TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Feb 95 18:09:00 CST Volume 15 : Issue 108 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Copy of Memo to AT&T re: 500/True Connections (John Shelton) March 7 Bellcore Meeting in DC (Judith Oppenheimer) SL-100 Administration (Jay Borden) Mitnick Chain of Events (Steve Cogorno) 500 Service in Canada (Evan Champion) Canadian "Framework" Proceeding (Dave Leibold) New RITIM Working Papers (Leslie Smith) Bell Canada Stumped on 500 Service (Scott A. Montague) Business vs. Residential Rates (Richard Palmer) National Strategies for Telecom Education? (Mikko Usvalehto) Help! - Vertex, DID or ISDN For my Phone Services (Jian Yuan Peng) Cellular Airtime Resellers (Bill Engel) Wanted: Used AT&T Business Telephone Systems (Alex Capo) 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: 500-677-1616 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 Shelton Subject: Copy of Memo to AT&T re: 500/True Connections Date: Mon, 20 Feb 95 9:48:50 PDT [Copy of memo sent to AT&T re problems] I would like to report some problems with my AT&T True Connections service, and offer some suggestions for feature enhancements. Overall, I find this service to be a really good idea; I hope it will eventually have all the bugs worked out. Current problems: Voice quality isn't as good as standard AT&T calls. I notice a distinct drop in volume as I am connected to the True Connections answering unit. Using the call sequencing feature, I cannot get consistent results regarding the number of rings. As a caller, I hear "ringing" immediately when each sequence number is tried. But at the remote end, the telephone may not start ringing for several seconds. This is particularly a problem with my cellular telephone, which may take varying lengths of time to start ringing, depending on whether I am in my home area or not. I currently have my sequencing set to a small enough number of rings so that my office voice mail does not answer (so I can go sequence to the next number), but that results in my cellular phone ringing only once, which isn't always enough time to answer it. I think the only practical solution will be for us to be able to program a different number of rings with each sequence number. AT&T is returning supervision on all 0+500 calls, even when used to modify forwarding. I think AT&T should be returning supervision only on 0+500 calls when they connect to voice mail or are used to dial home (or another number). Purely administrative calls should not return supervision. My voice mailbox has a different mailbox number and password than my 500 number itself. This means I have to remember four different numbers to retrieve my voice mail. I would appreciate being able to get voicemail by just entering my 0+500 number and master PIN, then following the menu. Beeper notification isn't working yet, which makes voice mail somewhat awkward. When will this service be working? Feature requests: I would like to ask for the following features to be considered: Allow designation of special numbers the way *H (home) can be designated. For example: *C (cellular) *O (office) *P (pager) This would speed up both entry of sequence lists, and the reading back of sequence lists. Allow me to have a voice greeting (ten seconds) played as soon as a caller rings my number. I could say something like: "Hi, this is John. Please wait for connection to my current phone; if there is no answer, I'll be back on to take a message." Allow callers direct access to beeper service. Callers could press a key to stop ringing and connect directly to my beeper service. When a sequence number is busy, offer the caller a choice of trying the next number, going direct to voice mail, or trying again later. To make TrueConnections truly useful in the future, local calling should become very inexpensive. Right now, my local callers are reluctant to call my 500 number instead of a local number, because of the cost. With SS7, it would be possible for AT&T to direct the local phone company to re-route the call locally, rather than tying up AT&T circuits. As a customer, I'd be happy to pay a nominal fee (10 cents?) for such a re-routing, to save my caller per-minute charges. Since AT&T switching would be tied up for only a few seconds, the cost to AT&T would be minimal. Expanding TrueConnections in this way should allow many more customers to consider the service. ===================== [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I can understand how some of you feel about the 0-500 supervision issue, I have to take exception. Why should instructing a computer where to send your calls be any different than instructing your secretary or a co-worker where to send them? If you were using the method which has worked well for many years of calling your office and saying to the receptionist, "I will be over at client X for a couple of hours if anyone calls ...", would you object to paying for the call to your receptionist/secretary to give those instructions? In the case of 500 service, you are using AT&T as your receptionist/secretary/ message taker. Should AT&T and the interim telcos/celcos have to work for free? Your secretary does not work for free. I could understand having no supervision until a valid pin number was entered or a calling card number; but do you really think you should get the entire administrative process for free? PAT] ------------------------------ From: producer@pipeline.com (Judith Oppenheimer) Subject: March 7 Bellcore Meeting in DC Date: 20 Feb 1995 12:55:46 -0500 Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM) March 7 at Bellcore in Washington DC, 2101 L St. NW, 6th floor. Ad Hoc State Department group on Numbering Issues. Starts at 9 am. Anyone can attend. All 800 number