TELECOM Digest Tue, 17 Jan 95 16:15:00 CST Volume 15 : Issue 37 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Japan Earthquakes (Gerald Serviss) Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan - Correction (Andrew Laurence) FAQ or File on LD Providers Wanted (Ron Parker) 206 to 360 Experience (Ron Parker) 900 Providing Advice Sought (ronnie@space.mit.edu) INMARSAT Standard Wanted (Glenn Shirley) Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Paul Havinden) Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Ari Wuolle) Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID (Glenn Foote) Re: 800 Numbers from Overseas (Paul Robinson) Re: SNA Over Token Ring (K. M. Peterson) Re: GSM SIM Implementation (Harri Kinnunen) Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Ben Burch) Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Seymour Dupa) Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Jonathan Mosen) Re: ISDN BRI Lines (Ed Goldgehn) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: serviss@tazdevil.cig.mot.com (Gerald Serviss) Subject: Japan Earthquakes Date: 17 Jan 1995 19:53:52 GMT Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola I just received some information on the effect of the Japan earthquakes on the cellular systems that we have installed. Motorola has analog cellular systems that cover about 90% of the land mass of Japan. This is taken from two different notes: An excerpt from an internal memo from Motorola Corporate: Telephone service is out for most of Kansai (Osaka area) which causes our cellular system to be down in some areas. Regarding Kansai Cellular Telephone (KCT), (Motorola's) system, 16 digital sites and 35 analog sites were down due either to electric power failure or the telephone network. We have had our entire cellular field force, as well as our subcontractor, Daimei, at work around the clock getting the system back into full service. All JSMR infrastructure is confirmed to be working, except we do not have information yet in Kyoto. An excerpt from a man on the scene in Osaka: As you may or may not know by now, there was an earthquake measuring at about 7.2-7.5 on the R scale. Buildings, highways and bridges collapsed. Needless to say this caused a dramatic increase in the call traffic on the KCT system that was running at about 90% capacity. Our apartment was shaken pretty good but we got lucky to escape with no damage, but we did get one heck of a scare when we were rudely awakened at 5:46 am when our bed turned into roller coaster. Almost all public transportation is out-of-service, I am lucky enough to live within walking distance of the MTSO so I am one of the priviledged few who got to work today. The bad news is, if we had MP16s we probably could of handled the load with minimal load shedding. However, we had to rough it with MP10s. The good news is The load has been over 100% of the determined capacity(Using Load line analysis and confirming CPU usage in the upper 90s) for about 12 hours now and the system is doing a great job at shedding load. The percentage of attempts to mobile completions has remained the same even though the total loading has fluctuated greatly. All of these numbers have not been confirmed and are just based on my preliminary analysis. Jerry Serviss Motorola Inc serviss@rtsg.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 13:41:38 -0800 From: laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence) Subject: Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan In comp.dcom.telecom TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > Over 170,000 people have died ... I heard the death toll was 1,700. Andrew Laurence laurence@netcom.com Certified NetWare Administrator (CNA) Oakland, California, USA CD-ROM Networking Consultant Pacific Standard Time (GMT-8) Phone: (510) 547-6647 Pager: (510) 308-1903 Fax: (510) 547-8002 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This error of a extra zero in the total was caught about five minutes after that issue of the Digest was released. You and several others pointed it out as well. Now the count is up to about 1,800. PAT] ------------------------------ From: parker@olympus.net (Ron Parker) Subject: FAQ or File on LD Providers Wanted Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 19:55:28 GMT Organization: Internet for the Olympic Peninsula Is there a FAQ or file anywhere that compares the services and rates of different LD providers? I have been sweet talked into switching to AT&T's Small Business Advantage plan that was to 'provide the best rates possible for the small business'. My costs have gone up by 33% over the flat rate I was paying, my last bill was dated Nov. something and their customer service lines are swamped. I am looking for a better service. TIA, Ron P. ------------------------------ From: parker@olympus.net (Ron Parker) Subject: 206 to 360 Experience Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 20:01:31 GMT Organization: Internet for the Olympic Peninsula I have just gone thru the area code change from 206 to 360. One customer said that when she dialed our new area code she was put into a mailbox in her own company. I was aware that some PBXs would not allow a zero or one middle digit to pass but I never thought of the mailbox problem. How prevelant is this mailbox numbering problem? Ron P. ------------------------------ Subject: 900 Providing Advice Sought Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 14:01:08 EST From: ronnie@space.mit.edu Reply-To: ronnie@space.mit.edu I was hoping someone could tell me the most cost-effective way to set up my own 900 service given the following: 1. It will use touch-tone, menu-driven prompting, with the ability to transfer to a live operator. 