Received: from MIT-Multics.ARPA by buit1.bu.edu (3.2/4.7) id AA19406; Mon, 15 Jun 87 22:36:06 EDT Date: Mon, 15 Jun 87 22:22 EDT From: "Roger A. Roach" Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #13 To: telecom-request@BUIT1.BU.EDU Message-Id: <870616022253.683102@MIT-Multics.ARPA> Forum-Transaction: [0382] in the >site>arpa_mail_dir>Telecom meeting Transaction-Entered-By: Network_Server.Daemon@MIT-Multics.ARPA Transaction-Entered-Date: 9 Jun 87 21:45 EDT Status: RO From: jsol@buit1.bu.edu@buita TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Jun 87 20:51:41 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 13 Today's Topics: Re: Horror stories wanted 890 prefix Confidencer Wanted Re: Horror stories wanted Re: phonevision X.25 PAD Sought Re: Cellular Fraud ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 6 Jun 87 17:33:46 EDT From: "Keith F. Lynch" Subject: Re: Horror stories wanted To: simsong@MEDIA-LAB.MEDIA.MIT.EDU Cc: KFL@AI.AI.MIT.EDU, Telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU What is wrong with a hotel allowing access to only one carrier? Or with a hotel not even HAVING any phone service? (The latter may be a good selling feature!) If a hotel customer doesn't like what the hotel provides, he can always find another hotel. ...Keith ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 87 12:39:15 PDT From: csustan!elric@lll-crg.ARPA (Elric of Imrryr) To: lll-crg!telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu Subject: 890 prefix Cc: Is this prefix (890) universally unused and thus available to the LOCs to use for this service, or is this just a Bell of PA special? Sincerely, Frank Prindle Prindle@NADC.arpa Well here in California (Pacfic Bell), 890 is one of the ringback prefixes. PacBel has been using '811' as the toll free prefix to call your service rep. Brad -- elric Lunatic Labs @ Csustan {lll-crg,lll-lcc}!csustan!elric Reality is what ever you can get away with! | The info on cracking DES will be | in my next transmission... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 87 13:11:40 PDT From: scotto@pnet01.CTS.COM (Scott O'Connell) To: crash!telecom%mit-xx.arpa@nosc.mil Subject: Confidencer Wanted Cc: crash!scotto@nosc.mil Does anyone know where I can purchase a Rohn Confidencer? It's the noise cancelling microphone used on 500 type WE telephones. AT&T phone stores say they haven't carried them in a long time. Please reply directly, thanks. Scott O'Connell - Datagram Corp. UUCP: {akgua hplabs!hp-sdd sdcsvax nosc}... 3297 Sweetwater Springs Blvd #8 ...crash!pnet01!scotto San Diego, CA 92078-1477 ARPA: crash!pnet01!scotto@nosc 800/235-5030 INET: scotto@pnet01.CTS.COM ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 87 08:38:51 EDT From: Simson L. Garfinkel To: KFL@AI.AI.MIT.EDU Cc: KFL@AI.AI.MIT.EDU, Telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: Horror stories wanted Date: Sat, 6 Jun 87 17:33:46 EDT From: "Keith F. Lynch" What is wrong with a hotel allowing access to only one carrier? Because only having one carrier may be a violation of federal regulation. Specifically, anti-trust laws and the like. ------------------------------ To: seismo!comp-dcom-telecom@seismo.CSS.GOV From: harvard!huma1!janowsky@seismo.CSS.GOV (Steve Janowsky) Subject: Re: phonevision Date: 8 Jun 87 18:24:43 GMT In article <8706052153.AA20677@jade.berkeley.edu> SPGDCM@CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU (Doug Mosher) writes: .> .> MINX adds what they call "voice and full-motion video" to PC communication .> networks. It appears that you add a Datapoint monitor-camera combination to .> some sort of IBM PC; presumably the same monitor is used at other times for .> high quality color graphic monitor use. .> .> I have no idea what quality; certainly some teleconferencing video is .> limited scan, like 2 per second or whatever; their term "full-motion" .> is interesting. I believe that data compression techniques allow something like "full-motion" video. When you're speaking (for example) your lips move but most of the tv screen remains constant -- and thus only the lips need to be re- transmitted. Of course this is a gross oversimplification, but... Steve Janowsky (janowsky@huma1.harvard.edu ...harvard!huma1!janowsky) ------------------------------ From: hplabs!well!rogue@seismo.CSS.GOV (L. Brett Glass) Subject: X.25 PAD Sought Date: 3 Jun 87 23:15:33 GMT I am setting up a network link for a public-service organization that is looking for an inexpensive, possibly used, X.25 PAD. It need not have the ability to originate calls. Please send recommendations, information, etc. to one of the addresses below: {lll-crg|ptsfa|hplabs|hoptoad}!well!rogue well!rogue@!LLL-LCC.ARPA glass (BIX) ------------------------------ From: hplabs!well!shibumi@seismo.CSS.GOV (Kenton Abbott Hoover) Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud Date: 3 Jun 87 18:46:53 GMT It would seem that one should build a box which, when one is not sending a call keeps the original serial number/phone number/etc. number combination, but when one is to send simply picks a new series of numbers from any scavaged off the airwaves (that just happen to belong to other senders). I would think that the cost of the electronics to do this would be about 2 times one unit plus 10%. Have I missed something? -- Kenton ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Mon, 22 Jun 87 13:46:36 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #18 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Jun 87 13:46:36 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 18 Today's Topics: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Re: Horror Stories digit graber Addresses of Government Officials Re: Intra-lata credit calls Submission for comp-dcom-telecom COMPUDUNIT Further Horrors ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ihnp4!ll1a!ll1!uucp@ames.arpa Date: 16 Jun 87 22:14:01 GMT To: ll1a!ihnp4!ptsfa!ames!comp-dcom-telecom@ames Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: ll1!nesac2!jec From: jec@nesac2.UUCP (John Carter ATLN SADM) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Horror Stories Message-ID: <1250@nesac2.UUCP> Date: 16 Jun 87 17:03:04 GMT Article-I.D.: nesac2.1250 Posted: Tue Jun 16 13:03:04 1987 References: <12309401739.23.MYERSTON@KL.SRI.Com| Distribution: world Organization: NESAC Lisle, Illinois Lines: 33 | |What is wrong with a hotel allowing access to only one carrier? | |Or with a hotel not even HAVING any phone service? (The latter | |may be a good selling feature!) If a hotel customer doesn't like | |what the hotel provides, he can always find another hotel. | | ...Keith | | ||Because only having one carrier may be a violation of federal | ||regulation. Specifically, anti-trust laws and the like. | | I agree with Keith. This is the same "the world owes me a living" | mentality that demands the highest of quality from a faceless "Ma | Bell" while resisting any increases in cost. It is best exemplified | by the socialist fools at Consumer Reports. If the hotel can choose | who will provide mattresses, room TVs, etc why not telephone service? | If they abuse the customers they will lose business. Makes sense to | me! | +HECTOR+ | ------- But it's the only room available within 10 miles of the meeting, using their carrier means the call is on your hotel bill, your company provides you with a credit card for a different carrier, and your company won't pay for calls made on another carrier and charged to your hotel bill. And there's no place to put the T1100+ if you try to use the pay phone for E-mail. -- John Carter AT&T Communications - Atlanta RWC USnail: 3001 Cobb Parkway, Atlanta GA 30339 E-mail: ...ihnp4!cuea2!ltuxa!ll1!nesac2!jec Voice: 404+951-4642 (The above views are my very own. How dare you question them? :-) ------------------------------ From: dolqci!mgrant@seismo.CSS.GOV Date: Wed, 17 Jun 87 14:51:44 edt To: To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu Subject: digit graber A while ago someone asked about a device to decode touchtones on the line and display them on some sort of display. The "Model TPM-32 DTMF/Dial Pulse Digit Display Unit" by Motion Technology seems to do the trick for a mear $249.00. It can be ordered from: Specialized Products Company 2117 W. Walnut Hill Lane Irving, TX 75038 I just noticed the thing in their most recent catalog. I'm in no way affiliated with them. -Mike ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Jun 87 18:11 CDT From: Mike Linnig Subject: Addresses of Government Officials To: telecom@BUIT1.BU.EDU If you feel the need to write someone about the changes to the FCC's access charge policy... The following is a portion of a list of government officials found on the arpanet a year or so ago. The names might have changed, but most of the addresses are probably still good. Mike Linnig ---------- MAILING ADDRESSES OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ---------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telephone # | Organization | Notes ---------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------- 202 456 1414 | White House Office | President Ronald Reagan | 1600 Pennsylvania Ave N.W. | | Washington, DC 20500 | ---------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------- 202 632 6600 | Federal Communications | Chairman | Commission | Mark S. Fowler | 1919 M St N.W. | Commissioners | Washington, DC 20554 | James Quello | | Henry M. Rivera | | Mary Ann W. Dawson | | Dennis R. Patrick ---------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------- 202 523 3598 | Federal Trade Commission | Chairman | Pennsylvania Ave at Sixth | James C. Miller III | St N.W. | | Washington, DC 20580 | ---------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------- 202 275 2812 | General Accounting Office | Comptroller General | GAO Bldg | Charles A. Bowsher | 441 G St N.W. | | Washington, DC 20548 | Fraud Waste and Abuse Hotline | | 1-800-424-5454 (outside DC) | | 633-6987 (DC area) ---------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------- 202 395 3000 | Office of Management and | Director | Budget | James C. Miller III | Old Executive Office Bldg | | 17th and Pennsylvania Ave | | N.W. | | Washington, DC 20503 | ---------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------- 202 224 3121 | Officer of the House | Speaker of the House | U.S. Capitol | Thomas P. O'neill (Mass) | Washington, DC 20515 | Room 2331 202-225-5111 | | | | Majority Leader | | James C. Wright, Jr. (Tex) | | Room 1236 202-225-5071 | | | | Minority Leader | | Robert H. Michel (Illinois) | | Room 2112 202-225-6201 ---------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------- 202 224 3121 | Officers of the Senate | President of the Senate | U.S. Capitol | V.P. George Bush | Washington, DC 20510 | Old Executive Office Bldg | | 202-224-8391 | | | | Majority Leader | | Robert Dole (Kan) | | Room SH141 202-224-6521 | | | | Minority Leader | | Alan K. Simpson (Wyoming) | | Room SH709 202-224-3424 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ To: comp-dcom-telecom%linus@mitre-bedford.ARPA From: apollo!rees.UUCP@seismo.css.gov (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Intra-lata credit calls Date: 17 Jun 87 14:47 GMT I've noticed that when I make an intra-lata call in Michigan (formerly Michigan Bell), and charge it on my calling card, the charge shows up on the NE Tel portion of my bill (my home service is from NE Tel), but it not listed as anything special. I assume that NE Tel is doing the billing on behalf of Michigan Bell, but it doesn't say that on the bill. But why should my AT&T card number allow Michigan Bell to bill NE Tel? AT&T wasn't involved in the call. Or is the card acting as a NE Tel card at the time? If so, why should Michigan Bell honor the card? I think the technology has outpaced the regulation, as usual, but it's nice that these calls still work. ------------------------------ From: cmcl2!phri!dasys1!patth@seismo.CSS.GOV (Patt Haring) Date: 17 Jun 87 14:39:03 GMT To: comp-dcom-telecom@seismo.CSS.GOV Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: dasys1!patth From: patth@dasys1.UUCP (Patt Haring) Newsgroups: comp.edu,cat.mag,comp.dcom.telecom Subject: COMPUDUNIT Keywords: mystery story writing project Message-ID: <553@dasys1.UUCP> Date: 17 Jun 87 14:39:02 GMT Organization: The Big Electric Cat Lines: 16 Re: MYSTERY WRITING ANYONE? If anyone is interested in participating in a mystery story writing project via telecommunications, they should contact me Michael Blyth at 718-816-5742. The project titled COMPUDUNIT will consist of using an existing writing curriculum to write your own WHODUNIT MYSTERY! Funding for this program is provided by Learning Link. Participants will try writing a collective Whodunit using the same COMPUDUNIT curriculum guide. Writing starts in Sept. 1987. Don't miss it, call today. -- Patt Haring {allegra,philabs,cmcl2}!phri\ Big Electric Cat Public Unix {bellcore,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!patth New York, NY, USA {philabs}!tg/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu 18 Jun 87 11:06:42-PDT From: HECTOR MYERSTON Subject: Further Horrors To: telecom-request@BUIT1.BU.EDU Cc: myerston@KL.SRI.Com WERNER@R20.UTEXAS.EDU writes> >> This is the same "the world owes me a living" >> mentality that demands the highest of quality from a faceless "Ma >> Bell" while resisting any increases in cost. It is best exemplified >> by the socialist fools at Consumer Reports. >just to let you know that this "fool" thinks that you are all wet ... >if society allows monopolies, we have a right to demand that prices go >down and quality goes up when technology improves ... of course, your >disregard for the value of the work (and the need for it) of Consumers >Report make me expect that I am talking to deaf ears ...to bad. >not that I think that CR is infallible ...far from it! You missed both points. Society did NOT "allow monopolies" society BROKE UP the monopoly allowing the user (in this case the hotels) to choose which Long Distance carrier to use. The original poster was complaining about the Hotel blocking access to OTHER carriers. We can't have our cake (by breaking up the Bell System) and eat it too (demand that hotels provide some sort of equal access to one and all). A discussion of CR probably belongs in Net.fussbudget. But, since you ask, here is my rationale. CR is OK for testing toasters and the like although they over-emphasize the manufacturer and government responsibilities for user stupidity ("Unsafe if turned on while in the bathtub"). They have recently chosen to expand into social engineering and liberal politics. Their views on such things as Telecommunications policy have no more validity than that of any other left-wing journal. Besides, they insist in numbering their pages in mid-19th century style. I am replying here as ARPANET does not recognize your address. ------- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Wed, 24 Jun 87 0:08:16 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #19 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Jun 87 0:08:16 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 19 Today's Topics: Query about FAX format Incoming Phone Calls Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Re: Intra-lata credit calls FCC proposes tax for "Enhanced Services" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 87 13:43:16 EDT From: Richard Furuta To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Query about FAX format Cc: furuta@brillig.umd.edu Can someone provide me with information about what kind of interfaces are in use by FAX machines? What signalling tones are used? What encoding of the page is transmitted? Is any of this compatible with computer communication equipment? What would it take to make your average everyday Unix-style computer behave as if it were a FAX machine (transmit and/or receive)? Please send me a copy of your responses directly. I am on Telecom but boy am I ever behind in my reading! Thanks. --Rick furuta@mimsy.umd.edu seismo!mimsy!furuta ------------------------------ Date: 22 Jun 87 22:43 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD Subject: Incoming Phone Calls To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU This may end up sounding like a really dumb question but... If all the lines in a neighborhood are being utilized and someone tries to call into that area to a phone that is NOT being used what (if anything) will happen? Will they get a busy signal? Thanks, --Bi// ------------------------------ From: jack!man!nu3b2!rwhite%ucsdhub.UUCP@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu Date: 24 Jun 87 01:00:19 GMT To: man!comp-dcom-telecom Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: nu3b2!rwhite From: rwhite@nu3b2.UUCP (Robert C. White Jr.) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Intra-lata credit calls Summary: It's who pays that counts. Message-ID: <765@nu3b2.UUCP> Date: 24 Jun 87 01:00:19 GMT References: <8706112109.AA03207@jade.berkeley.edu> <35867a62.b8ab@apollo.uucp> Organization: National University, San Diego Lines: 21 Its like the roaming agreement on a celular telephone. when you make a calling card call, the call is billed through the "normal" route. Company "A" bills AT&T for the call and AT&T normally reaches you through your local operating company [which is why the firs ten numbers on your card are most probably your phone number.] The sematnics of a billing depend on the operating company in question. I think you will find that all the call detail listed is AT&T long-lines provided, at least on that one page, and that the fact that this bill is forwarded through is listed someware insignificant [like on the back of the summary page or something] This whole thing is noraml, AT&T always does it that way. Robert. Disclaimer: My mind is so fragmented by random excursions into a wilderness of abstractions and incipient ideas that the practical purposes of the moment are often submerged in my consciousness and I don't know what I'm doing. [my employers certainly have no idea] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Jun 87 23:57:47 EDT From: jsol (Jon Solomon) To: telecom Subject: FCC proposes tax for "Enhanced Services" Thanks to Keith Peterson at SIMTEL for forwarding information he received on the info-modems list. What he forwarded was a couple of postings to some USENET newsgroups, describing what the FCC wants to do, and ways which people can (if they choose to) inform the FCC of their views on it. The submission is too large to post, so I have made it available for FTP access from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU in the file FCC.THREAT.1 I will post a copy of this to the USENET readers, and BITNET users should send me mail if they want a copy. (mail to telecom-request@buit1.bu.edu) Enjoy, --jsol ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 23:30:19 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #20 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Jun 87 23:30:19 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 20 Today's Topics: FCC news release on PDN surcharge Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Re: Incoming Phone Calls CSCNET Re: Incoming Phone Calls Re: Addresses of Government Officials Re: FCC Surcharges for Telenet/Tymnet/CompuServe/MCIMAIL/etc. Information tax ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 24 Jun 87 20:06:16-PDT From: David Roode Subject: FCC news release on PDN surcharge To: Telecom@buit1.bu.edu Following is the FCC access charges news release of June 10, 1987. (This is not the official text of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).) FCC PROPOSES ELIMINATION OF INTERSTATE ACCESS CHARGES EXEMPTION FOR ENHANCED SERVICE PROVIDERS The Commission has proposed elimination of the exemption from interstate access charges currently allowed enhanced service providers, effective January 1, 1988. Charges for intrastate service would not be affected. Enhanced services add value to, or enhance the use of, basic transmission service. Examples of enhanced services, which the Commission defined in its Computer II and Computer III procedings, include computer-based applications such as protocol processing, information retrieval systems and voice or message services. In its access charge proceeding, the Commission provided for exemptions for a number of groups. These exemptions have gradually been eliminated. In the pre-access environment, enhanced service providers and WATS resellers were paying local business exchange service rates for their interstate access, rather than the higher charges that other common carriers (OCCs) were paying and the even higher amounts assessed to MTS and WATS through the divisions of revenues and settlements processes. The Commission decided that the immediate imposition of interstate access charges on enhanced service providers and resellers could affect their ability to provide service during the time they were adjusting to the new access charge rules. Consequently, the Commission granted enhanced service providers, as well as resellers, a temporary exemption from payment of interstate access charges. In proposing to eliminate this exemption, the Commission said it was concerned that the charges currently paid by enhanced service providers did not contribute sufficiently to the cost of the exchange access facilities they use in offering services to the public. Concerns about rate shock might justify a temporary, but not a permanent, exemption from access charges. Enhanced service providers have had ample notice of the Commission's ultimate intent to apply interstate access charges and ample opportunity to adjust their planning accordingly. Moreover, it said, the potential financial impact on enhanced service providers of eliminating their exemption is substantially smaller than it was at the time the exemption was granted. In particular, the Commission noted that the common carrier line charge has decreased dramatically with the introduction of subscriber line charges. END ------- ------------------------------ From: ucsdhub!jack!man!nu3b2!rwhite@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu Date: 25 Jun 87 07:25:29 GMT To: man!comp-dcom-telecom Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: nu3b2!rwhite From: rwhite@nu3b2.UUCP (Robert C. White Jr.) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Incoming Phone Calls Summary: busy signal,sort of. Message-ID: <775@nu3b2.UUCP> Date: 25 Jun 87 07:25:29 GMT References: Organization: National University, San Diego Lines: 39 In article , WBD.MDC@OFFICE-1.ARPA (William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD) writes: > This may end up sounding like a really dumb question but... > > If all the lines in a neighborhood are being utilized and someone tries to call > into that area to a phone that is NOT being used what (if anything) will > happen? Will they get a busy signal? It is not a dumb question, but there is something I don't think you understand. EVERY phone number is on it's own DEDICATED pair running all the way to the Central Office Switch servicing that area [often but not always the entire prefix {first 3 of the standard 7 digits} the only common execption to this is those who have purchased a "foregn exchange" If every circut comming into a CO [Central Office] is busy, and you are calling from another CO, or your CO's swithch is not capable of compleeting enough connections to support your outgoing call you will recieve the "fast" busy signal . This is the "Circut Overload/Insufficient Access Rights" signal and is heard mostly on mother's day /snicker ;-). Any other busy signal or condition is either a mundane destination busy [Or system all f**ked up signal] All the lines in a CO can be busy, all the connections in a CO switch can be busy, but the only way all "the lines going into a neighborhood" can be busy is if every number has at least one instrument "off-hook" If it often takes several minutes for the tone generator to give you dial-tone, call your Opperating Company and tell them to buy a bigger switch!!! Robert. Disclaimer: My mind is so fragmented by random excursions into a wilderness of abstractions and incipient ideas that the practical purposes of the moment are often submerged in my consciousness and I don't know what I'm doing. [my employers certainly have no idea] ------------------------------ To: TELECOM@buit1.bu.edu Subject: CSCNET From: johnso%tp5@rand-unix.ARPA (A. Ross Johnson) Date: 24 Jun 87 22:32:35 PDT (Wed) I have just noticed that CompuServe now offers foreign access via CSCNET. The nodes are limited in number, but this does provide the short-term traveler with access to U.S. networks without a local foreign data network account. Have subscribers to this list utilized CSCNet for foreign access to U.S. networks? What is the experience. The surcharge on CompuServe is evidently $20/hour, which is generally less than what one would pay to local networks in Germany and Britain (and probably elsewhere) for the same service. There will be local ld charges, e.g. so far the only node in Germany is evidently in Frankfurt, that will offset the savings. Ross Johnson If I receive many replies, I will summarize to this group. ------------------------------ From: moss!ihlpf!ahl@RUTGERS.EDU (A Little) Subject: Re: Incoming Phone Calls Date: 25 Jun 87 14:52:49 GMT To: > > If all the lines in a neighborhood are being utilized and someone tries to > > call into that area to a phone that is NOT being used what (if anything) will > > happen? Will they get a busy signal? > > I believe that they will get a re-order tone. This is a "fast-busy", Most local offices TRY to design their networks so that blocking will not occur. A classic example of the above scenario is an area near a high school and a majority of the students get home at 3:00 and want to call their friends. A well designed office will distribute lines from this area throughout the network. The respondant was correct, though, that if all circuit are used, reorder tone will result. Andy inhp4!ihlpf!ahl ------------------------------ Date: 25 Jun 86 08:15 EST From: C0144%CSUOHIO.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: Re: Addresses of Government Officials Outside of the usual public carriers, does anyone have any idea if the pubic officials mentioned earlier have Internet addresses? Surely, there must be at least *1* person at the top levels of our government with enough initiative to venture into our realm. Of course, actually reading the mail is a different story. :-) -Dave +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From the North Coast Dave Chatfield, Dept. of Computer Services _____ of America...._-! Cleveland State University ! --___ ___-- ! ! ------(*) ! BITNET: C0144@CSUOHIO ! Cleveland ! ARPA: C0144%CSUOHIO.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU ! ! USENET: davec!ncoast.UUCP ! O H I O ! BBS: Assistant Sysop, PC-OHIO 216-381-3320 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 17:58:38 EDT From: Michael Grant To: ROODE@bionet-20.arpa, telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Re: FCC Surcharges for Telenet/Tymnet/CompuServe/MCIMAIL/etc. Cc: BIONET@bionet-20.ARPA, Cimbala@bionet-20.ARPA, If they add these fees, it seems like it's going to be the same price to dial up directly to the service long-distance. Am I missing something? -Mike ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 20:48:09 EDT From: "Keith F. Lynch" Subject: Information tax To: ROODE@BIONET-20.ARPA Cc: KFL@AI.AI.MIT.EDU, Telecom@BUIT1.BU.EDU > Is it fair to have voice pay more than data for the identical services? It is not the identical service. A T1 line (1.544 million baud) can support 44 full duplex voice conversations. It can support over 1200 1200 baud links. And that is worst case, where both ends of the link are sending 1200 baud solid without pause. Actual usage tends to be about 1/10 of this, and this feature is taken advantage of by packet nets such as telenet, tymnet, etc. If this was not the case, how could services such as PC PURSUIT afford to sell time for less than six cents per hour? Presumably they are multiplexing over some existing common carrier and already paying the access charges and long distance charges, anyway. Five dollars per hour for a 1200 baud line? Only if voice lines are charged $1400 per hour! Why should they pay less for the same service? Seriously, if anyone can find any possible justification for this proposed 8000% tax, I would very much like to hear it. ...Keith ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Tue, 30 Jun 87 0:21:34 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #21 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Tue, 30 Jun 87 0:21:34 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 21 Today's Topics: Re: Incoming Phone Calls Area Code split, Chicago area Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Re: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Clarksville, Md. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To: From: pttesac!vanam@lll-tis.arpa.ARPA (Marnix van Ammers) Subject: Re: Incoming Phone Calls Date: 28 Jun 87 18:20:51 GMT In article WBD.MDC@OFFICE-1.ARPA (William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD) writes: >This may end up sounding like a really dumb question but... > >If all the lines in a neighborhood are being utilized and someone tries to call >into that area to a phone that is NOT being used what (if anything) will >happen? Will they get a busy signal? Me and my friend who both work in the phone company and have experience with ESS happened to read this and before reading the followups decided that unless there was a problem with the office (poor load balancing), nothing would happen. That is, the incoming call would complete with no problem. If there were poor load balancing, some of the people in the neighborhood would start getting no-dial-tone or slow- dial-tone at times. On incoming calls to a very busy office with poor load balancing, callers could get re-order tone (120 ipm busy tone). -- Marnix (ain't unix!) A. van\ Ammers Work: (415) 545-8334 Home: (707) 644-9781 CEO: MAVANAMMERS:UNIX UUCP: {ihnp4|ptsfa}!pttesac!vanam CIS: 70027,70 ** So what *is* a deterministic finite automaton ? ** ------------------------------ Date: 29-Jun-1987 0028 From: covert%covert.DEC@decwrl.dec.com (John R. Covert) To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Area Code split, Chicago area In 1990, Chicago, currently 312, will split. The inner area will remain 312; the outer area will be 708. This leaves only 903, 908, 909, and 917 available for assignment. (508 is assigned to Massachusetts, 719 to Colorado, and 407 to Florida.) /john ------------------------------ From: moss!asr2!skipt@RUTGERS.EDU Date: 29 Jun 87 13:28:40 GMT To: moss!cbosgd!comp-dcom-telecom@rutgers.EDU Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: asr2!skipt From: skipt@asr2.UUCP (Skip Tourville) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Summary: it this really true? Message-ID: <109@asr2.UUCP> Date: 29 Jun 87 13:28:39 GMT References: <8706250758.AA04222@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> Organization: AT&T Conversant Systems, Columbus, OH Lines: 15 >From a recent article: > ....... EVERY phone number is on it's own DEDICATED pair running > all the way to the Central Office Switch servicing that area [often Is this really true? (For residential service I mean) In areas where there is a large concentration of directory numbers it might be useful to run a digital trunk to a remote switching unit. If the number of digital channels is less that the number of directory numbers, some blocking would occur under heavy load. I think I have heard of such arrangements. Skip ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Jun 87 19:31:49 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) To: telecom@BRL.ARPA Subject: Clarksville, Md. I made it down to Clarksville, Maryland recently. The setup I knew for there as of several years ago was (in area code 301): 286--no local service to Balt. or DC 531 (Columbia service)--local to Baltimore city, not beyond it 988 (Ellicott City service)--local to Baltimore metro area so I assumed that 286, with the smallest calling area, would show up on pay phones. But recently, I noticed 286 popping up in Washington area directory as Berwyn, part of Washington metro area; so the question I put forth in a recent Digest was what was now on the Clarksville pay phones. Answer: 531. This suggests that Clarksville area is changing from rural to suburban-bedroom. (Use 596--Columbia with Laurel service--for local service to DC.) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Sat, 25 Jul 87 19:05:34 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #22 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jul 87 19:05:34 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 22 Today's Topics: PDN surcharge Re: copper pairs back to the CO Dedicated lines to CO novatel 390 sales calls and directory listings Bell PA as L.D. Carrier ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 87 15:07 MST From: Paul Dickson Subject: PDN surcharge To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU > Enhanced services add value to, or enhance the use of, basic transmission >service. Examples of enhanced services, which the Commission defined in its >Computer II and Computer III procedings, include computer-based applications >such as protocol processing, information retrieval systems and voice or >message services. How does the FCC define "basic transmission service"? If it's a voice connection between to two points, then services like PC-pursuit shouldn't be considered an "enchanced service". The bits per second data rate of these data serives are far lower than voice communications. I wouldn't mind paying the surcharge if I got with it a 19.2Kbps data rate or greater. Paul Dickson Dickson%pco @ BCO-Multics.