users are urged to attend, and be vocal! Protect your 800 numbers! International Freephone is on the agenda. Keep an ear/eye open for 888 as well - If *your* business were 1 800 FLOWERS, would you want 011 800 FLOWERS (proposed International Freephone) and 1 888 FLOWERS (proposed new add-on toll-free exchange) alienating and confusing *your* customers, and running up your telecom bills with wrong calls that generate no sales? Protect your advertising and branding investments in your 800 numbers. Protect your brands and trademarks. Protect your business interests. If you don't, no one will. J. Oppenheimer, Producer@Pipeline.com Interactive CallBrand(TM) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The only thing is, the telephone-using *public* has to be to some extent responsible for knowing what and where they are dialing. {Chicago Tribune} columnist Mike Royko has complained several times in the past about how his internal centrex number at the newspaper is the same as a very commonly used number by AT&T for customer service, minus the 1-800 on the front. Idiots galore trying to complain to AT&T about something or other -- after all these years -- still do not understand they must dial 1-800 first, so if they are in area 312 they get his private unlisted centrex number instead. And you know what he wants? He wants AT&T to change *their number* -- so that *he* won't get their calls. How do you accomodate idiots and fools short of stopping the world and letting everyone get off? Do you propose that when the 800 number supply is exhausted we just quit having any more? Do you propose that international commerce and trade be handicapped by having no uniform way to dial around the world with the charges reversed to the called party automatically? You use FLOWERS as an example, and apparently would restrict the use of 356- 9377 where any other 'toll-free' numbering scheme is concerned because the Americans got it first and want to protect their brand name. That is all well and good, but 1-800-FLOWERS is not the same as 011-800-FLOWERS or 1-888-FLOWERS. Needless to say, its not the same as any local area code plus 356-9377, and yet day after day that number gets calls for FLOWERS by people who forgot the 1-800. There is a practical limit to how much can be done to idiot-proof the phone network. You say its okay to have things like 011-800 and 1-888 as long as the existing American 800 users can have their numbers grandfathered, or held out of use under the new codes? Well that would put us right back where we are now, with an increasingly limited supply of available numbers. Or are you suggesting that only the 'big' 800 users get that protection, and the rest of us with 800 numbers can live with the nuisance that the corporate clients you represent don't wish to tolerate, i.e. 'customer confusion' and having to pay for calls which generated no business, etc? This reminds me of the airline a few years ago which misprinted its schedule book -- thousands of copies distributed -- and gave out the number of some hapless individual in error instead. When he called to complain, they told him to change *his* phone number. When they later found out he was getting rather rude with persistent callers who kept telling him he was a liar and that they *knew* they had reached the airline, then the airline tried to sue him for force him to change his number so that their customers would not be confused. Never once did it occur to them to correct their own error and reprint their booklet. You may not recall, but the same kind of arguments you are presenting here came up twenty or more years ago as AT&T began major expansions of 800 service as it was configured back then. Relatively few companies had 800 service in the early 1970's, and those who did often times had words made out of the four digit suffixes. Then AT&T opened up a bunch of new prefixes and changed the configuration on some already being used and suddenly the same words showed up attached to other 800 prefixes in other parts of the country. "If I have 800-xxx-FOOD you can't let him have 800-yyy-FOOD; too many people will get us confused." That's life, sorry. You need to educate your customers *how* to place the call, what more can I say? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 13:19:36 -0500 From: jborden@world.std.com (Jay Borden) Subject: SL-100 Administration Does anyone have experience with software used to perform administration of an SL-100? What does Northern provide in this area? Are there third party apps? I'm looking at basic add/move/change function support, and whatever else is available. Please mail me directly with your responses. If there's sufficient interest, I'll summarize and repost for the group. Thanks, jay b ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Mitnick Chain of Events Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 10:19:50 PST I thought this would be of interest to the group. Steve cogorno@netcom.com NETCOM HELPS PROTECT THE INTERNET - A Letter from CEO Bob Rieger to Our Customers - I know many of you are interested in NETCOM's involvement with the arrest of Kevin Mitnick, and how this may impact you, if at all, as a NETCOM subscriber. First, let me supply a chronology of events: 1. In a routine security check, NETCOM discovered a misappropriated file. As a result, we began an investigation to trace what appeared to be a security breach. 2. At about the same time, the WELL (a small Sausalito-based on-line provider) was investigating an account with an unexpectedly large amount of disk usage. In the course of this investigation, they discovered suspicious material which included items believed illicitly obtained from well-known network security expert Tsutomu Shimomura's computer. Mr. Shimomura performed network monitoring at the WELL, and determined that the account was being accessed from a number of sites, including NETCOM. 