TELECOM Digest Sat, 4 Mar 95 08:04:00 CST Volume 15 : Issue 133 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Local Competition in North Carolina (Donald E. Kimberlin) Major UK Network Failure (Richard Cox) PacBell Offers a "Taste of Interop" in LA, March 28 (Cherie Shore) Dialing the Falkland Islands (Richard Cox) IVR Application, Northern Telecom SL1 PBX (Chris Daniels) Questions About Format of Printed Telephone Numbers (Jeff Wolfe) Re: Pizza Hut Consolidated Phone Number - All Locations (Tony Harminc) Re: Pizza Hut Consolidated Phone Number - All Locations (Ian Angus) Looking for Remote Control Solution (Mark Breman) Question on Setting up Internet Users Group (James E. Law) Oh Yeah? (Cole Cooper) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 3 Mar 95 20:56 EST From: Donald E. Kimberlin <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Local Competition in North Carolina Observers of U.S. telecommunications demonopolization history may recall that in early days of events like Hush-a-Phone and Carterfone, significant news focused on the Mebane Home Telephone Company of North Carolina. Mebane was the battleground upon which the North Carolina Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Communications Commission did battle concerning whether or not the public could own and attach its own telephones to lines of the local telephone company. At one point, the NC PUC even issued a widely-ridiculed decision that it would permit the public to connect its own telephones for interstate traffic only -- but that in order to do so, users would have to rent a separate telephone line to be used for interstate calls only. Saner heads eventually prevailed, and the matter was resolved by other means. Today, North Carolina appears to be among the earlier states contemplating statewide demonopolization of local telephone service, perhaps beginning as early as July 1, 1996. A bill was introduced into the North Garolina legislature only several weeks ago, with nearly enough co-sponsors to assure passage at introduction. Here's a story from the March 3, 1995 Charlotte, NC ... And so there you have it, Dear Moderator. I coincidentally note it was five years ago and less that my posts forecasting the demise of local competition in the U.S met with replies of incredulity in this forum, mostly from those who were certain the long-standing claims of massive capital cost would maintain the once-sacrosanct "natural monopoly" concept of 1913 in perpetuity. Yet, today, we see instead the telephone companies in North Carolina seizing the initiative to change their own status. Clearly, they have gotten the message as demonstrated in places like England and New Zealand that it's no longer such a massive, capital-intensive task to construct and maintaim a functioning local telephone plant. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 17:03:14 -0500 From: richard@mandarin.com Subject: Major UK Network Failure On the morning of Thursday, 2 March, workmen accidentally cut into a major fiber-optic cable near Banbury, which contained BT's main telecomms link between London and Birmingham. Details of the incident are not yet completely clear, but it is reported that approximately 18 fibres, each carrying 540Mb, plus the associated maintenance spares, were broken by the damage. Serious congestion followed - not only on BT's network, but also on other networks as customers and service providers tried to reroute their traffic by other means. Several of the mobile networks, who lease bulk capacity from BT, also suffered consequent disruption: as did JANET, the "Joint Academic NETwork" in the UK. This incident has raised some significant questions about BT's claims to have a resilient network, and to be able to reroute around a single point of failure. It took BT until late in the afternoon of the following day (Friday, 3 March) before service on the route was fully restored. Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, PO Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan CF64 3YG Voice: 0956 700111; Fax: 0956 700110; VoiceMail: 0941 151515 e-mail address: richard@mandarin.com; PGP2.6 public key on request ------------------------------ From: cashore@PacBell.COM (Cherie Shore) Subject: PacBell Offers a "Taste of Interop" in LA, March 28 Date: 4 Mar 1995 09:32:51 GMT Organization: Pacific Bell Your time is extremely valuable, and Interop is over 300 miles away in Las Vegas. Why go? Pacific Bell will demonstrate cutting edge network interoperability applications right here in Los Angeles on March 28. Our 'A Taste of Interop' event will feature exhibits of: Telemedicine Multipoint Desktop Videoconferencing The Studio of the Future High Speed Internet Access Cupertino's CityNet Caltech's Real-Time Earthquake Monitoring We'll be showing examples of applications running on the following digital comunication technologies: ISDN Frame Relay SMDS Advanced Broadcast Video Service No reservations required; exhibits will be open between 12:00 and 5pm on March 28, at 1010 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles. Parking is provided. Cherie Shore cashore@pacbell.com ISDN Technology Manager, PacBell ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 07:37:39 -0500 From: richard@mandarin.com Subject: Dialing the Falkland Islands The TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > It does not matter how many digits the place has. If the number is > direct dialable, then it can be used. In most places where the local > numbers are less than seven digits, you will find the city code and > country code are longer, to fill in the blanks. The country originally referred