2. I am technically knowledgable enough to set this up on a PC, and I have sources of voice-mail cards, etc. Is it more cost-effective to do it myself, or can I deal with one of those 900 resellers? If I go the reseller route, can I customize the menus, and set up transferring, etc? I will also probably want to allow people from payphones to call an 800 number and give their CC. Thanks for any help, Ron ------------------------------ From: shirleyg@stanilite.com.au Subject: INMARSAT Standard Wanted Date: 16 Jan 1995 04:05:22 +1100 Organization: Stanilite Electronics Pty. Ltd. Sydney, Australia The subject nearly says it all. I'm after the standard for INMARSAT. I know there are ITU docs that have interface specs to INMARSAT but what is the standard that defines frequencies, air word protocol, call states etc? Also is there anyone out there that knows rough estimates of prices of GSM mobiles. Seems to me Australians are paying about double what everyone else in the world is (and I want to get one next time I'm overseas). Glenn ------------------------------ From: paulh@uk.gdscorp.com (Paul Havinden) Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas Date: 17 Jan 1995 10:53:57 GMT Organization: Graphic Data System Ltd, Cambridge, UK Judith Oppenheimer (producer@pipeline.com) wrote: > The call being completed with the message "this is not a free > call" are being done by Sprint. Since the caller is paying the normal call charges and I assume the 800 owner will be paying their normal rate for the call, does that mean that Sprint are in fact getting paid twice for that call? Paul Havinden Email: Paulh@uk.gdscorp.com Graphic Data Systems Tel: +44 (0)1223 371855 Cambridge,UK Fax: +44 (0)1223 371898 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, it means they are getting paid once, in two parts by two subscribers. One subscriber pays for the overseas call to the USA gateway; the other subscriber pays *what he agreed to pay all along* for a domestic 800 call from the USA gateway to wherever the call is terminated. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ari Wuolle Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 16:51:06 +0200 Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas > Well I just tried it from the UK via British Telecom and got the usual > message "800 numbers from outside the **US** are not free ..." and > then I got the ringing tone, so I guess it works. Didn't stay on the > line to see who answered though! Maybe you should have stayed on line for few seconds longer. I tried to call that Canadian number at home and got: 990-1-800-668-2355 (800-NOT-BELL) {3 seconds silece} {One short US-style ringing tone} Female voice 1 :"Access to the 800 number you have dialed is not free of charge outside the United States. If answered, you will be charged international direct dialing rates for this call. If you do not want to proceed with this call please hang up now." {One normal US-style ringing tone} Female voice 2 : "We are sorry your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check the number and dial again or call your operator for assistance. This is a recording 702-7." {US-style busy tone} This call didn't cost anything. I also tried this again few hours later from a different location. On my first try the line went dead after the first announcement. But when I tried immediately again, I got the same response as I got when I called that number at home. Ari Wuolle E-mail Ari.Wuolle@hut.fi Mail Kolkekannaksentie 10 B 4 Telephone + 358 0 509 2073 02720 ESPOO Cellphone + 358 49 431 140 FINLAND Fax (temporary) + 358 0 428 429 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It probably went dead because at the gateway point -- wherever that is -- after the first announcement the call was re-dialed to be sent to its destination. Most likely there was some error there which caused it to abort at that point. PAT] ------------------------------ From: glnfoote@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Glenn Foote) Subject: Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID Date: 15 Jan 1995 04:08:03 -0500 Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet Jonathan Bradshaw (Jonathan@IQuest.Net) wrote: > 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. > [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] Pat, You are right. That was what I wanted to know. However, this issue is going to raise some interesting questions among that portion of the public which is a little "touchy" about Caller-ID and "privacy". It does seem like the telephone companies are trying to have it both ways ... you pay for Call Blocking and it works, UNLESS someone else has paid for the right to