3. The WELL contacted NETCOM for assistance in tracking the source of the security breach. 4. A day or two later, the FBI contacted NETCOM and requested NETCOM's active involvement in the broadening investigation of the suspicious activities at the WELL. 5. NETCOM caucused with representatives of the WELL, the FBI, the U.S. Attorney's Office, Mr. Shimomura, and Julia Menapace (an independent computer consultant and associate of Mr. Shimomura). 6. Following the conversation, it was decided that the best vantage point for further tracking of these activities was NETCOM's Network Operations Center. 7. NETCOM operations staff joined their efforts with Mr. Shimomura and his associates to trace the suspect intrusions to a particular telephone modem in NETCOM's Raleigh, N.C. site. 8. At that point, the U.S. Justice Department subpoenaed the local telephone carrier for records of dial-ins at specific times to this modem. It became apparent that the telephone company's switch equipment had been compromised, so that these records could not be obtained. However, the Justice Department found another method for making a match. 9. With this information, the Justice Department knew the approximate location of the originating call. 10. Mr. Shimomura flew to Raleigh and used cellular tracking equipment to locate the apartment building the calls were coming from. Eventually, the calls were traced to an individual apartment, and Mr. Mitnick was arrested. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 18:59:06 +0000 From: evan champion Subject: 500 Service in Canada Organization: Bell Northern Research Is 500 service beeing offered by Bell Canada yet (or will it be offered in the future), and what costs should I expect for making use of 500 service if and when it is available here? Thanks! Evan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 22:57:50 EST From: Dave Leibold Subject: Canadian "Framework" Proceeding [from Bell News, 6 Feb 1995 - content is Bell Canada's] Framework proceeding gets underway Carrying many of the same principles underlying our recent corporate reorganization forward into the regulatory arena, Bell and other members of the Stentor alliance filed evidence with the CRTC in support of the split rate base approach to regulation, on January 31. Splitting the rate base, an important element of the CRTC's regulatory review decision issued last September, means assigning the company's costs and revenues to two distinct segments of our business - competitive and utility - using the CRTC-approved Phase III costing methodology. On the utility side, the CRTC would continue to regulate under the traditional rate base, rate of return regulation until January 1998 (when price caps are scheduled to be introduced). On the competitive side, we sink or swim on our own. Competitive areas of our business will no longer be part of the regulated rate base, and there will be no predetermined level of profitability associated with competitive service revenues. Unlike the other telephone companies, Bell did not include a financial forecast for 1995 as part of this filing, but anticipates doing so by March 20. The company's new management team is in the process of establishing a specific forecast for 1995 as part of a three-year transition plan. úÿ The January filing was the initial step in preparation for a public hearing to be held beginning May 8, in Hull, Quebec. The proceeding will also address such issues as contribution, rate rebalancing, and investment in the Beacon Initiative, as well as Canada/ U.S. cost comparisons in the delivery of long distance services. The public hearing is expected to last about eight weeks. -------------------------- David Leibold -+- dleibold@gvc.com -+- aa070@freenet.toronto.on.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 95 12:38:24 CST From: leslie_smith@wiltel.com Subject: New RITIM Working Papers Dear TELECOM Digest, WilTel is pleased to announce the addition of new RITIM working pages to our Telecom Library. We thought that some of your readers might also enjoy seeing what the researchers at RITIM are finding. Thanks for allowing us to share with you and your readers. Leslie Smith RITIM's New Working Papers URL: http://www.wiltel.com/ritim/ritim.html WilTel is pleased to announce that The Research Institute for Telecommunications and Information Marketing (RITIM) has recently released new working papers now available on the Internet via WilTel. The new RITIM working papers cover aspects of marketing research that shed light on some of the behaviors, organizations, and strategies of the telecommunications and information technology industries. The RITIM working papers also present results of case studies, conceptual work, reviews, and research projects undertaken by researchers interested in telecommunications and other information-related industries. RITIM working papers provide convenient, timely, and free access to the valuable research completed by RITIM sponsored researchers. Topics of the newly released RITIM working papers include: - The Marketing Challenge: When services compete with products - Acceptance of New Information and Communication Services: A strange framework - Impact of Organizational Size, Number of Sites, and Line Business on Telecommunications - The Changing Information Business: Towards content-based competition RITIM's goal is to be the premier academic research center dealing with the different markets, organizations, behaviors, and strategies of the evolving telecommunications and information technology industries. If you would like to learn more about the exciting research RITIM has supported, you