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Jun 87 17:16:19 EDT From: Michael Grant To: moss!asr2!skipt%RUTGERS.EDU@buit1.bu.edu, Subject: Re: copper pairs back to the CO >> ....... EVERY phone number is on it's own DEDICATED pair running >> all the way to the Central Office Switch servicing that area [often ... In some circumstances, especially if you order up many phone lines, the telco will install a T1 line to a room or closet you provide them. They then break that T1 line upto 24 voice channels. I have heard of this being done to offices and apartment complexes in areas where the copper wire back to the CO is at a premium. -Mike Grant ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jul 87 11:04:32 edt From: df1b+@andrew.cmu.edu (David R. Fulmer) To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Dedicated lines to CO Cc: > ....... EVERY phone number is on it's own DEDICATED pair running > all the way to the Central Office Switch servicing that area [often Ah, but this is not always true. In some areas where the local telco didn't plan ahead for enough expansion they sometimes multiplex several subscriber's lines onto one wire pair. This way they don't have to lay new cable if the area outgrows their original estimates. A freind has this. He has both a voice line and a line running his BBS, but only one wire pair running to the CO. This doesn't have much to do with the original discussion about all pairs being busy, but I though it was worth posting anyway. . . Dave Fulmer !seismo!andrew.cmu.edu!df1b df1b+@andrew.cmu.edu (arpa) r750df1b@cmccvb (bitnet) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jul 87 18:24 EDT From: Kovalcik@MIT-Multics.ARPA (Richard Kovalcik, Jr.) Subject: novatel 390 To: telecom@AI.AI.MIT.EDU Cc: rk@AI.AI.MIT.EDU I am looking for someone familiar with the "dealer setable" options on the novatel 390 cellular phone and / or with access to the dealer instruction manual. I am especially interested in descriptions of the "dealer setable" options. Please contact me if you can help. ------------------------------ From: SPGDCM%UCBCMSA.Berkeley.EDU@jade.berkeley.edu Date: Fri, 10 Jul 87 17:15:57 PDT To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: sales calls and directory listings MSG:FROM: SPGDCM --UCBCMSA TO: NETWORK --NETWORK 07/10/87 17:15:56 To: NETWORK --NETWORK Network Address From: Doug Mosher Title: MVS/Tandem Systems Manager (415)642-5823 Office: Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 Subject: sales calls and directory listings To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu I just got some interesting info from the sales rep at Pacific Bell when I called asking how I could reduce my receipt of sales calls. On the one hand, I could only choose between being "listed" (so my friends and apparently businesses can all find me) or "unlisted" (so neither can, and paying an extra fee). Also I cannot order a directory line such as "NO SALES CALLS". HOWEVER, another very nice option exists. There is another directory, the "reverse directory", which is ordered by physical address. This is used by almost all sales callers, since they choose neighborhoods, based in good part on demographics (certain neighborhoods or streets tend to be rich/poor/full of homeowners/people living in salt air and needing window repairs/etc/etc). Normally if you are "listed" you're listed in both, and "unlisted", unlisted in both. BUT: It is FREE to be de-listed in the reverse directory only, and still appear in the regular one. Comes out every 6 months so it takes awhile for you to see the effect of delisting; I imagine some organizations use old ones so it might fade over an even longer period. The salesperson believed that 9 out of 10 sales callers use the reverse. In published brochures I now remember the telco claiming that the reverse directory is used also by police, fire, etc. Hmmmm, betcha I'll still show on the 911 screens even though I de-listed. Thanks, Doug sales calls and directory listings ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jul 87 01:01:45 PDT From: jimmy@PIC.UCLA.EDU (Jim Gottlieb) To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Bell PA as L.D. Carrier Cc: A May 1987 bill insert from Bell of Pennsylvania suggests that customers use the PIC code of 1-0-B-P-A when calling to South Jersey in order to "automatically save 10% off AT&T's regular long-distance rates for these calls..." I remember hearing that there is some deal that lets Bell of PA (and, I think, New York Tel.) handle inter-LATA traffic into parts of New Jersey. That's OK. What puzzled me was the following sentence: "If you've already chosen Bell of Pennsylvania as your long-distance company, there's no need to dial '1-0-B-P-A.'" Now, I do sleep eight hours a night so I may have missed something, but I do know that BOCs can not be long-distance carriers. How could some- one have Bell of PA as their primary carrier? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jim Gottlieb "It's easier to apologize than to ask permission. When in doubt, do it." Internet: jimmy%pic@ats.ucla.edu UUCP: sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!ucla-cs!pic.ucla.edu!jimmy ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Sat, 25 Jul 87 19:41:15 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #23 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jul 87 19:41:15 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 23 Today's Topics: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom distributed key system info wanted Incompatibility with 5ESS? NYSE stock quotes, etc, SCA data transmission in FM Bands BOC Support ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gerry Wheeler Date: 14 Jul 87 18:57:39 GMT To: comp-dcom-telecom%watmath.waterloo.edu@RELAY.CS.NET Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: mks!wheels From: wheels@mks.UUCP (Gerry Wheeler) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: distributed key system info wanted Keywords: distributed key system Message-ID: <281@mks.UUCP> Date: 14 Jul 87 18:57:38 GMT Distribution: na Organization: Mortice Kern Systems, Waterloo, Ont. Lines: 58 We are going to have our operations distributed between two buildings, a short distance apart (but not adjacent -- the intervening public roads prevent running wires between buildings). We would like to find a telephone system which will span the two buildings transparently. For example, people using the intercom shouldn't have to know whether the destination is in the same building or not, and people in either building should be able to answer incoming calls (especially when the system is set for night service). We currently have an electronic key system with features such as hands free intercom, paging, and busy lamps on all stations, and we would like something similar. We expect a maximum size of 16 to 20 stations total, and maybe 5 CO lines. So far, we have seen three solutions. One is to run all the CO lines into building A, which would have a (electronic) key system. Then, using several single line interfaces, station outputs would run from system A to building B, likely via leased lines. The phones in building B would be standard desk phones. They would be able to access the system's features by dialling special codes, but they wouldn't have features like hands-free intercom, busy lamps, etc. The second solution is to put another (electronic) key system in building B, which would see the station lines from system A as CO lines. Unfortunately, this does not give the desired transparency. For example, the two intercom systems remain completely independent. The third solution we have seen is to use electronic systems which are designed to be tied together. The IBM-Rolm Redwood system is one of these. The two systems operate as equals, rather than master/slave. However, even then there are failings in the transparency of operation. For example, the intercoms are not integrated, and calling an extension on the other system still involves going through local dial tone, getting remote dial tone, and dialling the remote extension. It would seem technically feasible to have two electronic systems which pass data and voice back and forth over leased lines, such that they share a common view of the world. By continually updating each other as to the status of their stations and lines, all stations' indicators would reflect the status of the whole distributed system. In addition, when calling a remote station, the originating system could send data to the remote system indicating which tie line is being used for voice, and to which extension it should be routed. In such a system stations connected to either system would have equal access to all other stations, and features like busy lamps would operate correctly for all stations and lines. (As a bonus, if this system could also provide a few 9600 bps serial lines between the buildings, we would really be set!) If someone could point us in the direction of a system to integrate the two buildings, for a reasonable cost, we would be most appreciative. Of course, responses on unreasonable systems will be read with interest too. We'll summarize whatever information we get. -- "Network XXIII. Where two's company, and three's an audience." -- Max Headroom Gerry Wheeler {seismo,decvax,ihnp4}!watmath!mks!wheels Mortice Kern Systems Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Tue Jul 14 15:01:27 1987 From: mcb@lll-tis.ARPA (Michael C. Berch) Subject: Incompatibility with 5ESS? To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu The Pacfic Bell CO (Millbrae, California: 415-697) where I live is finally installing a new switch, replacing the one installed in 1954. We will finally get stuff like international direct dial, etc., that normal people have had for a while now. PacBell sent out the following letter (excerpted): "Dear Customer: As part of our plan to expand and improve telephone service, [...] we will be making some changes in the central office equipment serving your area. [...] We are informing you in advance of this change because there is a possibility that our new equipment may affect some customer telephone equipment. [...] If you have [equipment other than a standard Touch-Tone or rotary-dial telephone] please contact your equipment vendor prior to our change date. Your vendor will need to know these facts: Pacific Bell is installing #5 ESS equipment in the Millbrae Central Office. Installation is planned for September 19, 1987. Your vendor can tell you if any adjustments are necessary to make your equipment compatible with our installation. [...]" ----- Hmmm. I didn't know that a 5ESS was not downwardly compatible with anything you might plug into the network. What sorts of things might cause problems or be incompatible? Are they talking about older PBXs, or what? Michael C. Berch ARPA: mcb@lll-tis.arpa UUCP: {ames,ihnp4,lll-crg,lll-lcc,mordor}!lll-tis!mcb ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jul 87 04:53:38 PDT From: To: ames!comp-dcom-telecom Path: ptsfa!nonvon!root From: root@nonvon.UUCP (root) Newsgroups: sci.electronics,misc.invest,misc.wanted,rec.audio,sci.crypt,comp.dcom.telecom,rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.packet Subject: NYSE stock quotes, etc, SCA data transmission in FM Bands Keywords: NYSE quotes, SCA, FM, Data Message-ID: <620@nonvon.UUCP> Date: 19 Jul 87 23:50:06 GMT Organization: NONVON Systems Computer Research Group Lines: 21 Looking for information on recieving or decoding the data transmissions that occur on many Public Service FM radio stations (KQED, KQEC, KMET, etc). Any help/information at all would be appreciated. Info is modulated on the SCA subcarrier for many background music applications. Special reciever circuitry is used for reception. Althouh most stations transmit music, some, like KQED, transmit data, and this is specifically what I'm looking for... the baud rate, encoding method, etc. Please e-mail responses, and *IFF* there is any interest, I will disburse what I get. Thank You, Alex P Novickis UUCP: {ihnp4,ames,qantel,sun,amdahl,lll-crg,pyramid}!ptsfa!nonvon!apn {* Only those who attempt the absurd ... will achieve the impossible *} {* I think... I think it's in my basement... Let me go upstairs and check. *} {* -escher *} ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jul 87 18:32 PDT From: William Daul / McDonnell-Douglas / APD-ASD Subject: BOC Support To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Could someone please send me the name of the organization that was created to support the BOCs. I think it was mentioned way back when...the company was suppose to make sure that the BOCs would always be able to talk with one another...in the national interest...as well as other services. Thanks for any pointers, --Bi// [I believe you are referring to Bell Communications Research, or Belcore. --JSol] ------------------------------ To: ucbvax!BUIT1.BU.EDU!jsol Date: Thu, 23 Jul 87 07:43:08 EDT From: ulysses!heh Could you please post the following note for me? Thanks. I'm looking for *ANY* product in the market with a VME or SCSI interface that interfaces with telephone lines or that does digital voice recording and transmission. This product (hardware/firmware/software) is expected to do any of the following: initiate and answer calls, recognize and generate touch tone, digitize, store, and play back voice files, and to carry on dialogues with voice input and touch-tone control. Products I'm looking for are similar to the Natural Microsystems' Watson board or Dialogic Corp's Dialog board for PCs, and the Voice Power board for AT&T UNIX PC 7300, but I'd like to use Sun workstations. Any information is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Harlan Husmann {ihnp4,ucbvax,vax135,seismo}!ulysses!heh (201)582-4834 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Sat, 25 Jul 87 20:05:49 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #24 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jul 87 20:05:49 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 24 Today's Topics: Long Distance Carriers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 18 Jul 87 18:03:15 cdt From: John Reece To: comp-dcom-telecom@seismo.CSS.GOV Path: pollux!john From: john@pollux.UUCP (John Reece) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Long Distance Carriers Message-ID: <321@pollux.UUCP> Date: 18 Jul 87 22:42:46 GMT Reply-To: john@pollux.UUCP (John Reece) Distribution: world Organization: Department of Electrical Engineering; S.M.U.; Dallas, TX Lines: 444 The following is a list of long distance carrier access numbers of the form 10XXX. An asterisk indicates that the number is used but the name of the company is not available. 001 MidAmerican LD (Republic Telecom) 002 AmeriCall LDC 003 RCI Corporation 004 * 005 * 006 * 007 Tel America 009 * 010 * 011 Metromedia Long Distance 012 Charter Corporation (Tri-J) 013 Access Services 014 * 015 * 018 * 020 * 021 Mercury 022 MCI Telecommunications 023 Texnet 024 Petricca Communications Systems 028 Texnet 030 Valu-Line of Wichita Falls 031 Teltec Saving Communications 033 US Sprint 035 * 036 Long Distance Savers 039 Electronic Office Centers of America (EO/Tech) 040 * 042 First Phone 044 Allnet Communication Services (LDX, Lexitel) 050 * 051 * 053 American Network (Starnet) 054 * 055 * 056 American Satellite 057 Long Distance Satellite 058 * 059 COMNET 060 Valu-Line of West Texas 061 * 062 * 063 COMNET 065 * 066 * 069 V/COM 070 National Telephone Exchange 072 * 077 * 080 AMTEL Systems 081 * 082 * 084 Long Distance Service (LDS) 085 WesTel 086 * 087 * 088 Satellite Business Systems (MCI) 089 Telephone Systems 090 WesTel 092 * 093 Rainbow Communications 095 Southwest Communications 098 * 099 AmeriCall 120 * 121 * 122 RCA Global Communications 123 * 124 * 131 * 133 * 137 All America Cables and Radio (ITT) 142 First Phone 146 ARGO Communications 170 * 177 * 188 Satellite Business Systems 200 * 201 PhoneNet 202 ExecuLines 203 Cypress Telecommunications (Cytel) 204 United Telephone Long Distance 205 * 206 United Telephone Long Distance 210 * 211 RCI 212 Call US 213 Long Distance Telephone Savers 214 Tyler Telecom 215 Star Tel of Abilene 216 * 217 Call US 218 * 219 Call USA 220 Western Union Telegraph 221 * 222 MCI Telecommunications (SBS) 223 Cable & Wireless Communication (TDX) 224 American Communications 225 * 226 * 227 ATH Communications (Call America) 228 * 229 Bay Communications 230 * 231 * 232 Superior Telecom 233 Delta Communications 234 AC Teleconnect (Alternative Communication) 235 * 236 * 237 Inter-Comm Telephone 238 * 239 Woof Communications (ACT) 240 * 241 American Long Lines 242 Choice Information Systems 243 * 244 Automated Communications 245 Taconic Long Distance Service 246 * 247 * 248 * 249 * 250 Dial-Net 251 * 252 Long Distance/USA 253 Litel Telecommunications 255 All-State Communications 256 American Sharecom 258 * 260 Advanced Communications Systems 263 Com Systems (Sun Dial Communications) 264 * 265 * 266 * 267 * 268 Compute-A-Call 269 * 270 * 271 * 272 * 275 * 276 CP National (American Network, Starnet) 277 * 278 * 280 * 282 * 283 * 284 American Telenet 285 * 286 Clark Telecommunications 287 ATS Communications 288 AT&T Communications 295 * 298 Thriftline 299 * 300 * 301 * 302 Austin Bestline 303 MidAmerican LD (Republic Telecom) 304 * 307 * 310 * 311 SaveNet (American Network, Starnet) 312 * 313 * 314 * 318 Long Distance Savers 321 Southland Systems 322 American Sharecom 323 * 324 First Communication 326 * 330 * 331 Texustel 332 * 333 US Sprint 335 * 336 Florida Digital Network 337 * 338 Midco Communications 339 Communication Cable Laying 341 * 342 * 343 Communication Cable Laying 345 AC Teleconnect (Alternative Communication) 348 * 350 Dial-Net 353 * 355 US Link 357 Manitowoc Long Distance Service 358 * 362 Electronic Office Centers of America (EO/Tech) 363 Tel-Toll (Econ-O-Dial of Bishop) 366 * 369 American Satellite 370 * 372 * 373 Econo-Line Waco 375 Wertern Union Telegraph 379 * 382 * 385 The Switchboard 390 * 393 Execulines of Florida 399 * 400 American Sharecom 