see the numbers of everyone who calls ... Sooner or later I expect some group will bring this matter to court, or at least make a major public relations issue out of it. There WAS a time when those 800 numbers did not have access to the numbers calling them, they had to take "Ma Bell's WORD" on the accuracy of the bill. For that matter, the current practice of providing the ANI to the 800 number is not (to the best of my knowledge) founded in any tariff. On the other hand, those with Call Blocking are PAYING FOR a SPECIFIC service, the right NOT TO HAVE their phone numbers disclosed to those whom they wish to call. Therefore, one could argue that the Telephone Companies are in direct violation of their contract with the customer, that this situation took place with the full knowledge and INTENT of Telephone Company management personnel ... etc.. It will be interesting to see what will happen when (not, I expect if) this challenge takes place ... makes me kind of glad I retired from the Consulting business ... ;-). Glenn L Foote ...... glnfoote@freenet.columbus.oh.us [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They are NOT 'paying for the right to see your phone number'; they are *paying for the phone call*, period. The person or company or whatever paying for a phone call is entitled to know where -- to what telephone number -- the connection was extended. For example, you have a non-published number and you call me collect through the operator. In all probability your number will not be displayed on my Caller-ID box. When I get my bill at the end of the month however your number will be listed there in the long distance portion of the bill saying something like 'From Columbus, OH xxx-xxx-xxxx' and the time of day and number of minutes, etc. Are you suggesting because I get this information I 'paid to get your number'? All I paid for was the phone call, which legally means the call *belongs to me*, and I am entitled to know the uses made of my phone when I am charged for those uses. Any 'contract' with telco regards blocking of ID is governed by tariff. Furthermore, in my phone book where the enhanced custom calling features are explained in detail, it says plainly 'although you may choose to block delivery of your number to the telephone you are calling, you may NOT block delivery on calls to 800 numbers or collect calls.' I would think that 'contract' is rather plain. So people can be as 'touchy' as they like -- and I know a few who are -- but that is really their problem. *They* are the ones who want things both ways at the same time: *you* pay for my phone call, and *you* don't have any right to know what you are paying for, because I am a prima-donna about such things. Har har har! Then start dialing my seven digit number and paying for it yourself, bozo. Either that, or handle those calls similar to 'blocked number blocking' with an intercept saying 'the 800 number you have dialed requires your phone number. Since you wish to not give it, please hang up and dial the regular number, paying for the call yourself.' PAT] ------------------------------ From: Paul.Robinson@f417.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Paul Robinson) Date: 17 Jan 95 09:50:48 -0500 Subject: Re: 800 Numbers from Overseas Reply-To: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring MD USA Mr Robert Hall writes: > What about calls from the U.S. to other countries' toll-free úÿ > numbers? Since Hong Kong is a small country and local calls are > free, the use of 800 numbers here has been pretty much limited to > accessing a particular foreign carrier's "home direct" service. > For example, from within Hong Kong, I dial 800-1111 to get the AT&T > "bong" to place calls charged to my AT&T card. If someone > Stateside dials 011-852-800-1111 do they loop back to AT&T's "bong?" They're smarter than that. I called it from Montgomery County, in Maryland and got a recording saying my International Call could not be dialed, probably the same as if you, in Hong Kong, tried to dial 1-703-950-1022, the access number for MCI here in the Washington, DC area. Fidonet: Paul Robinson 1:109/417 Internet: Paul.Robinson@f417.n109.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: kmp@tiac.net (K. M. Peterson) Subject: Re: SNA Over Token Ring Date: 17 Jan 1995 15:48:18 GMT Organization: KMPeterson/Boston In article Paul Robinson writes: > Timothy S. Chaffee , writes: >> I am looking into moving our print traffic from a SDLC/SNA >> connection to run over our Token Ring network. Can this be done? Any >> pointers in the right direction would be greatly appreciated! > There is a company -- the name escapes me -- selling a product called > the "Hydra" which connnects in place of a terminal controller, and > allows RS232 connections to look like 3270 terminals, allowing a > person on a PC or a modem to call into an SNA terminal network as if > their terminal WAS a 3270 terminal. If they can do this, they probably > have something that will do what you want. Yes, but no. Token Ring runs SNA natively. If you're running in an IBM host environment (mainframe), it's just some configuration and hardware changes. If you're running TCP/IP on that Token-Ring, you have the changes