue. Modems are free to transmit immediately upon answering for the purpose of indicating modes, training adapter equalizers, etc. With modern modems like V.32 and V.34 this process takes more than the two second billing protection delay so this is a non-issue. Wally Ritchie Ft. Lauderdale, Florida ------------------------------ From: writchie@gate.net Subject: Re: Microwave-Data Problem Date: 13 Jan 1995 05:00:07 GMT Reply-To: writchie@gate.net In , Doug H. Kerr writes: > I'm having a problem here at our college with a remote site which I > connect via microwave. We have two NEC 2400 connected and also use a > data channel off the T-1 for our router which connects our lans. I > have not had any problems with my telephones but the lan has had > severe problems. Here lies the problem: the data people say it's the > microwave or T-1. I run a data channel also that is used for a CCIS link > between switches and have no problems with this so I assume it is not > in the micro or T-1. How can you prove the origin of the problem, or > monitor the system without the high cost test equipment? You have two ways to fix things. Open Loop and Closed Loop. With Open loop you try a bunch of things until the problem is fixed. You may not know why but it gets fixed. (BELL calls this FM for (F*&54king Magic). In Closed Loop you measure things with test equipment to find out whats wrong and then you fix it. Proper closed loop solution is to test the bit-error rate on the T1 link and prove that it is low. You cannot imply that because the switch uses the data link with success that all is ok. First the data traffic is likely to be very low on this link and second the error recovery procedures are very robust so you won't know of the problem unless you can see the actual error counts on this link. LAN protocols, particularly IP, assume very low error rates with recovery at the relatively high level of TCP. Speech is very tolerant of relatively high bit errors rates so this also proves nothing about the quality of the link. Open loop solution is assume that the Microwave is OK on blind faith. Most likely you have a timing problem, quite possibly frame slips between the two PBX's. How is the data channel delivered to the data users? How is each PBX timed? What other T1 connections to other Networks are involved? Reliable transmission requires that both PBX's derive their timing from the same source. The data equipment should be clocked from the common timing. Wally Ritchie Ft. Lauderdale, Florida úÿ ------------------------------ From: writchie@gate.net Subject: Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now? Date: 13 Jan 1995 05:23:10 GMT Reply-To: writchie@gate.net In , David Gingold writes: > Can anyone tell me what ever happened to the PicturePhone II phones > manufactured by AT&T in the '70's? I have heard a rumor that these > phones might have been given to Ameritech as part of the breakup, but > I have know idea where to start looking. Remember the warehouse in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" which was supposed to be where the Government stored useful things for safe keeping. Well that was actually AT&T's White Elephant Warehouse where they keep 7300 PC's, PicturePhones, and other such things :) One of the nice things about being a Monopoly with rate of return regulation is that the more money you waste the higher your rate base and the more money you make. AT&T's success was due less to the invention of the telephone as to the the invention of the Triad of BellLabs, Western Electric, and Operating Companies. The purpose of BellLabs was to burn money. This money was reflected in the price of WE equipment sold to Operating Companies. The greater the cost of the equipment, the greater allowed return on investment. AT&T, of course, is now much closer to a real company. Bellcore, however, serves a function for the RBOC's similar to the old scheme. Instead of just burning money, however, Bellcore concentrates on positioning the operating companies for doing things that they are legally barred from doing today. Wally Ritchie Ft. Lauderdale, Florida ------------------------------ From: Jonathan@IQuest.Net (Jonathan Bradshaw) Subject: Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID Organization: IQuest Network Services Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 01:02:12 GMT In article , glnfoote@freenet.columbus.oh.us asks: > Can someone explain IF, not why, full telephone numbers of people > calling 800 numbers are shown (either on the bill, or as part of the > call) to those who OWN the 800 numbers? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer is yes. People who have 800 > numbers receive the ANI -- not the Caller-ID, I get Caller ID NOT ANI through my 800 number depending on the origination. From Indianapolis, I know I get full Caller ID from South Bend and Bloomington, IN where I have tested it. This shows up as the NAME and Number (so its NOT ANI) but if the caller dials me directly, I see "OUT OF AREA". I don't know how far this extends but it does seem to be quite extensive in Indiana. Somehow One Call is picking up and transferring the CID data along with the call. Jonathan Bradshaw | Packet mail: N9OXE@N0ARY | Internet: Jonathan@IQuest.Net PGP KEY AVAILABLE | ESD Administrator, Boehringer Mannheim, Indianapolis, IN [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think however we can correctly answer the original query by stating that yes indeed, the persons who own 800 numbers do get identifying data on all or almost all calls they receive. If there is some reason they want to make an issue out of it, they nearly always can backtrack to the source of the call. I think that is what our original writer was asking about. PAT] ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California Date: 13 Jan 1995 02:33:58 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) (Re rate analomies in California on intrastate/interstate calls). That could change since the FCC is considering allowing LEC to get back into the LD business. Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS Home of GBBS/LLUCE support (909) 359-5338 12/24/14.4 V32/V42bis ------------------------------ From: jmandel@carbon.cudenver.edu (Jan Mandel) Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly Date: 12 Jan 1995 19:51:13 -0700 Organization: University of Colorado at Denver Paul Beker (pbeker@netcom.com) wrote: > wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) writes: > Yep ... several years ago every single pay phone in that airport was a > *real* Southern Bell phone. Since then, the politicians and others > (ever heard of the Atlanta Airport scandals / fiascos?) have gotten > involved and now you will find a wide variety of worthless COCOTs > scattered throughout the airport. Funny thing ... in the slang of numerous East-European languages COCOT is slang vulgar term for the male sex organ. How fitting. Jan Mandel, Center for Computational Math, University of Colorado at Denver jmandel@colorado.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:26:18 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Cellular NAM and ESN Alan Shen wrote: > Call your cellular carrier about this. Some will allow you to have one > NAM for two different phones (with different ESN numbers) for an extra > charge usually from about $5-$8 a month. Absolutely not! This is a violation of the cellular standard and forbidden by the FCC. No carrier may permit it. It will not work correctly; if both phones are on at the same time it may interfere with calls to other subscribers. /john ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:36:46 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: Multiple ESN's per NAM dsc3cjc@imc220.med.navy.mil (Chris J. Cartwright - ELF) wrote: > - Two ESN's on one NAM $17.95/mo + reg. service price; > - Three ESN's on one NAM 29.95/mo + reg. service price; I don't believe it. They must mean multiple MIN's on each NAM. /john ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 13:57:22 HKT From: Mr Robert Hall Subject: Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers In response to Paul A. Lee's message requesting information about the numbering change in Hong Kong, here is an extract from a document published by Hongkong Telecom: What is '2' Day? The growth of the telecommuncations services in Hong Kong has led to an increase in the demand for numbers. To meet Hong Kong's needs into the 21st century, the telecommunications regulatory authority, OFTA, hasannounced a new numbering plan that will make more numbers available. From January 1, 1995, all seven-digit business and residential phone and fax numbers will undergo a very simple change: they will be prefixed with the digit '2' - hence the name '2' Day. How '2' Day Affects you: Residential and business seven-digit phone and fax numbers will be changed by adding a '2' to the existing number. Apart from this, the original number will remain unchanged. Our number, for example, which is 888-2888 will become 2888 2888. Pager customers: There are plans to change pager numbers at a later date. OFTA has not yet finalised its plans in this area and customers will be informed of the exact date in advance. Mobile customers: Mobile numbers will remain unchanged. Citiwide Citinet numbers that currently begin with 922X XXXX will become 292X XXXX and those dataline numbers beginning with 938X XXXX will become 293X XXXX. Emergency services and enquiry hoteline numbers such as 999, 1081, 1083 and 109 will remain unchanged. ------------- Typist note: there is a three month grace period during which anyone not adding the '2' prefix will be connected. After that time, there will be a recorded message played to the caller. Also, all Value Added Network (VAN) operators have had their numbers changed from the traditional seven-digit numbers to eight digit numbers beginning with 3XXX XXXX. This applies to numbers such as the CompuServe access number, my Internet service provider and BBSes. Let me know if you have