401 * 404 MidAmerican LD (Republic Telecom) 405 * 411 * 412 Penn Telecom 414 * 415 * 421 * 422 * 424 * 426 * 428 Inter-Comm Telephone 432 Lightcall 435 Call-USA 436 Indiana Switch 440 Tex-Net 441 Escondido Telephone 442 First Phone 443 * 444 Allnet Communication Services (LDX, Lexitel) 445 * 450 * 452 * 455 Telecom Long Distance 456 ARGO Communications 457 * 458 * 462 American Network Services 464 Houston Network 465 Intelco 466 International Office Networks 468 * 469 GMW 470 * 472 Hal-Rad Communications 475 * 480 Chico Telecom (Call America) 482 * 484 * 486 * 488 United States Transmission Systems (ITT) 497 * 500 * 505 San Marcos Long Distance 511 * 512 * 515 Burlington Telephone 523 * 529 Southern Oregon Long Distance 532 Long Distance America 533 Long Distance Discount 535 * 536 Long Distance Management 537 * 538 * 539 * 543 * 547 * 550 Valu-Line of Alexandria 551 Pittsburg Communication Systems 552 First Phone 555 TeleSphere Networks 556 * 565 * 566 Cable & Wireless Communication (TDX) 567 Advanced Marketing Services (Dial Anywhere) 579 Lintel System (Lincoln Telephone LD) 580 * 584 * 585 * 587 * 588 * 590 Wisconsin Telecommunications Tech 599 Texas Long Distance Conroe 600 * 601 Discount Communications Services 602 * 606 Biz Tel Long Distance Telephone 607 * 610 * 616 * 622 Metro America Communications 626 * 627 * 628 * 634 Econo-Line Midland 638 * 646 Contact America 647 * 652 * 654 Cincinnati Bell Long Distance 655 Ken-Tel Service 658 * 660 Tex-Net 661 * 666 Southwest Communications 669 * 675 Network Services 678 * 680 Midwest Telephone Service 682 Ashland Call America 684 Nacogdoches Telecommunications 685 * 687 NTS Communications 688 * 689 * 698 * 700 Tel-America 704 Inter-Exchange Communications 707 Telvue 709 Tel-America 711 * 717 Pass Word 722 * 723 * 724 * 726 Procom 727 Conroe-Comtel 728 * 729 * 733 * 734 * 735 Marinette-Menominee Lds 736 * 737 National Telecommunications 738 * 741 ClayDesta 742 Phone America of Carolina 743 Peninsula Long Distance Service 747 Standard Informations Services 753 * 755 Sears Communication 757 Pace Long Distance Service 759 Telenet Communication (US Sprint) 760 American Satellite 765 * 766 Yavapai Telephone Exchange 767 * 770 * 771 Telesystems 774 * 776 * 777 US Sprint 778 * 782 * 785 Olympia Telecom 786 Shared Use Network Service 787 Star Tel of Abilene 788 ASCI's Telepone Express Network 789 Microtel 792 Southwest Communications 800 Satelco 801 MidAmerican LD (Republic) 805 * 808 * 818 * 821 * 822 * 823 * 824 * 825 * 826 * 827 TCS Network Services 833 Business Telecom 834 * 835 * 836 * 837 * 838 * 839 Cable & Wireless Communication (TDX) 847 VIP Connections 850 TK Communications 852 Telecommunicatons Systems 853 * 855 * 857 * 859 Valu-Line of Longview 862 * 864 * 866 Alascom 868 * 870 * 872 Telecommunications Services 874 Tri-Tel Communications 876 * 878 * 879 Thriftycall (Lintel Systems) 880 * 881 Coastal Telephone 882 Tuck Data Communications 883 TTI Midland-Odessa 884 TTI Midland-Odessa 885 The CommuniGroup 887 * 888 Satellite Business Systems (MCI) 889 * 895 Texas on Line 897 Leslie Hammond (Phone America) 898 Satellite Business Systems (MCI) 899 * 900 * 909 * 910 Montgomery Telamarketing Communication 911 * 915 Tele Tech 919 * 927 * 933 North American Communications 936 Rainbow Commuinications 937 Access Long Distance 938 Access Long Distance 945 * 950 * 951 Transamerica Telecommunications 955 United Communications 957 * 958 * 960 Access Plus 963 Tenex Communications 969 Dial-Net 977 * 983 * 985 America Calling 986 MCI Telecommunications (SBS) 987 ClayDesta Communications 988 Western Union Telegraph 991 Access Long Distance 992 * 995 * 996 * 999 * ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Sat, 25 Jul 87 20:09:52 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #25 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Jul 87 20:09:52 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 25 Today's Topics: SS# & Utilities -- a story ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Jul 87 16:42:59 GMT From: hao!gatech!spaf@ames.arpa (Gene Spafford) Subject: SS# & Utilities -- a story To: security@RUTGERS.EDU [This is the last message to be published this weekend. A total of 4 digests were sent out with approximately 11 or 12 messages going to individual recipients. TELECOM was nonfunctional for some time due to several catastrophe's including my vacation and our network connection going down several times. Things look more stable now. NOTE: Telecom is available as comp.dcom.telecom on usenet, it would lessen the load on the ARPANET/MILNET backbone if readers who receive TELECOM in their mailbox and who read netnews; switch to reading TELECOM as a newsgroup. Send your delete requests to telecom-request@buit1.bu.edu. --jsol] As a matter of principle, I'm one of those people who won't give out my social security number when applying for utilities or credit cards. The reasons why have been discussed numerous times in various security-related groups. It is my understanding that it is against the law to force someone to give his/her social security number unless it is a government agency; although I've often run into occasional resistance, a few moments of explanation has usually resulted in things working out okay. Then there's today. I'm moving to W. Lafayette Indiana in two weeks and I called to establish my phone service there. Indiana is served by GTE for phone service. I did not anticipate any problems since I have an excellent credit history, as could be verified by a quick check with the local Southern Bell folks. After the rep at GTE took all my information down, she asked for my SS#. I explained that I don't give that out. She informed me that I would be required to pay a $75 deposit if I refused to give my SS#. So, I asked to talk to her supervisor. Her supervisor repeated that I would have to give my SS# to waive the deposit. I asked if they could simply call Southern Bell or take a credit card #, or they could call Purdue and verify my employment. He said that wasn't enough -- I had to supply my SS#, no other option. I enquired as to why they needed it -- he said it was for a credit check and to verify future disconnect requests. I explained that they could do that self-same credit check without the SS# *and* I don't give out my SS# precisely because I don't want it used as a verification number on my account. He insisted I either supply the number or pay the deposit. He also asked why I was being so stubborn -- it was even on my driver's license, wasn't it? (It isn't -- and hasn't been. In Georgia, you have always had the option of having a different ID, and now the licenses are being issue with those as default. The guy at GTE claims that the Indiana licenses are *required* to have the SS# on them -- anyone know if this is true? It shouldn't be...) I explained that having done some work in computer security, and personal experience, I know how that number can be abused. He said I was the only person he'd ever run into to refuse to give the SS# (!). I then asked him if the requirement for a SS# was written policy -- I wanted a copy to examine. He informed me that such information was private to the company and I couldn't have a copy -- didn't I trust him? I then asked if that policy was on file with the state Public Service Commission. At that he (rather loudly) asked if I wanted service with GTE or not? I asked him very calmly if he was threatening to deny me service -- he quieted down. I next explained that I wanted to see a copy of the written policy because it would be interesting to include in an article I might write on improper use of SS#s. He became very quiet. I offered to find the name and number of someone at Southern Bell who could verify my 9 years of service here. He said to call back with that information (thankful to get rid of me, I guess). The lady I talked to at Southern Bell was very helpful. She informed me that all the Southern Bell operators are told not to force a SS# because it is against both policy and law, but if someone won't provide it they are to get a bank account # or credit card number (both of which I am willing to give in circumstances such as this). She was more than willing to talk to the supervisor at GTE and give him a credit reference, if only he'd call. She said she'd also fill him in on policy. *AND*, most interestingly, Southern Bell had somehow obtained my SS# through other means and it was on file, but she marked it so that it was not to be given out to anyone, specifically not anyone with GTE Indiana. :-) Back to GTE. I called the supervisor (collect, of course) and gave him the name and number of the lady at Southern Bell. He was very curt and said he'd probably still require a deposit. He hung up on me. 20 minutes later the original GTE operator called me back and cheerily informed me that my service would be turned on August 4 with *no* deposit required! Questions --------- 1) Do many of you (net-readers) withhold your SS# in similar circumstances? Do you have these kinds of confrontations too? 2) Anyone know if other people at GTE Indiana are such jerks, or is this an isolated instance? 3) Anyone know if Indiana does, in fact, *require* that the SS# be on the driver's license? 4) Should I bother to follow-up on this further? That is, should I bother contacting the Public Service commission in Indiana about the treatment I received? (I'm currently not sure it is worth the effort). Too bad we don't have a choice of phone companies as well as long distance carriers -- I'd keep Southern Bell. -- Gene Spafford Software Engineering Research Center (SERC), Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 Internet: spaf@gatech.gatech.edu uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,rutgers,seismo}!gatech!spaf ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:26:42 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #26 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:26:42 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 26 Today's Topics: modem/Contel SL1XT problem charging schemes ISDN What number am I dialing from? Bell of PA as a LD carrier Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Re: SS# & Utilities -- a story BBS project !! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To: uw-beaver!comp-dcom-telecom@beaver.cs.washington.edu From: uw-nsr!stewart@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Stewart Castaldi) Subject: modem/Contel SL1XT problem Date: 24 Jul 87 22:59:03 GMT We have recently moved our computer which required that our telephone lines be attached to a different PBX. This new PBX is a Contel SL1XT. We have seven modem lines, 1 dial-out and 6 dial-in. The dial-in lines are on a hunt group so that if the first line is busy when it is dialed then the call will automatically be transfered to the first non-busy line. It appears that the first line on the hunt group is being taken off hook or disconnected approximately every half hour. Users complain that carrier drops or garbage character strings are encountered about every 30 minutes. The accounting files show that the line is going off hook and then the modem is timing out and hanging up at approximately 10 and 40 minutes past the hour on a very regular basis. Has anyone on the net experienced these problems or know of problems with the Contel SL1XT? -- Stewart Castaldi Dial: (206) 543-5418 University of Washington WD-12 Inet: stewart@nsr.acs.washington.edu Seattle, Washington 98195 UUCP: uw-nsr!stewart ------------------------------ To: munnari!comp-dcom-telecom@uunet.UU.NET From: munnari!trlamct.oz!andrew@uunet.UU.NET (Andrew Jennings) Subject: charging schemes Date: 24 Jul 87 05:43:40 GMT We're doing some work that involves working out data charging schemes. So far we've encountered the following schemes : data rate (independent of distance) rate & distance rate & distance with special inter-city rates distance to your local "center" Are there any more elaborate schemes out there ? We figured that if these cover all the US schemes then this probably covers all possible. -- UUCP: ...!{seismo, mcvax, ucb-vision, ukc}!munnari!trlamct.trl!andrew ARPA: andrew%trlamct.trl.oz@seismo.css.gov Andrew Jennings Telecom Australia Research Labs (Postmaster:- This mail has been acknowledged.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Jul 87 17:28:44 EDT From: Marc Davidson <443185%UOTTAWA.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu> Subject: ISDN To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Is anybody out there involved in ISDN trials? like the one being put on by (I think ) Mountain Bell in Phoenix. Bell Canada is going to be starting one in Ottawa in September, they will be using Northern Telecom's DMS-100 switch and will be providing Basic Rate Access lines in the beginning and later on, probably next year, Primary Rate Access lines. Intercity ISDN is expected by 1989. I was wondering what type of services are being offered by the present ISDN trials in North America, is there any Broadband ISDN services yet? In particular, the concept that you can take 'your' terminal from one physical network outlet and then walk over to another physical outlet and plug 'your' terminal in and still be recognized by the network, is an interesting one. In Ottawa, that type of service will be provided behind any NT1 (Network Termin ating equipment), but not behind another different NT1, it should be offered globally (within the same switch) in the near future. It would be interesting if you could do this sort of thing, but at much larger distances...say the othe r side of the world. I would appreciate it if anybody could send me further info on ISDN (in general). Thanks, Marc Davidson Undergrad CO-OP student Electrical Eng. University of Ottawa, Ottawa Canada Bitnet: JMD2F@UOTTAWA, 443185@UOTTAWA Telex/Dialcom: 20:GOC009, 22:PES001 Telno: (613) 722-7833 "Duntish: Mentally incapacitated by a severe hangover" ...Douglas Adams ------------------------------ Date: Sun 26 Jul 87 16:05:05-PDT From: Vic Christensen Subject: What number am I dialing from? To: telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU At least at MIT (and I assume the surrounding area), the number to get the mechanical voice to tell you what umber you're dialing from is (200) 222-2222, if I recall correctly... Vic Christensen ------- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jul 87 08:48:20 EDT From: prindle@nadc.arpa (Frank Prindle) To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Bell of PA as a LD carrier It is quite simple - if you choose (with Bell of PA) to make Bell of PA your primary "long distance" carrier, the longest distance you can call with 1+ is three south Jersey counties! A lot of people in PA, back when the ballots were being distributed, didn't understand this (Bell of PA did nothing to make it clear) and ended up with an apparently useless phone (since Bell of PA also didn't explain 10xxx-1+ dialing either). Fortunately, Bell of PA "allowed" these poor unfortunates to re-select a primary carrier without charge! I doubt anyone really uses Bell of PA as a primary now. Frank Prindle Prindle@NADC.arpa ------------------------------ From: moss!twitch!uucp@RUTGERS.EDU Date: 27 Jul 87 14:40:33 GMT To: moss!cbosgd!comp-dcom-telecom@rutgers.EDU Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: twitch!homxb!hrs From: hrs@homxb.UUCP (H.SILBIGER) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: SS# & Utilities -- a story Summary: State requires SS# on driver licences. Message-ID: <504@homxb.UUCP> Date: 27 Jul 87 12:02:58 GMT References: <8707260009.AA03268@buit1.bu.edu> Distribution: world Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel Lines: 55 > > > As a matter of principle, I'm one of those people who won't give out > my social security number when applying for utilities or credit cards. > The reasons why have been discussed numerous times in various > security-related groups. It is my understanding that it is against > the law to force someone to give his/her social security number unless > it is a government agency; although I've often run into occasional > resistance, a few moments of explanation has usually resulted in > things working out okay. > > Then there's today. I'm moving to W. Lafayette Indiana in two weeks > and I called to establish my phone service there. Indiana is > served by GTE for phone service. I did not anticipate any problems > since I have an excellent credit history, as could be verified by > a quick check with the local Southern Bell folks. After the rep > at GTE took all my information down, she asked for my SS#. I explained > that I don't give that out. She informed me that I would be required > to pay a $75 deposit if I refused to give my SS#. So, I asked to > talk to her supervisor. > said he'd probably still require a deposit. He hung up on me. >........ ......... > > Questions > --------- > > 1) Do many of you (net-readers) withhold your SS# in similar circumstances? > Do you have these kinds of confrontations too? > > 2) Anyone know if other people at GTE Indiana are such jerks, or is > this an isolated instance? > > 3) Anyone know if Indiana does, in fact, *require* that the SS# be > on the driver's license? > > 4) Should I bother to follow-up on this further? That is, should > I bother contacting the Public Service commission in Indiana > about the treatment I received? (I'm currently not sure it is > worth the effort). > > Too bad we don't have a choice of phone companies as well as long > distance carriers -- I'd keep Southern Bell. > > -- > Gene Spafford > Software Engineering Research Center (SERC), Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 > Internet: spaf@gatech.gatech.edu > uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,rutgers,seismo}!gatech!spaf The State of New Jersey requires SS# for all licences, registrations, etc. It has been challenged, but the practice was upheld. Herman Silbiger ...!ihnp4!homxb!hrs ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jul 87 14:30 EDT From: PERRY%nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu@RELAY.CS.NET Subject: BBS project !! To: telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU pP-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PKpPATTENTION BBS USERS, PROGRAMMERS !!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BBS USERS: I'm now in the process of doing research and starting to develop a ShareWare BBS program. The goal of my project is to build the "Ultimate" BBS! Now is your chance to give your input into this project! I want to hear your ideas! What complaints to you have about the BBSes you call? What do you like about them? What don't you like about these systems? You have some ideas for features? Great! Don't limit yourself. Please let me know (no matter how exotic or complex the idea!) Please mail me any ideas, questions, or comments at the address below. Thanks again. Your comments and ideas are sought and greatly appreciated! THANKS!! ------------------------------- PROGRAMMERS: I need YOUR HELP NOW! I'm writing a ShareWare BBS program. My goal is to create the "Ultimate" BBS: A BBS with many fea- tures, that is easy to use, easy to maintain, and that is very flexible. I am requesting opinions of users of BBSes (as you can see above) and will try to take them into account. I know some- thing about communications and programming but I can use all the help I can get on this large undertaking. Any information about modems, communication routines, questions, or comments would be greatly appreciated. (See below for my Address) I know BASIC and Turbo Pascal. Would C be a better language to use for this? (It would be nice if I could make this BBS run on as many machines as possible) Any comments, questions, suggestions (including source code), or requests to be involved will be greatly appreciated!! (See below for my Address) THANKS!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USnail: Jeffrey F. Perry NOTE: Please send responses directly to 67 Angelica Drive me. (I don't read this list) Framingham, Ma 10701 ARPANET: PERRY%NUHUB.ACS.NORTHEASTERN.EDU@RELAY.CS.NET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:34:54 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #27 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:34:54 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 27 Today's Topics: 911 Surprises Submission for comp-dcom-telecom TV satellite transponder cost??? re: NYSE stock quotes, etc, SCA data transmission in FM Bands re: NYSE stock quotes, etc, SCA data transmission in FM Bands SS No., private payphones, Sprint, waiting, sales calls ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 87 14:30:54 CDT From: Paul Fuqua To: risks@CSL.SRI.COM, telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Subject: 911 Surprises Tarrant County (Fort Worth) is about to start a 911 emergency telephone service, the second in the state, prompting quite a few newspaper articles about aspects of their service and that of Harris County (Houston), which started in January 1986. The details I found most interesting were the problems that had to be overcome in both systems (quoted without permission from the Dallas Morning News): For instance, Harris County found initially that people dialing a seven-digit number with 911 in it would sometimes reach the emergency operator by mistake. Telephone company computers were so quick, they would pick up the 911 and transfer the call before waiting for a fourth digit. [There are no other magic three-digit calls in this area: for 411, one dials 1411, and all other numbers are seven digits. - pf] ... In the beginning, 911 operators were deluged by calls from children trying out the system and from people who put the 911 number on the speed-dialing function on their telephones and hit the number by mistake. Misdirected calls also come in from cordless phones whose batteries are low -- a situation that seems to mistakenly trigger calls to 911 ... ... Another problem Tarrant County is working on is establishing street addresses for rural homes. The [911] district is working with the U.S. Postal Service and telephone companies to assign street addresses to more than 9,000 locations in Tarrant County so that a recognizable address will appear on the screen -- not just a rural route and box number. [The director] was surprised when the effort met some resistance. ... "Some people have said, `I'm not going to use 911 so I don't need my address changed.'" Tarrant County will start up their system on August 2, despite the failure of equipment to automatically transfer the address information from the emergency operator to the appropriate agency. Dallas County (Dallas) expects to start their own service next April; the goal is that the whole state will have 911 by 1995. pf Paul Fuqua Texas Instruments Computer Science Center, Dallas, Texas CSNet: pf@ti-csl UUCP: {smu, texsun, im4u, rice}!ti-csl!pf Someday (maybe): pf@csc.ti.com ------------------------------ From: humu!uhccux.UUCP!todd%nosc.UUCP@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (The Perplexed Wiz) Date: 28 Jul 87 02:19:53 GMT To: humu!comp-dcom-telecom Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: uhccux!todd From: todd@uhccux.UUCP (The Perplexed Wiz) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: TV satellite transponder cost??? Keywords: TV satellite transponder cost Hawaii Message-ID: <706@uhccux.UUCP> Date: 28 Jul 87 02:19:52 GMT Distribution: na Organization: U. of Hawaii, Manoa (Honolulu) Lines: 18 A friend is trying to get information on the lowest possible cost of satellite transponder time for television distribution to, from, and within Hawaii. This television station is the local PBS station in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is interested in specifics of satellite brokers and classification of channel allocation (e.g., preemptable, unprotected, protected). Are long term leases or purchases of transponders possible??? Please send any information to me and I will forward it... thanks...todd -- Todd Ogasawara, U. of Hawaii Center for Teaching Excellence UUCP: {ihnp4,seismo,ucbvax,dcdwest}!sdcsvax!nosc!uhccux!todd ARPA: uhccux!todd@nosc.MIL INTERNET: todd@uhccux.UHCC.HAWAII.EDU ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jul 87 13:54 PST From: KJBSF%SLACVM.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: re: NYSE stock quotes, etc, SCA data transmission in FM Bands Date: 27 July 1987, 13:49:41 PST From: Kevin J. Burnett x3330 KJBSF at SLACVM To: TELECOM at BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: re: NYSE stock quotes, etc, SCA data transmission in FM Bands In article <620@nonvon.UUCP> root@nonvon.UUCP writes: > Looking for information on recieving or decoding the data transmissions >that occur on many Public Service FM radio stations (KQED, KQEC, KMET, etc). >Any help/information at all would be appreciated. I believe that the current edition of Radio-Electronics magazine has an article about decoding the SCA signals on FM stations. I don't recall what exactly they said about it, but I think they had a decoder that you could build yourself. (that's the July issue) --- Kevin J. Burnett KJBSF%SLACVM.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU Santa Clara University '88 ------------------------------ From: SPGDCM%UCBCMSA.Berkeley.EDU@jade.Berkeley.EDU Date: Tue, 28 Jul 87 15:02:34 PDT To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: SS No., private payphones, Sprint, waiting, sales calls MSG:FROM: SPGDCM --UCBCMSA TO: NETWORK --NETWORK 07/28/87 15:02:30 To: NETWORK --NETWORK Network Address From: Doug Mosher Title: MVS/Tandem Systems Manager (415)642-5823 Office: Evans 257, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 Subject: SS No., private payphones, Sprint, waiting, sales calls To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu SS# and government and business My understanding is that the fed govt and fed agencies, grant recipients, etc. are restrained in their use of the SS#, and also have some policies relating to what info they can ask you for, and notifications about how that data will be used. They must tell you: what data is required from you, what it will be used for, and what are the consequences of your refusal to tell them. I get lots of little forms from e.g. the IRS going into these matters; for example, briefly, "tell us your SS#, we use it to verify your taxes, we are authorized by acts xxx and yyy to require this, consequence for refusal is... (something bad, can't remember what)." Unfortunately these laws all refer to govt agencies. I do not know of laws that permit or prevent any private uses of government-supplied numbers. I occasionally try to refuse this and that private use. The reactions vary from agency doesn't care (like once I refused to provide a thumbprint and found to my surprise that it was optional) to agency insists. Credit bureaus and credit granters love to require the SS#. In many cases I get the feeling I will lose out on a private service (such as a credit card or a loan) if I protest/refuse. This becomes most painful with monopoly services such as a local telco. I would imagine the best path of resistance for such would be the closest thing you can find to a regulatory agency such as local PUC. I would expect them to be completely bureaucratic about it: if the written tarriffs require an SS# you'd have no complaint, if they don't, you would have a complaint. Private Pay phones In the SF bay area there are now various private pay phones. I am sorry to see that there seems to be no requirement for them to identify a responsible person or company. If you lose out there is not a clear path to complain to. I suppose some companies may discover that the occasional psychopathic user physically destroys offensive devices; though admittedly this may happen even if they identified a number to call. I think all public vending devices including phones should be required to identify either an owner or a servicing agency. Many of these phones here cost $.25, though Pac Bell's are $.20. I was very surprised when I needed to use a non-bell payphone yesterday and had only 3 dimes. The bad news: rejected my third dime; the good news, allowed the call on .20 though posted price was .25. This model also allowed free 611 and 911 calls. I am interested in any info readers have about how 911 and 611 calls are routed to the proper general service and private companies on these devices . ??Or perhaps Pac Bell can supply their own private, separately priced pay phones?? US Sprint I just received my new "FON" credit card from them. They say it replaces the previous travelcard service. Umph... I used to pay nothing extra to call while travelling, and I called various local 950-0777 numbers to place calls. Now I call an 800 number (at least this is uniformly available, while the 950 service was here and there but not everywhere). But now I pay .55 extra per tone call (and, as before, there is a 1.55 extra 800 number for rotary calls). Do any readers know of alternate carriers, preferably nationwide, which provide cheaper travel calling? I may be stuck with the unilateral raise from 0 to .55 if all other choices are more expensive. Sprint has incidentally gotten at least two months behind in their billing as a result of merging with US Telecom. In the worst way: they still bill you but don't credit your payments till 3 months later, very unfortunate. Waiting Demons The increasing use of staging equipment for company service lines, such as airlines and US Sprint, is a bore. Takes 10-30 minutes to filter through the queue; speaker phone becoming a necessity. Anyone know of devices to assist the caller (for example a device to wait for some sort of change in the line, and emit a loud tone, or even better, speak into the phone a message such as "now that you have answered let me summon the caller"? Automated sales calling I received my second most-pernicious automated sales call yesterday on my ans. machine. The caller's tape gives a long pitch, then asks you for your number or address. They avoid identifying themselves in any way so you can't complain to them or about them. My "cause for action" essentially is that they are tying up my answering machine for minutes without my permission, and to no value to them, since even if I loved their product when listening to the message, there is no way to contact them. Does anyone know of regulations affecting this, or to whom I could try to complain? If action could really be gotten, I could hope to be present some day, and give them my number, then report them once they contact me and give some sort of identification (though maybe they stay anonymous even then). There's an underlying issue of public responsibility here, in both vending machines and anonymous telephone business. Where are the regulators when we really need them? Thanks, Doug >SS No., private payphones, Sprint, waiting, sales calls ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:41:09 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #28 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:41:09 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 28 Today's Topics: State Line, Pa. (2 of them) Bell of PA as default carrier / Sprint FONcard and Schlage key card Modem problems Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Recognizing answering machines (and other messages) Re: (none) Has India X.25 network to the rest of the world? Universal Custom Calling proposal ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 87 1:30:14 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) To: telecom@BRL.ARPA Subject: State Line, Pa. (2 of them) There is a State Line, Pa. (Bedford County) with phone prefix 814-767 (don't know what mailing address is used), NOT to be confused with State Line, Pa. 17263 (Franklin County) for which I don't know the phone prefix (area 717). ------------------------------ Date: 29-Jul-1987 2252 From: covert%covert.DEC@decwrl.dec.com (John R. Covert) To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Bell of PA as default carrier / Sprint FONcard and Schlage key card From:MONTI, National Public Radio 29-JUL-1987 16:46 Subj: Bell of Pa as a default carrier In case nobody else responds to the guy who wondered how Bell of Pennsylvania could be anybody's default long distance company, here's the obvious answer: If a Pennsylvania customer selects BPA to be his default long distance carrier, he may direct dial using 1 + area code (if necessary) calls only withing his own home LATA. If he's in the Philadelphia LATA, he may also call the limited number of New Jersey counties to which BPA is allowed to carry toll traffic. If he tries to dial, using 1 + AC, to a phone outside those two limited areas, he will probably get a recording saying he can't use BPA for this call. He'll then have to know somehow about the existence of 10XXX or have a travel card for a non-AT&T long distance carrier. He'll have to use one of those two methods to make that call. For some weird Philadelphian who rarely or never makes toll calls outside his LATA and the New Jersey special privilege corridor, this might actually be a viable level of service to have. I wouldn't have it. The reason an AT&T card wouldn't work here is because if the subsciber dials, say, 0-312-NXX-XXXX, the call would be routed to the "operator assisted or credit card" level of the DEFAULT long distance carrier for that phone, which would be BPA, which would get him an intercept recording just as if he had dialed 1-312-NXX-XXXX. Greg Monti, National Public Radio, 2025 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20026 202-822-2459 ------------------ From:MONTI, National Public Radio 29-JUL-1987 16:52 Subj: Sprint FONcard and Schlage key card Just found a good reason not to carry around the fancy new US Sprint FONCard. Its metal foil inlay which makes it shiny silver in color messes up the ability of the Schlage card-entry system to read my security card. I remember being told when the Schlage system was first installed that any substantial metal object in the same pocket or wallet would invalidate the reading of your card. To enter the office I either need to remove the Schlage card and present it to the detector by itself or remove the US Sprint FONCard and present the whole wallet to the detector. If Sprint never implements the magnetic stripe feature on the back of the FONCard, I might as well just write the card number on a piece of paper and carry that in my wallet. The new number is 14 digits and bears no relation to the old Sprint travel service number I have nor to my home phone number. Oh well, guess this is progress. Greg Monti, National Public Radio, 2025 M Street NW< Washington, DC 20036 202-822-2459 via VAX1:: ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Jul 87 06:45:25 edt From: thinder@nswc-wo.ARPA To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: Modem problems Cc: thinder We have recently installed a group of Racal Vadic 4224E modems to serve as dial in access to our local area network and to selected host machines. Prior to this installation these connections were handled by Ven Tel MD212 modems with no problems. Soon after cut over we received complaints from a few users that they could no connect to the LAN using a variety of PC's/ terminals and modem combinations. After investigation it "seems" that the problem is related to our modem/phone line and "ring". If a user dials into the rotary and the modem answers without any ring, the users modem may not "see" the connection. It is not consistent, sometimes a line will answer with a ring then a tone nine times in a row, then on the 10th time fail, the reverse also occurs. To further compound the problem, one line that is connected to a VAX and Racal Vadic modem ALWAYS provides one ring and then the modem tone. I have more information about the connection, including the cabling and specifications of the network devices. Rather than list all this information I will respond to any questions concerning the problem directly. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thomas K. Hinders Naval Surface Weapons Center Silver Spring MD (301) 394 4225/1802 thinder@nswc-wo.arpa or thinder@nswc-oas.arpa ------------------------------ From: mnetor!spectrix!rmc@uunet.UU.NET To: comp-dcom-telecom@uunet.UU.NET Date: Thu Jul 30 10:46:21 1987 Date: 30 Jul 87 14:46:18 GMT To: mnetor!uunet!comp-dcom-telecom Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Responding-System: spectrix.UUCP Path: spectrix!rmc From: rmc@spectrix.UUCP (Russell Crook) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Recognizing answering machines (and other messages) Keywords: answering machines recognition autodialers Message-ID: <299@spectrix.UUCP> Date: 30 Jul 87 14:46:16 GMT Distribution: na Organization: Spectrix Microsystems Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada Lines: 24 Dumb question time: Given that you have a computer-driven system to do call-ahead (i.e., have a system that will call ahead to a number with a prerecorded message, and then listens to the line for some sort of response): is it (realistically) possible for this system to recognize if it has encountered: 1) an out of service number (by recognizing certain aspects of the recording?) 2) an answering machine (i.e., is the "beep" standardized) 3) pulse (versus touchtone) signals 4) anything else (busy, blocked call, etc.) The intent is confirmation of time and place with a customer. Some of these I know are easily done, and readily available in existing stuff. However, 1) and 2) are (I believe) much tougher to handle. Does anyone know of something that handles most of these cases? (If so, I would like the approximate cost, even if it is only a guess). Please reply by mail (if there is sufficient response, I will post). Thanks in advance Russell Crook (...!seismo!{mnetor,utzoo}!spectrix!rmc) ------------------------------ To: sdsu!comp-dcom-telecom From: pnet01.CTS.COM!adamsd%sdsu.UUCP@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (Adams Douglas) Subject: Re: (none) Date: 31 Jul 87 16:36:22 GMT Regarding using Sun workstations with voice mail equipment. Try contacting the following company: Linker Systems 13612 Onkayha Circle Irvine, CA (zip?) 714-552-1904 It was my impression at SigGraph that this company is working on similar interfacing. ------------------------------ To: comp-dcom-telecom@uunet.UU.NET From: enea!sal.UUCP!dk@uunet.UU.NET (Danny Kohn) Subject: Has India X.25 network to the rest of the world? Date: 9 Aug 87 03:59:26 GMT I am working with a NGO with one of it's offices in Bombay-India. We have some difficulty finding out if there is some Data Network available (we need X.28 connection). Is there someone out there who would know the current status of X.25/X.28 in India? Danny Kohn UUCP: dk!sal@enea.se ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Aug 87 00:47:49 PDT From: jimmy@PIC.UCLA.EDU (Jim Gottlieb) To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Universal Custom Calling proposal Cc: It has been reported that Southwestern Bell plans to introduce a new calling card that, come Signalling System #7, will allow peo- ple to program pay telephones with the same custom calling features that they use at the home or office. What I've been wondering for a long time is why telcos don't just give many of these features away in order to stimulate more cal- ling. Why not give all payphones 3-Way? This would encourage more calls to be made. Why not give all cellular phones 3-Way and Call Waiting. Since you pay airtime for both calls, they would rake in the bucks. 3-Way (and 4-way and 5-way and...) calls seem to be the ones that last the longest. I think some telco should be brave and try giving 3-way (and maybe Call Wait- ing and Call Forwarding) to all customers. With the right publi- city, they would more than make in additional calls/length of calls the money they would lose from not charging for such ser- vices, and make up the costs of installing more 3-port conference circuits. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jim Gottlieb "It's easier to apologize than to ask permission. When in doubt, do it." -- Grace Hopper, U.S. Navy, Retired Internet: jimmy%pic@ats.ucla.edu UUCP: sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!ucla-cs!pic.ucla.edu!jimmy ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:51:18 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #29 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:51:18 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 29 Today's Topics: Re: SS# & Utilities -- a story Int'l Collect Calls Re: SS# & Utilities -- a story Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Need recommendation for 3-4 line phone system Submission for comp-dcom-telecom X.PC and MNP protocol drivers Telephone Interface Modules In-use indicator for phone line Awful tones when hitting wrong number FCC access charges New articles in archive ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 87 12:48:50 EST From: abp@j.cc.purdue.edu (Jeffrey J Wieland) Subject: Re: SS# & Utilities -- a story In article <8707260009.AA03268@buit1.bu.edu> spaf%ames.arpa@gatech.UUCP (Gene Spafford) writes: >[This is the last message to be published this weekend. A total of 4 ... >As a matter of principle, I'm one of those people who won't give out >my social security number when applying for utilities or credit cards. >The reasons why have been discussed numerous times in various >security-related groups. It is my understanding that it is against ... >Questions >--------- > >1) Do many of you (net-readers) withhold your SS# in similar circumstances? >Do you have these kinds of confrontations too? My wife, who also has had some minor problems, but nothing like this. >2) Anyone know if other people at GTE Indiana are such jerks, or is >this an isolated instance? When my mother went to have her telephone line and billing changed to her own name, she was also informed that she would have to pay a "deposit". She was able to persuade them otherwise (20 years as a high school teacher pays off sometimes). GTE in West Lafayette can be pretty nasty (and slow), probably due to the large number of students here at Purdue. >3) Anyone know if Indiana does, in fact, *require* that the SS# be >on the driver's license? Indiana does NOT require the SS# to be on your driver's license. You can be issued a number with a "Z" prefix instead. My wife has one of these. >4) Should I bother to follow-up on this further? That is, should >I bother contacting the Public Service commission in Indiana >about the treatment I received? (I'm currently not sure it is >worth the effort). Couldn't hurt. >Too bad we don't have a choice of phone companies as well as long >distance carriers -- I'd keep Southern Bell. > >-- >Gene Spafford >Software Engineering Research Center (SERC), Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 >Internet: spaf@gatech.gatech.edu >uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,rutgers,seismo}!gatech!spaf Jeff Wieland abp@j.cc.purdue.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Aug 87 15:55:24 PDT From: broder@vaxa.isi.edu (Ben Broder) To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Int'l Collect Calls I have a friend who has received a phone bill containing several somewhat confusing items. They appear to be collect calls from El Salvador. However, none of the calls have a time of day and some do not even have an originating phone number. Although she does have friends in El Salvador, she insists that no one accepted collect calls on those days. Is it possible that these calls were really calls billed to a third number (my friend's) that for some technical reason appear as collect calls? Thanks for any help, Ben Broder (broder@vaxa.isi.edu) ------------------------------ From: sundc!hemaneh!tj@seismo.CSS.GOV (Central Area MTS) Subject: Re: SS# & Utilities -- a story Date: 6 Aug 87 03:01:12 GMT To: In article <8707260009.AA03268@buit1.bu.edu>, spaf%ames.arpa@gatech.UUCP (Gene Spafford) writes: > Questions > 1) Do many of you (net-readers) withhold your SS# in similar circumstances? > Do you have these kinds of confrontations too? I too withhold my SS# as a general principle. There are a lot of places here in Dallas that misuse it from 7/11 to the local cable tv company. For the most part, I've been able to refuse all of them. I did give in on the cable tv people once and used my roommate's SS# instead. > 2) Anyone know if other people at GTE Indiana are such jerks, or is > this an isolated instance? It seems that many public utlities have this attitude, though not all. > 4) Should I bother to follow-up on this further? That is, should > I bother contacting the Public Service commission in Indiana > about the treatment I received? (I'm currently not sure it is > worth the effort). I don't see why not. It seems that it has only taken a few of us refusing to make a general policy change in the phone company. When i first moved to Dallas 4 years ago, Southwestern Bell was quite insistant about it. When I recently moved and changed service, they did not even try to press the issue when I said no. The depressing thing is that people like 7/11 ask for it on their movie club applications. Perhaps a letter the the Southland Corp?... As someone who has worked on accounting sw, I can understand the convenience of using the SS# as an index for customers, However, it makes things much too easy to get to information about a person. Although, did you know that it is perfectly legal to posses more than one SS#? So long as you are not trying to defraud anyone, only confuse, it's ok. Cal Thixton /* these are my opinions */ Sun Microsystems Dallas {ucbvax,decvax,decwrl,ihnp4}!sun!{,texsun!}tj {ut-sally,convex,smu}!texsun!tj tj@sun.com -- Cal Thixton Sun Microsystems Dallas {ucbvax,decvax,decwrl,ihnp4}!sun!{,texsun!}tj {ut-sally,convex,smu}!texsun!tj tj@sun.com ------------------------------ From: uumedis@cbosgd.mis.oh.att.com (UUCP) Date: 6 Aug 87 15:54:56 GMT To: comp-dcom-telecom@RUTGERS.EDU Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: cbosgd!osu-eddie!mdf From: mdf@osu-eddie.UUCP (Mark D. Freeman) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Need recommendation for 3-4 line phone system Message-ID: <3910@osu-eddie.UUCP> Date: 6 Aug 87 02:28:13 GMT Distribution: na Organization: StrongPoint Systems, Inc.; Columbus, OH. (guest of Ohio State U.) Lines: 25 I hope this is the right group for this... We are moving into new office space next month, and will need a phone system. We will have three lines, which should alternate-answer. Additionally, we will have one data-only line which should not be on the main system at all. We need 5 phones, and redial an intercom features. Speed dialing and music on hold would be nice. Of course, cheap is a major requirement. One minor point: I hate phones on which the * and # keys are used by the phone for special features. Makes using voice mail systems a real pain in the ass. Any recommendations? -- < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark D. Freeman mdf@osu-eddie.uucp StrongPoint Systems, Inc. mdf@Ohio-State.arpa 2440 Medary Avenue ...!cbosgd!osu-eddie!mdf Columbus, OH 43202 Guest account at The Ohio State University (614) 262-3703 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ From: ndmath!milo@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Greg Corson) Date: 7 Aug 87 20:17:16 GMT To: comp-dcom-telecom%seismo.css.gov@iuvax Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Path: ndmath!milo From: milo@ndmath.UUCP (Greg Corson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.dcom.modems,comp.dcom.telecom Subject: X.PC and MNP protocol drivers Message-ID: <270@ndmath.UUCP> Date: 7 Aug 87 20:17:15 GMT Organization: Math. Dept., Univ. of Notre Dame Lines: 14 Does anyone know of a place where I can get Apple Macintosh compatable drivers (or source code) for either the X.PC or MNP communications protocols? I am looking for the drivers to incorporate in a terminal program I am writing. I don't mind it if I have to pay some kind of licensing fee to get the drivers but if somebody is willing to give them away it would be great. Greg Corson 19141 Summers Drive South Bend, IN 46637 (219) 277-5306 (weekdays till 6 central) ...seismo!iuvax!ndmath!milo ------------------------------ To: comp-dcom-telecom@decwrl.dec.com From: malcolm@spar.SPAR.SLB.COM (Malcolm Slaney) Subject: Telephone Interface Modules Date: 8 Aug 87 00:11:31 GMT Can anybody recommend a good source of telephone line interface modules? I have audio output now on my Sun and I would like to hook it to a phone line so I can really have some fun. It would be nicest if I could get ringing indications and have some way to take the phone off hook. Thanks. Malcolm Slaney Schlumberger Palo Alto Research malcolm@spar-20.arpa ------------------------------ Date: Sat 8 Aug 87 20:55:57-EDT From: "Adam Peller" Subject: In-use indicator for phone line To: telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Message-ID: <12324972488.16.OAF.G.PELLER@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU> Does anyone know how to build a circuit that will light up a LED if the phone line is being used (checks to see if the voltage is low)? thanks Adam Peller -- ADAMP%OZ@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU (Arpa) -- please send replies directly to me, I'm not on the mailing list ------- ------------------------------ To: tektronix!comp-dcom-telecom%reed.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET From: James Deibele Subject: Awful tones when hitting wrong number Date: 10 Aug 87 08:04:03 GMT Every once in a while, I'll dial a wrong number and get an incredibly horrible recording in my ear. The recording always starts off with three LOUD tones, which has caused me to wonder if the tones weren't to warn off TTY's for the deaf or something similar. Every time I hear once, I'm seriously tempted to throw the phone against the wall (and I would if we lived back in the days of the one BIG phone company, with leased phones, etc.). It doesn't seem to matter whether the local company is a GTE or Baby Bell, they still use the tones. Whazz going on? Thanks. -- A hunting we will go, | James S. Deibele (jamesd@percival) A hunting we will go, | TECHBooks (TM) We'll steal someone else's signature --- | FidoNet #105/3 or #105/4 And we'll never let it go. | (503) 760-3161 ------------------------------ From: khayo@cs.ucla.edu Subject: FCC access charges Date: 14 Aug 87 21:33:11 GMT +++ If you want to respond by mail, do not hit "r"; +++ +++ please note address correction in my .signature. +++ In the September issue of "Micro Times" (a free magazine circulating in So. Cal. & maybe elsewhere) there is a rather informative article on the FCC access surcharges for Enchanced Service Providers ("And Then There Were None", by Brock N. Meeks.) As expected, the author's conclusion is roughly that the local Bells are going to make a bundle at our (modem users') expense, and that "fairness" of the proposal is very questionable. The article also includes all the info about the preferred format of letters that you may want to send in response. I know that such package was posted here a while ago, but some of you may have missed it and the "Micro Times" version may be more up-to-date. The magazine is available in electronic form (I just tried it, it's there) on "Tele-Web" BB at (213) 372 4050 [300/1200, 7 bits, 1 stop bit, no parity, 24 hrs, multi-user] where you should type "GO MICRO" at a prompt. Also, on Compuserve there appeared a statement of CS's position regar- ding the matter, along with an example of a letter & addresses of all FCC Commisioners. I like to think that they responded to my repeated suggestions sent via "User Feedback" urging them to do just that. I have the CS package on disk & can post it here or email to those interested persons (if any) who don't have access to CS. Sincerely - Eric Behr ----------------------------------------------------------- I'm sick & tired of editing my incorrect address in the header. The *correct* one is khayo@MATH.UCLA.EDU; I have no connection with the CS Department, except that we breathe the same smog. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Aug 87 18:12:10 EDT From: jsol (Jon Solomon) To: telecom Subject: New articles in archive Many articles around the FCC's new incentive to charge "enhanced services" for access to the local network are now available for anonymous FTP on host XX.LCS.MIT.EDU in directory . The files were too large to include in a digest, and are being made available to you in this method. Note that USENET users will as usual continue to get copies of these files mailed after this digest. The files are: pc.pursuit -- a look at the impending charges and their impact on pc pursuit users. docket.87-215 - the docket itself. fcc.policy - some more notes on the subject. There are some conversations in today's digests which may require that you read these documents. This is unavoiadable. --jsol ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Sat, 22 Aug 87 21:41:12 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #30 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 87 21:41:12 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 30 Today's Topics: Periodic Line Noise Choice of long distance carrier Re: Why can't the world call 800 numbers? Re: Why can't the world call 800 numbers? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 7 August 1987, 10:44:11 EDT From: Nicholas Simicich To: telecom@buit1.bu.edu Subject: Periodic Line Noise Someone who lives in or near Endicott, New York, is having the following trouble with their home dial in terminal. The terminal is a PC on a call back system--thus, the terminal is not always the originator of the noisy call, but may be, instead, in answer mode. The noise seems to occur no matter who is the originator. I believe that they are using 212A type modems. I'd appreciate a direct response as well as a copy to the net if your response is interesting (which it is, of course) as I'm a couple of months behind in my digest reading :-). -=-=-=- I get a consistent, periodic (once every 2.1 seconds, I timed it) one byte (X'7B' or X'FB'--not sure exactly which) inbound-only noise when talking to PCTERM (an internal call back system), a local BBS, and a university using either an internal package, PROCOMM 2.4.2, and MS-Kermit and anything else I could test on. Some connections are clear and remain clear (the one session which started clean and became dirty was explained by the Deposit Telephone Co. as a NY Telephone line-configuration exercise one weekend). The dirty ones stay dirty and it's impossible to do any work. I tried another modem--no luck. The Telephone Co. is stymied. Ideas? I've also been assured that there are no powerful radars nearby, etc. I've used a pure vanilla PC DOS system with the same results. The Deposit phone company claims that my exchange, 693, is fairly modern, and that the microwave circuit is not the problem. -=-=-=- Nick Simicich, NJS@IBM.COM, or, for bitnet, NJS at YKTVMX Collect:(all I know about the problem is above) (914) 737-1908 Contents: 100% personal opinion, sugar, salt, High fructose corn syrup... ------------------------------ Date: 19 Aug 87 16:55:00 EDT From: "KEPLER::HUI" Subject: Choice of long distance carrier To: "telecom" I would appreciate advice/recommendations on my upcoming choice of long distance carrier. I would also appreciate a copy (or pointer) to the last survey of long distance carrier rates in telecom-digest. (I've been offnet for several months.) My calling pattern is mostly from home (area code 301) to California (area codes 805, 707) and to West Germany. Calling is almost entirely during non-peak rate periods. Oh yes, home is Baltimore, MD. With respect to Germany, I would appreciate information on who supplies service (anyone other than AT&T yet?) and differencies in hours for minimum rate. Also the local phone company (C&P) charges extra (of course) for tone service. Does anyone know if they're actually equipped to NOT provide it if you don't order it? Many thanks for all responses. Please reply to me directly as arushton@stsci.arpa I'm not on the telecom mailing list yet. - A. Minick Rushton Space Telescope Science Institute ------ ------ ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Why can't the world call 800 numbers? Date: 21 Aug 87 19:02:53 EDT (Fri) From: jhc@mtune.att.com (Jonathan Clark) To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu In article <2801@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: >[Since the Arpanet side seems to be losing, let's do it ourselves over >here on the Usenet. Be sure to include an Approved: header or your message >will get emailed to the dead moderator. -- John] > >From outside the US/Canada, the number is 201-592-2000. It drives me up the >wall that from my phone I can call every telephone in the world directly except >800 numbers in the U.S. Since many companies publish only their 800 numbers, >it means I can't call them at all. Was it really beyond AT'Ts capability to >arrange for 800 numbers to be free in the US/Canada, but billed at normal >rates when called from abroad, but at least make them work? Well, I'm not in the POTS bit of AT&T, but large pieces of the world can call 800 numbers. AT&T periodically puts out bulletins about 'International 800 service is now available to...'. The trouble is that having an internationally-diallable 800 number costs the person paying for the number more money upfront plus more money per call (I think), and typically they decide that this isn't worth it. It's the same deal (fundamentally) as having in-state only 800 numbers. I believe that it also costs less to have an *out-of-state* only 800 number, (which is why you see 'call 800-123 4567, in Nebraska call 987 6543') but don't quote me on that. I have no idea of the exact tariffs involved. -- Jonathan Clark [NAC,attmail]!mtune!jhc An Englishman never enjoys himself except for some noble purpose. ------------------------------ To: uunet!comp-dcom-telecom@uunet.UU.NET From: van-bc!sl@uunet.UU.NET (Stuart Lynne) Subject: Re: Why can't the world call 800 numbers? Date: 21 Aug 87 18:22:37 GMT In article <2801@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: >From outside the US/Canada, the number is 201-592-2000. It drives me up the >wall that from my phone I can call every telephone in the world directly except >800 numbers in the U.S. Since many companies publish only their 800 numbers, >it means I can't call them at all. Was it really beyond AT'Ts capability to >arrange for 800 numbers to be free in the US/Canada, but billed at normal >rates when called from abroad, but at least make them work? Actually AT&T at least does have 800 numbers in Canada, that usually connect to the same place. Unfortunately there are two problems: 1. They are different 2. They don't advertise them as effectively as the US ones For example to order my copies of the SYSVID all I had was the 800 number in the US. Through a bit of phone tag with various 555-1212 directory services in that part of the US I came up with a generic number for AT&T. They were able to give me the phone number to call to order. When I called them they said "oh, you don't have our 800 number in Canda?". They gave it to me, I called back on that. Interesting note, newer versions of the SYSVID now include the Canadian 800 number as well. -- {ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision,uunet}!van-bc!Stuart.Lynne Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Sat, 22 Aug 87 21:42:22 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #31 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 87 21:42:22 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 31 Today's Topics: GEnie's action alert on FCC modem fees proposal GEnie's how to communicate opposition to FCC modem fees proposal GEnie's letter format for filing comments on FCC modem fees proposal ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1987 02:31 MDT From: Keith Petersen To: Info-Modems@SIMTEL20.ARPA Cc: Telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Subject: GEnie's action alert on FCC modem fees proposal ACTION ALERT ============ THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING THE IMPOSITION OF COSTLY NEW "ACCESS CHARGES" ON YOUR USE OF GENIE SERVICES ===================================== For 2 years, you and other GEnie subscribers have used your telephone to reach our service. Until now, your calls to us have been treated just like any other residential or business calls. Now, however, the Federal Communications Commission in Washington, D.C. is proposing to change all this. The FCC is considering a plan to make extremely expensive new "access charges" applicable to GEnie services provided to you over local telephone lines. The FCC's "access charge" scheme would drastically increase telephone company charges which we pay. In fact, our initial estimates suggest that GEnie Service costs would jump up by as much as $4.50 per hour of use for every one of our customers. Although ===== we have not yet considered the extent to which these cost increases would necessitate a price increase for GEnie Service, a cost increase of this enormous magnitude could require up to a doubling of our GEnie Service prices. THE "ACCESS CHARGE" PROPOSAL CAN BE PRVENTED IF WE ALL ACT TOGETHER TO COMMUNICATE OUR CONCERNS TO FEDERAL AUTHORITIES =============================== Right now the FCC plan is simply a proposal. It is not too late to prevent this mistake from occurring. Nonetheless, we all need to work together to head off this disastrous possibility. The FCC commissioners and their staff responsible for making the final decision seem convinced that such access charges are necessary and proper. We need your help in explaining why such increased charges would severely disserve the public interest. In evaluating its "access charge" proposal, the FCC will have to listen to your concerns if they are explained in terms of the proposal's practical effects on you or your business. Your views count. In addition, your elected congressmen will want to hear your concerns. Legislative representatives play a very helpful role in highlighting your interests for the FCC to consider. YOU NEED TO ACT NOW AND TO STAY INVOLVED UNTIL THE "ACCESS CHARGE" PROPOSAL IS REJECTED BY THE FCC =============================== The FCC requires that comments on its proposal be filed by September 24, 1987. Responses to these comments may be filed through October 26, 1987. The FCC may act on the matter as early as sometime in December. It is important for you to get busy now preparing your comments for submission to the FCC not later than September 24, 1987 -- whether in the form of a letter or a more formalized "pleading." Several significant facts ought to be included in expressing your views. Actually, they are pretty basic and easy to understand and communicate: (1) who you are; (2) how you use GEnie Service; and (3) how you or your business would be hurt if GEnie Service prices doubled due to access charges. These comments should be addressed to the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. The address of the FCC is 1919 M Street, N.W.; Washington, D.C. 20554. Similar letters or comments should be sent to your state's U.S. Senators and the U.S. House of Representatives' members from your district. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1987 02:35 MDT From: Keith Petersen To: Info-Modems@SIMTEL20.ARPA Cc: Telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Subject: GEnie's how to communicate opposition to FCC modem fees proposal HOW TO COMMUNICATE YOUR OPPOSITION TO ACCESS CHARGES ============================ WHAT THE FCC PROPOSES AND HOW IT WILL AFFECT YOU: ================================================= On July 17, 1987, the Federal Communications Commission announced its intent to apply its carrier access charges to all enhanced service providers -- the FCC's technical name for services like GEnie. What this means is that all providers of such services, including GEnie, which use local telephone lines to reach services provided by means of interstate telecommunications facilities will be subject to significantly increased telecommunications costs. Currently, long-distance common carriers, such as AT&T and MCI, pay interstate access charges. No decision has been made yet to raise our prices if the FCC were to impose access charges on enhanced service providers. However, if this proposal is adopted, the prices of GEnie Service might have to be raised as much as 100%. GE, other enhanced service providers, their customers, and some of their respective trade associations will be opposing the FCC's proposal by lobbying and filing comments with the Commission. The Commission has asked for comments from the public on its proposal which are due on or before September 24, 1987. Responses to these comments are due by October 26, 1987. If both users and providers of services make clear to the FCC the adverse consequences that will follow if its proposal is implemented, there is a good chance that the proposal will be rejected. HERE IS WHAT YOU CAN DO: ======================== The Commission will be interested in knowing how its proposal will affect you, the user of GEnie services, whether you are a residential user or whether information services are an essential aid to carrying out your business. Generally, the Commission's stated policy is to make information, services like GEnie, available to all users, both large and small. The Commission apparently does not appreciate that these enormous cost increases would seriously hurt you -- the very persons the FCC wants to help. The best way to communicate your concerns to the FCC is to explain what implementation of its proposal would mean to you or your business. You can do this by writing a letter to the FCC Commissioners and important staff members. The discussion in item #4, "Writing Your Letters and Comments " explains a very effective technique for writing this type of letter to the Commission. You may also wish to file formal comments with the Commission for consideration by the FCC's Common Carrier Bureau Staff when considering this matter. This may sound like more work, but it is really just a more formal way to say exactly what you would say in your letter. The discussion in item #4 tells you how to do this. Additionally, Congress would be anxious to learn that the proposed FCC action might have such adverse effects on its constituents. Because the FCC is attuned to Congress' viewpoints, letters to your Senators and Representatives would also be effective in preventing the FCC proposal from taking effect. Finally, we ask that you send GE Information Services a copy of any letters or comments that you write in connection with this matter. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1987 02:39 MDT From: Keith Petersen To: Info-Modems@SIMTEL20.ARPA Cc: Telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Subject: GEnie's letter format for filing comments on FCC modem fees proposal WRITING YOUR LETTERS AND COMMENTS: ================================== GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR FILING WITH THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ====================================== The FCC will read and consider your views in reaching a decision whether and how to impose access charges on enhanced service providers if you follow the following guidelines: 1. Letters: Type your letter on 8 1/2" x 11" paper and use the following format: * * * * * (YOUR LETTERHEAD OR NAME AND ADDRESS) (DATE) The Honorable Dennis R. Patrick, Chairman Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 Re: CC Docket 87-215 Amendments of Part 69 of the Commission's Rules Relating to Enhanced Services Providers ============================== Dear Chairman Patrick: [TEXT: Begin by describing who you are. Include any specific titles, duties, or responsibilities that would qualify you as someone who stands to be affected by the FCC's proposal. Of course, if you only use the GEnie service in a residential setting, explain that. The FCC will be interested. Explain why the use of the information services offering is important to you or to your business and what it allows you to do that you could not otherwise do. Secondly, explain that you are aware that the Commission has proposed to impose access charges on enhanced service providers. Explain that you fear that this regulatory action would adversely affect you or your business. Describe with as much detail as Possible what this would mean for you or your business. Close by urging the FCC not to adopt its proposal to apply access charges to enhanced service providers] Sincerely, [NAME] cc: The Honorable James H. Quello The Honorable Mimi Weyforth Dawson The Honorable Patricia Diaz Dennis Gerald Brock, Chief, Common Carrier Bureau Thomas Sugrue, Chief, Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau William H. Tricarico, Secretary Federal Communications Commission * * * * * 2. If writing formal comments, use the following format and double space the text of your comments on 8 1/2" x 11" paper: * * * * * Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Amendments to Part 69 ) of the Commission's Rules ) CC Docket No. 87-215 Relating to Enhanced Service ) Providers ) ) To: The Common Carrier Bureau ) COMMENTS OF [YOUR NAME] ======================= [TEXT: Follow the same guidelines for your text as in the formatted letter in paragraph 1 above.] Respectfully submitted, [If writing for a company, the name of the company in CAPITAL letters] [NAME, TITLE (if applicable), and address) [DATE] * * * * * If your comments are ten or more pages long, there are three additional things you must do. (A word of caution: Your comments will be most effective if they are short and concise). First, attach a cover page with the heading used above at the top. In the center of your cover page type COMMENTS OF [YOUR NAME]." In the bottom left hand corner, put the date. In the bottom right hand corner type: (1) your name or your company's name if you are filing on their behalf; (2) your title, if applicable; and (3) your or your company's address, whichever is applicable. Second, behind the cover page, include a two- or three-paragraph summary of your comments, numbering the pages using small roman numerals. Three, behind the summary and continuing the small roman numeral page numbering, place a table of contents which includes the summary, table of contents, and any headings within the text of your comments. 