can access the RITIM papers at URL: http://www.wiltel.com/ritim/ritim. The RITIM working papers are the property of RITIM. WilTel is proud to provide the World Wide Web interface that gives interested readers insight into the happenings at RITIM . ------------------------------ From: 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca (Montague Scott A) Subject: Bell Canada Stumped on 500 Service Date: 10 Feb 1995 23:44:18 GMT Organization: Queen's University, Kingston Well, it was bound to happen. What was, in myu opinion the best phone company in North America, has let me down. The problem? Bell Canada has never heard of 500 service. A quick call to Pat's number using both 1- and 0- gave me a "bad number" message. So, I got online with a Bell Canada operator, and she told me "sorry, I don't know of the 500 area code". I explained what the service was, and she said that she'd be glad to pass me on to the business office. I subsequently talked to Terry at the business office, and explained the deal. He called (while I waited) the product lines for Bell, and all the others he could think of, all to no avail. Terry has subsequently promised me to get back to me on the problem, and try to solve the missing NPA. Unfortunatly, Terry's going away on vacation for two weeks, so he'll continue the investigation after- ward. I politely suggested that he refer the problem to someone else while he was gone, but he said "I think I know what you are talking about, and I don't think I could explain it easily to someone else" (PARAPHRASE). Oh well. Terry will call me back with the results. I called 1-800-CALLATT; they didn't know what 500 was about; until I persisted. He can't connect me though. Can't wait 'till I can chat with you, Pat! Scott Personal reply? Send E-Mail to 4sam3@qlink.queensu.ca for a PGP public key. Keep your friends close... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I still talk to people from AT&T who never heard of 500 service; have no idea what it is and consider it a figment of my imagination. Very few of the operators seem to know anything about it; they deny such numbers exist, etc. You'd think someone would tell them so they would know how to assist customers; but then, maybe its me who is unclear on the concept. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rdp@palmer.com (Richard Palmer) Subject: Business vs. Residential Rates Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 18:24:22 GMT Organization: RD & MA Palmer MD PMC What are the criteria that the phone company uses to determine if they can charge business or residential rates to lines in a person's home? Does this vary from state to state? Are the criteria mandated by the state public service commission? richard.palmer@palmer.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Generally if the street address where service is being installed is known to be an address where business is conducted (i.e. a store front, an office building, etc) then business service is required there *unless the subscriber can prove that the address is used exclusively as a residence*. A listing or lack of same in the directory (non-pub service) is of no consideration since many businesses do have non-pub lines. If the street address is known to be residential, then residential service is offered to the customer unless the customer states that the phone will be used primarily for business-related conversations *or* if the subscriber requests a directory listing in a business (or shall we say non- strictly residential, in order to include schools, churches, organizations, etc) name. Business and residential service can be mixed at an address which is residential in nature but residence service cannot be mixed with business service at an address which is commercial in nature. That is, you can have business service in your home if desired, but you may not have residence service in your business, *even if you live there, for instance in the back room of the store, etc*. Requests for entries in the telephone book of a business nature always require business service. Furthermore, if the requested entry appears to telco to have been fabricated or devised only for the purpose of manipulating the position of the listing in the directory, then telco can require proof that such entry is in fact a name under which the business is known, for example by seeing copies of incorporation papers or business license documents. Since listings are sorted in strict alphabetical order with duplications further sorted in alpha order by street name and with continued duplications further sorted in numerical order by number on the street (in other words, John A. Smith at 1234 Main Street would appear ahead of John A. Smith at 2345 Main Street) and remaining duplications sorted by phone number (so that two instances of John A. Smith at 1234 Main Street would appear with the one whose number was 123-4567 listed ahead of the one whose number was 123- 4579), should a subscriber choose to be listed simply as 'A' then telco has the right to demand proof of such a name. Likewise any residential or business listing demanded where the name would otherwise be an offensive word can be challenged. ("Are you certain your name is Mr. Fu-k?"). PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: National Strategies For Telecom Education? From: Mikko Usvalehto Date: Mon, 20 Feb 95 17:40:01 +0200 Here in Helsinki University of Technology we are discussing what is the best way to coordinate telecom education in national level. Telecom business environment (both for operators and equipment manufacturers) is turbulent and technology competence needs of the telecom companies changes rapidly. Universities and institutes of technology have difficulties to follow the