to (the Falkland Islands) now has five digit numbers. Until recently there were only four digit numbers, and then they all changed to five digit by prepending all numbers with "2". International dialing to the Falkland Islands has been on +500 for as long as I can remember; before that it was operator-only connection via Cable and Wireless. Some of you may recall that the failure of the Cable and Wireless link just before the Falklands were invaded, was a point featured in a film made subsequently about the Falklands war. Obviously the service has since been improved -- possibly as a result of improvements in funding? There are no "city codes" for the Falklands Islands. It is unlikely that there is even more than one CO. So the Falklands have some of the shortest (international) numbers in the world, and from the UK dialling the Falklands takes less digits now than most inland numbers. Oddly enough, calls to the Falklands are also the most expensive calls (apart from Satellite and Ships calls) that can be made from the UK. As in the US, 500 has a special purpose in the UK -- it is one of our freephone (toll-free) codes, like 800. So if the initial digit 0 is repeated by accident, a call that should be free (such as 0500 224466) turns into one of the most expensive calls (00500 22446) that can be made. I believe there may still be shorter numbers than those in the Falklands, but until recently some of them could not be dialed in the normal way as Telco's equipment could not handle them correctly. Callers had to dial a dummy digit *after* the called number, to convince the COs that the digit string is valid. Either the numbers have been lengthened, or the COs have been fixed ... we no longer have to dial dummy digits. Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, PO Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan CF64 3YG Voice: 0956 700111; Fax: 0956 700110; VoiceMail: 0941 151515 e-mail address: richard@mandarin.com; PGP2.6 public key on request ------------------------------ From: cd2@access.digex.net (Chris Daniels) Subject: IVR Application, Northern Telecom SL1 PBX Date: 3 Mar 1995 16:33:42 -0500 Organization: 24 Hour Computers, Greenbelt, MD USA I am working on an IVR application which sits behind a Northern Telecom SL1 PBX and appears as an analog 2500 set; the problem is that the SL1 does not drop the loop current when the calling party hangs up, causing the IVR system to stay offhook and tie up the incoming line until a timeout occurs in the application. Does anyone know of a programming change that can be made to the SL1 which will return some form of call progress signalling, such as reorder or other tones? The voice board used is a Dialogic D41D, and the NT PBX is a SL1-XT release 19 issue 32. Please email your response to me, my provider is having news problems as usual. Thanks, Ken WIlliams Voicelink Communications, Inc. 202-541-9009 kenw@us.net ------------------------------ Subject: Questions About Format of Printed Telephone Numbers Date: Fri, 03 Mar 1995 18:01:52 -0500 From: Jeff Wolfe I got involved in a debate with some friends about the 'correct' way to write a telephone number. Is there an 'international standard'? Is it official or just commonly accepted? The guy I was debating with said that +1 814 555 1212 was the 'offical' way. What does the '+' mean? Jeff Wolfe Sysadmin, Newsadmin - Penn State - College of Earth and Mineral Sciences [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The '+' means 'international access code if required plus'. In other words, to dial a country in Europe for example, we dial 011 plus the country code and number. In the USA, '1' is by coincidence both the access code used internally when dialing long distance and it is the international access code for the USA and Canada when dialing here from elsewhere. So the way you would read your example is 'dial whatever you dial to place an international call, followed by 1 for the USA and then the area code 814 and local number 555-1212'. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Mar 95 18:05:40 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Pizza Hut Consolidated Phone Number - All Locations ansehl@MO.NET (Eric Canale) wrote: >> "No other food service company in Canada offers this level of >> convenience for its customers," says Corbett. "Our goal now is to make >> 310-1010 available across the country so no matter what city our >> customers are in, they dial the same number for a Pizza Hut pizza." > It's been a while since I lived in Canada, but Toronto based Pizza Pizza > has had the single (416) 967-1111 delivery number for all its locations > since the early 80s. I really don't see how Pizza Hut's system is any > different, other than the fact it's 10 years late. The problem with Pizza Pizza's system is that the famous 967-1111 works only from within the 416 area code (Metro. Toronto). Local callers in the surrounding 'burbs have to dial 416 967-1111, and callers further out have local numbers (e.g. Oshawa 905 567-1111) to reach their local dispatch centre. In fact I think there is only the one central dispatch site for all of southern Ontario. It's interesting to see the different approach taken by the chains. Pizza Pizza has all calls go to one place, and then sends the orders to the geographically appropriate store on a data network. This lets them track how busy each store is and avoid overloading by farming orders out further afield when necessary. I doubt that any phone-network based routing scheme will have such flexibility. Pizza Pizza has an overwhelming market presence in the Toronto area, úÿ to the point that customs people at the airport are reputed to ask suspicious travellers claiming to live in Toronto "what's Pizza Pizza's number?", or even to ask them to sing the little jingle "nine - six - seven -- eleven -- eleven". A number of other local chains have catchy numbers (Two-for-One Pizza is 241-0241 Get it: 241- oh - you did get it...), but nothing has close to the recognition of Pizza Pizza. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 18:42:19 EST From: Ian Angus Subject: Re: Pizza Hut Consolidated Phone Number - All Locations Eric Canale wrote: > (sellers@on.bell.ca) wrote: >> "No other food service company in Canada offers this level of >> convenience for its customers," says Corbett. "Our goal now is to make >> 310-1010 available across the country so no matter what city our >> customers are in, they dial the same number for a Pizza Hut pizza." > It's been a while since I lived in Canada, but Toronto based > Pizza Pizza has had the single (416) 967-1111 delivery number for all its > locations since the early 80s. I really don't see how Pizza Hut's system > :is any different, other than the fact it's 10 years late. There is a big difference. Pizza Pizza pioneered the single number for an entire city, covering multiple outlets. (Far in advance of Dominos in the US, for example.) But the Pizza Pizza system has two limitations, compared to the new one at Pizza Hut: 1. The Pizza Pizza number only works within the Toronto free calling area. Its long distance (or a different local number) from other areas. 2. The Pizza Pizza number goes to a central location, where the call is answered and the order taken. The order is then transmitted to the nearest franchise store by a data link. By contrast: 1. With the new service, Pizza Hut has the same seven-digit number (310- 1010) over multiple area codes. The caller never has to dial a long distance call. 2. The public network automatically routes the call to the nearest Pizza Hut store, based on the caller's location. So there is no need for a central answering location or retransmission of the order. Actually, Bell Canada's 310-Service is just 800-Service in disguise. The rates (to Pizza Hut) are the same as 800 rates, with a premium charge added for using 7-digit access. The idea is to let multi-location companies have a "local" appearance, but only one number to advertise. Ian Angus Angus TeleManagement Group Ajax Ontario Canada 905-686-5050 ext 222 angus@accesspt.north.net ------------------------------ From: Mark Breman Subject: Looking For Remote Control Solution Organization: NLnet Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 12:10:06 GMT Hi there, Currently we are using a NetWare connect modem pool. To communicate with this pool we are using the windows nasi redirector (attnasi 1.0 loaded at windows startup) from NOVELL which redirects COM1 to the modem pool. As remote control software we wanted to use ReachOut because this supports Super VGA 1024*768. ReachOut doesn't seem to work with the modem pool (COM1 is not redirected) because it makes no use of the standard windows communications API. Can anyone tell me which remote control solution supports SVGA 1024*768 or higher and is able to make use of a modem pool through the windows nasi redirector mentioned above? Because of memory problems we're not able to use the DOS nasi redirector. We are using NetWare 3.11, IPXODI 2.12, NETX 3.32, Windows 3.1 upgraded to 3.11 (NOT WfW). Please reply by email to: breman@ideta.nl Thanks in advance, Mark Breman breman@ideta.nl ------------------------------ From: edlaw@chattanooga.net (James E. Law) Subject: Question on Setting up Internet Users Group Date: 04 Mar 1995 02:56:33 GMT Organization: Chattanooga Online! I would appreciate any suggestions you can provide on how to organize a successful internet users group. Such a group has just been initiated in Chattanooga, TN (CHATNET) and is in the process of getting organized. Things seem to be off to a good start with 47 in attendance of our Jan. meeting. I know that some of you have been through this start-up phase multiple time and can suggest how we do it right. In particular, I would like input on: 1. Would you send me a copy of your charters/by-laws? 2. What kinds of officers are in place for your group? 3. What is the format of your meetings? What kind of meeting activities do members find to be interesting and/or helpful? 4. What activities (other than meetings) are your group involved in (e.g. training, communnity service projects, internet promotion)? 5. Are there any organizations that provide support to internet users groups? Any industry sponsors out there? 6. Any other suggestions? Please send your response via e-mail. Thanks for your help. Ed Law (edlaw@chattanooga.net) ------------------------------ From: Cole Cooper Date: 3 Mar 1995 9:49:02 EDT Subject: Oh Yeah? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh go ahead, you can whisper it to me. > I won't tell anyone who doesn't read the Digest or Usenet. You think > Ma Bell is a bitch, is that it? PAT]<< More than likely -- if he told you -- he'd have to kill you. (grin) But I don't think he wants to - the paperwork afterwards can be grueling. It would be a RFT-PM007 (Request for Termination - Post Mortem), and the last time I used one of those it took six months for approval. REPLY-TO: C.M. (Cole) Cooper - Stentor Resource Centre Inc. 3W 3030 2nd Avenue S.E. Calgary, Alberta. CANADA T2A 5N7 Internet: cooperc@stentor.ca TN: 403-531-4205 Compuserve 73361,35 Fax 403-531-4248 or 1-800-269-7571 The Information Superhighway Construction Foreman's office ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #133 ******************************