3. Mail your letters and comments as soon as possible but please make sure they are post marked early enough to arrive at the FCC offices no later than September 24, 1987. This is the day that comments are due on the proposal. 4. Send two (2) copies of your letters to Chairman Patrick and to each of the other Commissioners and Staff members listed at the bottom of the formatted letter to: [NAME] Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 If you are writing comments, send the original and five (5) copies to: William H. Tricarico Secretary Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 5. If you are part of an organization or association that relies on information services for your activities, encourage other members to write, but do not use a form letter or comments if a number of you plan to write. The Commission frowns on these. LETTERS TO YOUR SENATORS AND HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE ================================================= 1. Type your letter and use the following format: * * * * * [YOUR LETTERHEAD OR NAME AND ADDRESS] [DATE] [NOTE: USE THE APPROPRIATE ADDRESS AS FOLLOWS] The Honorable United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20515 - OR - The Honorable United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator (or Congressman ) [TEXT: Follow essentially the same format as that for your letter to the Federal Communications Commission: o Explain who you are and how you use information services. o Note your concern with the FCC's proposal to impose access charges on enhanced services providers. o Describe what effect this probably will have on your use of information services and, in turn, on your business or other activities. o If you have sent a letter or letters to the FCC, explain that you have done so and attach a copy of your FCC letter to the letter to the Congressman. o Close by urging the member of Congress to express his concern to the Federal Communications Commission.] Sincerely, [NAME] * * * * * 2. The sooner you send your letters to Congress, the more effect your opinions will have because your representatives will be able to exert pressure on the FCC before the agency begins considering its proposal in earnest. 3. Again, do not use form letters. Let your representatives know that you put some time and thought into this matter and that it will affect you personally. 4. You may also wish to send letters to the following chairmen of the subcommittees which will be most interested in the FCC's proposal: The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye Chairman Subcommittee of Communications Committee of Commerce, Science and Transportation United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 The Honorable Edward J. Markey Chairman Subcommittee on Telecommunications & Finance Committee on Energy & Commerce United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 5. For your convenience, we have included a list of United States Senators ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Sun, 13 Sep 87 18:46:05 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #32 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Sun, 13 Sep 87 18:46:05 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 32 Today's Topics: Phone Interfaces Comp.dcom.telecom submission Re: Choice of long distance carrier Submission for comp-dcom-telecom DSZ Rip-Off new Md. pay-phone instructions Graphics Package Wanted missing issues 26-29 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: spar!malcolm@decwrl.dec.com To: telecom@bu-it.bu.edu Subject: Phone Interfaces Date: 03 Sep 87 17:46:36 PDT (Thu) Can any body recommend an easy way to get a phone interface. I have an A/D and D/A box connected to my Sun and I would like to hook it to the phones. This is a company project (for a change) so I can easily justify up to a hundred dollars or so to guarantee that we don't burn out a phone line. At the very least I would like analog input/output, a ringing indication and maybe touch tone recognition. Does anybody have any recomendations? Thanks. Malcolm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 87 16:57:26 PDT From: sdcsvax!ames!fai!stevem@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU To: amdahl!buit1.bu.EDU!jsol Subject: Comp.dcom.telecom submission I tried to send the following to the originator of the request by mail, but it bounced back to me: Subject: Re: Choice of long distance carrier In article <8708212245.AA09660@bu-it.bu.edu> you write: > >I would appreciate advice/recommendations on my upcoming choice >of long distance carrier. I would also appreciate a copy >(or pointer) to the last survey of long distance carrier >rates in telecom-digest. (I've been offnet for several >months.) My calling pattern is mostly from home (area code 301) >to California (area codes 805, 707) and to West Germany. >Calling is almost entirely during non-peak rate periods. > >Oh yes, home is Baltimore, MD. With respect to Germany, I >would appreciate information on who supplies service >(anyone other than AT&T yet?) and differencies in hours >for minimum rate. > >Also the local phone company (C&P) charges extra (of course) >for tone service. Does anyone know if they're actually >equipped to NOT provide it if you don't order it? > I tried Sprint first (about 4 years ago) at home. I constantly ran into recordings asking me to call back later since all circuits were busy (or even worse just a network busy signal). After that, I decided to try MCI. I found that most of the time my connections were very poor quality (either I couldn't hear the other party or vice versa). I then gave up on the CHEAP carriers and went back to AT&T because I want to be able to place a call and to be able to hear the other party. Just recently, I started having problems completing calls at work -- Lo and behold, I found out that the company had just switched to Sprint for long distance service. When I complained to our telecom department, they told me to dial 10288 and the number I was calling (this places the call over AT&T). My suggestion would be to go with AT&T -- if the two largest competitors of AT&T are in this bad of shape, what can you expect from the small ones? Incidentally, I don't find AT&T's rates that bad. I also subscribe to their "Reach Out America" plan which is a real good deal if you make your calls on the weekend. --- Steven A. Minneman (Fujitsu America Inc, San Jose, Ca) !seismo!amdahl!fai!stevem The best government is no government at all. --- Steven A. Minneman (Fujitsu America Inc, San Jose, Ca) !seismo!amdahl!fai!stevem The best government is no government at all. ------------------------------ From: caf%omen%reed%tektronix.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET To: tektronix!comp-dcom-telecom%reed.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET Date: Wed Sep 9 03:28:10 1987 Date: 9 Sep 87 10:28:09 GMT To: reed!tektronix!comp-dcom-telecom Subject: Submission for comp-dcom-telecom Responding-System: omen.UUCP Path: omen!caf From: caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.dcom.telecom,comp.protocols.misc,or.general Subject: DSZ Rip-Off Message-ID: <584@omen.UUCP> Date: 9 Sep 87 10:28:09 GMT Distribution: na Organization: Omen Technology Portland OR Lines: 30 Keywords: dsz zmodem hack pirate A set of debug scripts designed to hack DSZ has been making the rounds of bulletin boards. The single purpose of these scripts is to disable the registration request printed by UNREGISTERED copies of DSZ. In other words, the only purpose of these debug scripts is to encourage nusers to avoid registering DSZ. The final insult is the message: - If you find this usefull, you may if you wish send $1.00 to MOBIUS c/o MOBIUS .aka. Servant of TSOTL, Pyroto Mountain P.O.Box 35103 Phoenix AZ 85069, or just Support your best Shareware. The $1.00 will also provide you with 60 minutes online time on my BBS as a contribution. - In other words, this gentleman suggests you Support Shareware by sending HIM $1.00 to support his piracy instead of registering DSZ with its author. - Since nobody is bothering to rip off FAST, DART, Blast, or Relay protocol drivers, at least one can say ZMODEM has "arrived". - If you see any of these files on a BBS, please inform the sysop of the pirate nature, and ask that they be removed. I would also appreciate any information of exactly who wrote these files, and who are conspiring to spread them. Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX Author of Pro-YAM communications Tools for PCDOS and Unix ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf Omen Technology Inc "The High Reliability Software" 17505-V Northwest Sauvie Island Road Portland OR 97231 VOICE:503-621-3406:VOICE TeleGodzilla BBS: 621-3746 19200/2400/1200 CIS:70007,2304 Genie:CAF omen Any ACU 2400 1-503-621-3746 se:--se: link ord: Giznoid in:--in: uucp omen!/usr/spool/uucppublic/FILES lists all uucp-able files, updated hourly ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 87 9:31:17 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) To: telecom@BRL.ARPA Cc: cmoore@BRL.ARPA Subject: new Md. pay-phone instructions A C&P pay phone in Elkton which is on 301-398 prefix has new calling instructions. Maryland is running out of NNX prefixes, and apparently provision is being made to switch to NXX prefixes. Station-to-station: local--(7 digit) number toll-- 1 + area code + number All 0+ calls require area code. (Yes, "area code" can include 301.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 87 18:06:16 EDT From: Srivas@UDEL.EDU To: telecom@UDEL.EDU, info-graphics@UDEL.EDU, sun-users@UDEL.EDU, Subject: Graphics Package Wanted I am looking for graphics packages that may be used on a Sun for representing finite state machines. If you have, or know of someone who might have, developed software to graphically display finite state automata, please send me mail at ARPA: srivas@udel.edu BITNET: srivas@udel.edu CSNET: srivas%udel.edu@relay.cs.net UUCP: ...!ihnp4!berkeley -\ ...!allegra!berkeley -->!srivas@udel.edu ...!harvard -/ If you know of any publications that have information about graphically displaying finite state machines, please send me mail about them. Thanks. Srivas ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 87 18:44:05 EDT From: jsol (Jon Solomon) To: telecom Subject: missing issues 26-29 If you are missing issues 26-29 then please let me know so I can mail them to you. I have a correct set of issues within that range, and can mail you by return mail any of the issues of Volume-7 in that range. --jsol ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************* Date: Fri, 18 Sep 87 22:18:20 EDT From: The Moderator (JSol) Reply-to: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V7 #33 To: TELECOM@BUIT1.BU.EDU TELECOM Digest Fri, 18 Sep 87 22:18:20 EDT Volume 7 : Issue 33 Today's Topics: Re: Phone Interfaces Re: Phone Interfaces Re: new Md. pay-phone instructions RingMaster service Question Re: TELECOM Digest V7 Sprint "Lawsuit"? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 87 16:11:43 EST From: Michael Grant To: spar!malcolm%decwrl.dec.com@buit1.bu.edu, telecom@bu-it.bu.edu Subject: Re: Phone Interfaces Well, we just bought this thing that answers the phone and lets you page people throughout the building. It basically answers the phone and connects the line to an amplifier. Maybe this device is what you want. It cost us $247.00. It's called a Page Adaptor by Valcom. Model V-9940. We got it from "The Telephone Man" in Springfield Virgina. They might have other things that solve your problem as well. By the way, this thing took almost 3 months to order from these people, so I hope you don't need it soon! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 87 18:13:32 EDT From: pyrnj!romain@RUTGERS.EDU (Romain Kang) To: malcolm@hobbes.spar.cas.slb.com Subject: Re: Phone Interfaces Cc: This question recently came up on Pyramid's internal network. The most attractive box was made by SpeechPlus in Mountain View, CA. They call it a voice response system. In brief, it can answer the phone, transmit DTMF codes to a computer via an RS-232 port as ASCII digits, receive ASCII text via the same port and send it back down the phone line as high quality synthesized speech. It includes such features as: XON/XOFF flow control or DTR/CTS flow control DTR supervision for incoming calls (raise DTR when a call comes in) Notification of an incoming call by sending digits to the RS-232 port (DTR is strapped) Flash-hook the phone line to transfer a call to a human being DTMF generation to make outgoing calls List price is $3,900. ------------------------------ To: comp-dcom-telecom@RUTGERS.EDU From: westmark!dave@RUTGERS.EDU (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: new Md. pay-phone instructions Date: 16 Sep 87 02:31:37 GMT In article <8709110931.aa20340@VGR.BRL.ARPA>, cmoore@BRL.ARPA (Carl Moore, VLD/VMB) writes: > A C&P pay phone in Elkton which is on 301-398 prefix has new calling > instructions. Maryland is running out of NNX prefixes, and apparently > provision is being made to switch to NXX prefixes. > Station-to-station: local--(7 digit) number > toll-- 1 + area code + number > All 0+ calls require area code. > (Yes, "area code" can include 301.) Maryland must be one of the few places left that hasn't adopted this dialing plan. I would expect most of the US to be on 1+ or 0+ ten digits before long. Because if the widespread use of this dialing plan, areas where it is not required generally permit it, for the benefit of travelers from other parts. -- Dave Levenson Westmark, Inc. A node for news. Warren, NJ USA {rutgers | clyde | mtune | ihnp4}!westmark!dave ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 87 14:04:30 EDT From: think!johnl@ima.ISC.COM (John R. Levine) To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu Subject: RingMaster service BellSouth's operating companies South Central Bell and Southern Bell are introducing a new service called RingMaster. It assigns two or three numbers to the same phone line, and gives the different numbers different rings. That way if you run a business in your home you can know whether to answer "Hello" or "Thank You For Calling Schrod Bait Systems" without having to install and pay for two lines. You could also use it for a minor variety of toll evasion; when you leave the office, call the second number, let it ring four times, and hang up, so your housemate hears the ring and knows you're on the way without answering the phone and completing the call. Sounds like a clever way to get some revenue from CO equipment that has to be present anyway to support the dwindling number of party lines. -- John R. Levine, Cambridge MA, +1 617 492 3869 { ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, Levine@YALE.something The Iran-Contra affair: None of this would have happened if Ronald Reagan were still alive. --- John R. Levine, Cambridge MA, +1 617 492 3869 { ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, Levine@YALE.something The Iran-Contra affair: None of this would have happened if Ronald Reagan were still alive. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Sep 87 18:55 ADT From: (Zaphod Beeblebrox) Subject: Question To: telecom-request@xx.lcs.mit.edu One of the previous issues had a list of the 0 access numbers to use a different long distance carrier for you call.... could you please send me that list again....Thankyou ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 87 08:27 EST From: Howie Ducat Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V7 To: The Moderator JSol Date: Mon, 14 Sep 87 08:18 EST From: Howie Ducat Subject: Sprint "Lawsuit"? To: Hi.. I recently received what I thought was my usual monthly SPRINT bill.. In actuality, it was some sort of legal gobbledegook about someone in Illinois winning a lawsuit against SPRINT.. and I seem to be entitled to SOMETHING from them, but I can not for the life of me figure out what it is... anyone have any idea?? Howie Ducat Brooklyn College Telecommunications ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest *********************