changes in business and also difficulties to provide education and continuing education, which satisfies companies' needs. We are interested in to know more about how telecom education is organised in different countries and is there any national strategies for telecom education ? If you have information on how telecom education has been organised in your country, then please contact: mikko.usvalehto@hut.fi Mikko Usvalehto Helsinki University of Technology, FINLAND ------------------------------ From: jypeng@netcom.com (Jian Yuan Peng) Subject: Help! - Vertex, DID or ISDN For My Phone Services Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 19:20:53 GMT Hi, Can you educate me about my question? This my first time to setup a telephone services, I have the following requirements: I want to setup three service lines and one support line. the service lines are 800 numbers (one 800 number from MCI). I want to accept three customers at same time. We plan to expand up to eight service lines in the future. For examples, If first customer calls in, then line one will answer. If other customers call in at the same time, when line one is busy, line two will answer. Same as line three, if line two is busy. The support line is not the 800 number. On that, the caller pays the toll. I have asked the hardware ventor, software ventor, and Pacbell about what kind of system I plan to setup. They told me different answers. Hardware ventor told me I need a DID system. Software vendor told me that I need a vertex system form my local telephone company. The Pacbell person told me (she recommended me) that I should rent a ISDN line. It seems to me that one of DID, Vertex or ISDN will work for me. The MCI told me they can broadcast the incoming call to all of three lines (all of them will ring as the same time.) if I want. I was so confused by all of them! Can you tell me what is difference between them? Can I extend to eight lines system later? Which is the lower cost? I also look into further, whether we need a T1 line (up to 24 lines) in two years later. Can we move smoothly from this current setup to 24 lines later? Any recommend- ations? Thank you for your information. Jian Yuan Peng jypeng@netcom.COM 650 Castro Street, Suite 120-265, Mountain View, CA94041 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, my goodness, my goodness. They are all going to sell you and oversell you. Forget every bit of what they told you and let's start over. Go to PacBell and say one thing: "I want four lines. Three are to be in a hunt group where the first hunts the second then the third. I want a fourth line which stands alone, not in the hunt group." Period. That's all you ask for. Do whatever they say or request in the way of credit requirements to get the lines installed and operating. As soon as the lines are installed -- and earlier, if you can get the number for the main line, and are sure it will be correct -- then you call up MCI -- if that's your pleasure, but I could make other suggestions -- and you tell them "I want an 800 number, and I want it to be pointed to xxx-xxxx" (whatever the number is PacBell assigned you as the lead number in your group of three lines.) Period. That's all you say to them. When MCI turns on your 800 number and points it to the main number in your group of three lines, everything you wanted will be accomplished. If a second or third person calls your 800 number while it is in use then those calls will be directed -- just like the first one -- to your main listed number. When those overflow calls hit PacBell, the local telco will put them on your overflow hunt lines two and three. MCI does not need to know *how* you are handling those calls (that in reality they are going in your hunt group somewhere) nor does PacBell need to know (nor do they care) where the calls are coming from, just that when they get them they put them on line one, then two and three as needed. You will want to make sure that your MCI 800 number has the capability of handling more than one inbound call at a time; there are a few out there that literally require you to have an '800 hunt group' with the inherent extra monthly service charges for each line, but most do not. Their switches are capable of taking 800 calls en-masse for you as long as you have somewhere to terminate them on your end. Meantime, that single line not part of the hunt group is sitting there and taking calls. You advertise its regular number so the caller has to dial that and pay for it. Next year if your business is still around and prospering and you need another five lines to make eight in total you call PacBell again and you say "I want five more lines in my existing hunt group." Period. Don't get them all confused using terms like T-1 and vertex and DID. That way they won't get you confused with their conflicting (and frankly, sales- oriented) answers. You don't need DID and a T-1 ... what are you running, the phone room for the Shopping Channel? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Engel2@ix.netcom.com (Bill & Susan Engel) Subject: Cellular Airtime Resellers Date: 20 Feb 1995 20:03:49 GMT Organization: Netcom I have been trying to find the names of resellers of cellular air time (if such resellers exist) that are active in the Phoenix, AZ metro area. I have contacted the Cellular Resellers Association to no avail. Does anyone have any info regarding this? Thanks for any help! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Feb 95 13:45:19 PST From: alex capo Subject: Wanted: Used AT&T Business Telephone Systems Our company buys and sells used AT&T equipment. For more information you may contact me at 1-800-469-5707. Thanks! Alex Capo ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #108 ******************************