Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7) id AA19197; Fri, 9 Dec 88 00:22:12 EST Message-Id: <8812090522.AA19197@bu-cs.BU.EDU> Date: Fri, 9 Dec 88 00:04:13 EST From: The Moderator Reply-To: TELECOM@bu-cs.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V8 #197 To: TELECOM@bu-cs.bu.edu TELECOM Digest Fri, 9 Dec 88 00:04:13 EST Volume 8 : Issue 197 Today's Topics: AT&T/Sprint Awarded FTS-2000 Contract Re: Calling card silliness Information Needed on Fax Group IV Standards trimline light bulbs Minor correction to Follow Me Roaming Article List being purged: take notice ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 8 Dec 88 22:52:33 EST From: telecom@bu-cs.BU.EDU (TELECOM Moderator) To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: AT&T/Sprint Awarded FTS-2000 Contract AT&T and U.S. Sprint were picked Wednesday to replace the U.S. government's aging telephone system, winning a mammoth ten year contract worth between four billion and fifteen billion dollars, with the actual amount being detirmined by the extent the service is used by the government over the life of the contract. The contract -- and the new phone system -- are called FTS-2000. It is the largest non-military contract ever awarded by the federal government. FTS-2000 will be a combination voice, data and video transmission service available to all U.S. government offices worldwide. The federal government already has the largest private telephone network in the world. AT&T, and its partner the Boeing Company will receive sixty percent of the contract proceeds. U.S. Sprint, which bid alone, will receive forty percent of the action. The third bidder, a consortium which included Chicago-based Ameritech, Martin Marietta and MCI Communications were the losers. FTS-2000 will be phased in over three years, with the first users to go online in the final quarter of 1989. All federal agencies will be online by 1991. During the interim between phase in and completion, FTS-2000 will be compatible with the existing, but obsolete and antiquated network. The winning bidders were selected by the General Services Administration, and were required to include in their package provisions for high-speed data transfer, video transmission, electronic mail, teleconferencing and integrated services digital network (ISDN) capabilities. The GSA took over three years to study the bids before making a final decision early this week. Watching the new federal telephone system -- if such an 'old fashioned' term can be used -- take shape should provide much discussion material in the Digest. As I receive more press releases and information about FTS-2000, I will of course post it here, and I hope readers will do the same. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ To: telecom@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU From: Dan Chaney Subject: Re: Calling card silliness Date: 8 Dec 88 06:53:51 GMT I've moved several times in the past few years (the joys of student life) but I have had phone service at each new place. Sometimes it has been a transfer of service, other times I have discontinued service and requested service at the new address. (The difference, explained to me, was due to moving outside of my service area.) Each time, regardless whether the actual number changed or not, the 4-digit extension (aka PIN) stayed the same. The same PIN used 4 years ago is the one I currently use. What I found most interesting about this was that even when I changed my long distance carrier (Advantage network - ask me about *them* in EMail, heh heh), my calling card still worked and still used the same old PIN number. --- And now, for something related but completely different --- The on campus phone system here at UK has, as best I can tell, two types of phones, restricted and not restricted. They have recently switched to Americall and have allowed credit-card calling from non-restricted phones by dialing 6-0 + area code-phone number. If you dont include the area code, it defaults to 606 (KY AC) and you get a tone and the nice lady that always asks politely for your number and then says thank you (I think she is sweet on me.) However, if you try a different area code (this won't happen if you include 606), you get an Americall operator - not the nice-lady tone system. Now for the crux of this. If I dial a number within my area code, get the tone, enter that and press #, the nice lady comes back and says I can enter a different number, which I do, and it can be a different area code and she just says thank you and everything is funky dory (local terminaologists equate that to fine.) Question: It seems to me that if dialing 6-0-ac<>606-xxx-xxxx puts me to a human and not a computer, then there is some computer link that isnt there, and if that is the case, what if the billing information isn't passed back?!?! Horrors!!!) OK, there is my two cents worth on card-numbers and another log onto the fire of the calling-card silliness. -- Dan Chaney {uunet and the like}!ukma!chaney chaney@ms.uky.edu EXT698@UKCC.BITNET "As often as I have been amongst men, I have returned less a man" - Seneca ------------------------------ Date: 8 Dec 88 22:23:12 GMT From: snark!eric@uunet.uu.net (EricS.Raymond) To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Information Needed on Fax Group IV Standards I'm examing options for an application involving databases that must include images and facsimile transmission support. I have some basic questions about Fax Group IV. 1. Does it support color? 2. What's the image size? Resolution in dpi? 3. Where can I get standards documents for it? Replies by email please, except that post of a short, incisive survey of fax standards might not be a bad idea. -- Eric S. Raymond (the mad mastermind of TMN-Netnews) Email: eric@snark.uu.net CompuServe: [72037,2306] Post: 22 S. Warren Avenue, Malvern, PA 19355 Phone: (215)-296-5718 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Dec 88 17:55:06 PST From: Mark Lottor Subject: trimline light bulbs To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Does anyone know where I can get replacement bulbs for an old style trimline? Is it a standard bulb or a WE special? ------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Dec 88 20:55:10 EST From: ghg@en.ecn.purdue.edu (George Goble) To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: Minor correction to Follow Me Roaming Article In article , I wrote: >How it works: >One has to the have call forwarding feature on his home service. >Upon entering the roaming area, the user dials "*18", gets a >series of beeps (Indy GTE, Cincinatti Ameritech), or a steady >800HZ tone (Miami, BellSouth), and hangs up (actually "END") This was based on very early information. One does not need to have call forwarding on his home service to use Follow Me Roaming. The switch sets you up a "temporary" call forwarding class of service if you do not have it. --ghg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Dec 88 23:03:20 EST From: telecom@bu-cs.BU.EDU (TELECOM Moderator) To: telecom Subject: List being purged: take notice I have not given a lot of attention to maintaining the list since the worm came up. Sites have been on again, off again, making it imprudent to remove a name simply because the mail bounced once or twice. The following consistently undeliverable names are being removed now. If you see yourself or a friend there, tell me a *good* address for you. This message is obviously going to be seen by those folks if they read comp.dcom. telecom as well as (instead of) [Telecom Digest]. Telecom-inbox@mcc.com Telecom-list@cos.com Ron@cad.ucla.edu BBoard.telecom@acc.arpa Daniel@bnr.ca Daemons repeatedly advise that system 'chaos' is no longer available. Fact or fiction? For the several people at Portal Communications who were on the Digest mailing list until several issues ago, please be advised that the address 'yourname@cup.portal.com' is now being called an unknown host, for whatever reason. I am rewriting all those addresses to be sun!portal!cup.portal.com!yourname and see if they will go through that way. Postmaster Pat :) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest *********************