above and a change of protocol. Remember the idea of a protocol stack: which layer is giving you a problem, the physical media or the higher layers? If you use SNA for printing, then you have an LU type that needs to be converted to LPR/LPD in the worst case... which is not a pretty picture. If it's only a physical layer change (running over the Ring v. SDLC), it's simple. K. M. Peterson eMail: KMP@TIAC.NET WWW: http://www.tiac.net/users/peterson/home.html Phone: +1 617 731 6177 voice +1 617 730 5969 fax ------------------------------ From: k22413@kyyppari.hkkk.fi (Harri Kinnunen) Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation Date: 17 Jan 95 14:35:29 GMT Organization: Helsinki School of Economics In johnl@ctin.adelaide.edu.au (John Leske) writes: > It is a Smartcard (ISO-7816). That is, a single chip micro with its > own ROM, RAM and non-volatial storage. The specific implementation for > GSM is defined in the GSM specs. There are multiple manufacturers of > this card. The specific characterisitics vary from manufacturer to > manufacturer. I believe some companies are looking at up to 16k or > 32kbit on the chip. The GSM-related data lies in a sub-directory on > the chip. Most of the hand-held GSM phones use a "punched-out" section of the Smartcard, being about 1cmx2cm in size. The punch-out dimensions are also standard, but I don't know if they are included in ISO-7816. Harri ------------------------------ From: Ben_Burch@wes.mot.com (Ben Burch) Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access Organization: Motorola, Inc. Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 21:47:07 GMT In article , laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence) wrote: > Recently I saw someone who appeared to be trying to steal a car, so, > being a good citizen, I ducked around the corner out of sight and > dialed 911 on my handheld cellular phone. Though I was standing on a > street three blocks from San Francisco City Hall, I was connected to > the California Highway Patrol. I waited several minutes for an operator > to come on the line, and finally gave up. > Good thing no one's life or safety was in danger. This bad result is because you did the wrong thing! How many time do people have to be told to dial the cellular operator, and say; "Operator, this is an emergency, please connect me with the police department emergency line." This takes a few seconds longer, but reaching help was the job here, not airtime minimization. Ben Burch Ben_Burch@wes.mot.com ------------------------------ From: grumpy@en.com (Seymour Dupa) Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access Date: 17 Jan 1995 10:14:47 -0500 Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc. Gerald Serviss (serviss@tazdevil.cig.mot.com) wrote: > The use of the strongest signal is no guarantee of routing the call > correctly, especially if you are in a building. As I understand it, the cell site receiving the strongest signal locks on to it, but all of the surrounding cell sites still receive the signal, althought at a lower level. If this is correct, could some sort of 'triangulation' be done to narrow down the phones' location? I know true triangulation requires directional antennas to determine from what direction the signal is comming, but in this context, couldn't the signal strenghts received by the surrounding sites be used somehow to narrow down the location? For example, if the signal received by three cell sites was almost equal, wouldn't the phones' location be at the center of the area between the sites? ------------------------------ From: jmosen@actrix.gen.nz@actrix.gen.nz (Jonathan Mosen) Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List Reply-To: jmosen@actrix.gen.nz Organization: Actrix Networks -- NZ Internet Service Providers. Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 01:24:01 GMT In article , etxlndh@eos99.ericsson.se (Robert Lindh) wrote: > Luxemburg Telekom > Norway Tele-Mobil > Netcom > Portugal TMN New Zealand also has a GSM network, run by Bell South. Jonathan Mosen, Manager Government Relations, Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind, jmosen@actrix.gen.nz ------------------------------ From: edg@ocn.com (Ed Goldgehn) Subject: Re: ISDN BRI Lines Date: 17 Jan 1995 06:25:58 GMT Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC In article , 0006718446@mcimail.com says: > GTE South has offered ISDN service here in Lexington, KY for the last > two years. However, when I enquire about a BRI line, they tell me I > must PREDETERMINE what I want to do with the two B-channels. For > example, B1 will always be used for voice calls, and B2 will always be > used for switched 56 data. I don't consider this true ISDN. Has > anyone else run across anything like this? This is quite standard ... in fact there are many additional questions you'll need to answer before you get your line (terminal type and switch settings to name a few). For more info, read the ISDN FAQ which can be found on comp.dcom.isdn Ed Goldgehn E-Mail: edg@ocn.com Sr. Vice President Voice: (404) 919-1561 Open Communication Networks, Inc. Fax: (404) 919-1568 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #37 *****************************