any questions. Rob Hall Hong Kong ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 13:06:29 HKT From: Jeffrey Bhavnanie Subject: Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers From the 1st of January 1995, All phone numbers in Hong Kong, Kowloon, New Territories and the outlying areas will be changed from the current seven digits to eight digits with the number '2' added in front. (eg) Old Number : 555-5555 New Number : 2555-5555 ->Jeff ------------------------------ From: akapo@akapo.com (John Akapo) Subject: Need Recommendation For Long Range Cordless Phone Date: 12 Jan 1995 15:09:52 -0800 Organization: CCnet Communications (510-988-7140 guest) I'm looking for a cordless phone with a range of up to two miles or more. Could someone please recommend some. I seem to remember that Uniden used to sell one of these; do they still? JoHn Akapo akapo@akapo.com ------------------------------ From: sharpen@chinook.halcyon.com (Sharpened Software) Subject: Data Over CB? Date: 13 Jan 1995 02:58:49 GMT Organization: Sharpened Software Inc. Are there any FCC regs concerning the type of information broadcast over the "Citizen's Band?" In short, can I send data over CB? Michael Libes Sharpened Software Inc sharpen@halcyon.com Seattle, WA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First off, you may not 'broadcast' over CB. The Crazy Band is intended, by FCC regulations for *two-way* personal communications. 'Broadcast' by definition is a one-way transmission intended specifically in a non-personal way for a large number of listeners. Is another site going to be responding to you in kind, with data back to you? Anyway, I think all this is very academic. Good luck if you want to try it. I presume the place you are broadcasting -- ooops!, communicating with is not more than 75-100 yards away. More than that and some Good Buddy will walk all over you. Its bad enough when two persons in actual voice communication have to ask each other to repeat themselves over and over because some local yokels are running way over the legal power limit. (So then you run extra power in order to get past the interference and he cranks his up a little more, etc.) Here in the Chicago area there are times and places the CB/eleven meter airwaves are solid heterodyne as the guys try to shove each other off the air. In the Crazy Band, no matter how loud your radio is; no matter how much power you put out or how well you are modulated, there is always someone out there whose radio is louder and has more power. They'll be glad to demonstrate it, you don't have to take their word for it. Just ask; they'll turn on their linear amplifiers and their reverberation units wired in series with their power microphones and Break rake rake rake rake for a Radio Check heck heck heck heck heck heck, and tell two old ladies with little handheld units seventy five miles away to 'back it down out there and give someone else a crack at it ..." :) I'd love to see the data before you send it, and after the other end gets it ... if it gets there at all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: holo@PrimeNet.Com (Anthony Hologounis) Subject: Computers and VCRs Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 20:13:25 MST Organization: Primenet Looking for information: I install media retrieval systems in schools. There is a centrally located rack with vcr's and laser disks,the teachers are able to access these from the phone. Up till now this has been pretty slick. Well now, what with each classroom having at least one computer which is part of the campus network I was wondering what equipment is available to tie my media system into the network. This way the teacher can access the vcr, laser from his/her pc. Now that would be slick. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Biographies on Line Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 01:35:00 CST Don't forget that the Telecom Archives now has a special section for the biographical data supplied by participating readers. This section is not open to the general net public, and requires access via the Telecom Archives Email Information Service and a password which is provided to each person who supplies information about themselves. You decide what to say; what you want to tell others about your work, your plans, your goals and your life. Once you supply the data and it is installed in the Archives, you get a password and instructions on how to access the bigoraphies of other participants here. You can remove it or modify it as desired. It is strictly non-commercial and deliberatly restricted to give list compilers and junk-mailers a hard time, yet allow folks in the telecom industry to become aqauinted with one another. Send your biography to 'ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu'. I am installing them as fast as they come in (already about a dozen on line since this was announced a couple days ago). PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #30 *****************************