Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA24113; Wed, 8 May 1996 08:53:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 08:53:15 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199605081253.IAA24113@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #225 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 May 96 08:53:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 225 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson MCI True Lies (Michael Quinn) SMS Database Questions (Nicholas Spill) Market Share of Various Vendors (Mike Polischuk) Mobile Phone Radiation / Cancer Link (Simon Johnson) Wireless Phone Jack System (Dawn Reske) H.324 ITU Video Conference Standard (Vidar Alvestad) Small ISDN Phone System (Bob Izenberg) Transparent Callback (Al Niven) Re: No More 10-ATT-0 (David Yewell) Re: No More 10-ATT-0 (lr@access1.digex.net) Re: Directory Assistance Charges (Babu Mengelepouti) Re: PIN Operation and Non-Traditional Cell Phones (Steve Bagdon) Re: ADSI Standards and Devices (Christoph F. Strnadl) Re: ADSI Standards and Devices (Stephen Knight) Re: US West Cutbacks Shake Oregon Employees (Steve Bagdon) Re: US West Cutbacks Shake Oregon Employees (Ed Kleinhample) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 20:52:00 GMT From: Quinn, Michael Subject: MCI True Lies An MCI rep called me Saturday April 27 about 1PM with a deal which sounded pretty good, and guaranteed rates below Sprint, to which I had shifted a few months back and was happy ($.10 min interstate nights/ weekends, and .22 peak). The package included: - $.08/min nights/weekends, .15/min peak. She specifically cited these rates, said they would be effective for at least six months and asked me if they were lower than Sprint's (and we also chatted about inTER vs inTRA LATA rates, so I know there was no confusion on either of our parts). - 35% discount for the first six months; - "free" 800 number with the first 100 minutes free; - some other minor inducements, like calling cards and covering the cost of shifting PICs, etc. So I shifted; even if it sounded too good to be true; which, as it seems, it was. When I received the intro package today, most of the info therein was consistent with the phone solicitation, but the rates noted above were not posted as they were in the Sprint intro packet, so I called customer service around 6:30 PM Eastern time for clarification. I talked to two different service reps, both of whom told me my rates were time, distance, and volume sensitive, and neither of whom had heard of any "$.08/min program" as described above. There was no supervisor in the entire MCI system -- he was "on vacation this week". And the "100 free minutes" is only good for the next month and a half, etc. So: am I the only person in Northern VA (Springfield) they called, and/or was I the only person dumb enough to shift, and/or was I drowsing/hallucinating after after a hot dog, a beer, and a few too many TELECOM Digests? Or are the marketeers completely disconnected with the customer service reps??? I'm shifting my LD service back to Sprint tomorrow morning. If a supervisor ever shows up at MCI, s/he is welcome to call or email me with his/er side of the story. Mike Quinn quinnm@bah.com, (703)412-7488 ------------------------------ From: ntp@netrunner.net (nikko) Subject: SMS Database Questions Date: Wed, 08 May 1996 01:07:14 GMT Organization: NetRunner, Miami, Florida 305 255 5800 Can the SMS database employ dynamic allocation on the "supra" network level: i.e. 60% AT&T, 30% MCI & 30% SPRINT? Is this possible? And can someone lead me to a FAQ or database or faxback service for SMS database capabilities. I know Database Service Management Inc does the high level organisation. Would appreciate any guidance here. Nicholas Spill telemarketing consultant and strategist nspill@netrunner.net voice 305 532-7565 fax 305 534-0825 ------------------------------ From: beatle@cml.com (Mike Polischuk) Subject: Market Share of Various Vendors Reply-To: beatle@cml.com Date: 8 May 96 02:20:50 GMT I would like to know if there is a source for the following information: 1. Who are the top ten telecom companies by sales dollar volume? 2. Who are the top ten telecom companies by units sold? I would like this information for the US and Canada separately, if available, but if only available combined; that's ok too. A further note: I should clarify that by telecom I mean vendors who sell key and/or PBX telephone systems. Thanks a lot for your help! By the way, I will be changing ISP's in the next day or so; if you could post replies to the group it would be appreciated. ------------------------------ From: Mr Simon Johnson Subject: Mobile Phone Radiation / Cancer Link Date: Wed, 08 May 1996 16:39:21 +1100 Organization: ISP Pty Ltd Hello, I was wondering if anyone had any information on the emissions from digital mobile phones? I was aware that certain ones have been banned from many European countries. Any links on the internet would also be appreciative. I've been using an analog mobile phone for the past two years with no problems. I recently purchased a digital - GH337 about three months ago. Since then I have had the WORST headaches in history and massive sharp pains just above my ears. I rang up the mobile phone company (who's name I won't mention) and they said that "tests are being done at the moment, we know its been mentioned in the media and that they have no comment and its probably not the phones fault and to go and see my doctor". If anyone has experienced this or has any information for me, please reply via E-Mail. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 May 96 16:09:34 PST From: dawn reske Subject: Wireless Phone Jack System I'm looking for input on how the wireless phone jack systems that are on the market really work. I purchased an RCA RC926 Wireless Phone Jack system at a local retailer here in town. It appears that the best environment for the wireless system is in a home or small office building. The system works by plugging your telephone line into a base station (A) which is then plugged into an electrical outlet near the wall jack. The extension unit (B) can then be taken anywhere in your home or office, you then plug in the line cord to your phone and extension unit into the electrical outlet and Presto Chango ... you have dial tone. I brought the system to the office and tried it out here in our building. It seems to work well, but I don't understand "what" makes it work. I called the RCA "Wanna Be Helpful Line" and got a few questions answered, however, I'm still baffled. They informed me that the system will work best up to 1000 feet in an ideal situation. When I asked what ideal meant, they stated that ideal was one in which the electrical wiring for the building went through the same meter, same breaker box, with little interference from other devices. A colleague of mine had a reasonable explanation as to how it all works, but we're still not certain. I'd like to be able to use the system for temporary moves and adds here on our campus. Before I do so, I really want to have a handle on the pro's and con's of utilizing this system for emergency temporary use. We are now assuming that since the system won't work when the power is out that it's not sending the information out solely over the electrical wiring, rather the signal is being modulated over the AC current and picked up by the extension unit (B) which is plugged into an electrical outlet. Or do the units themselves require electricity and that's why they don't work when the power is out? If anyone out there can help explain how this works, problems they're aware with the system, or any other experiences with a wireless (not really) phone jack system I would be very grateful. Dawn Reske University of Oregon Telecommunication Services dreske@oregon.uoregon.edu ------------------------------ From: Vidar Alvestad Subject: H.324 ITU Video Conference Standard Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 10:59:17 +0100 Organization: MRT International H.324 ITU Standard Where can I get source code (software development kit) for the H.324 Video Conferencing standard? (OS: DOS or Windows 95). My interest is within: H.223 Multiplex H.245 Control H.263 Codec I have documents covering this standard, but no one seems to have released anything yet. (All I have found is the H.263 codec from Telenor Research.) Thank you everybody for helping me out. Best Regards, Vidar Alvestad vidar.alvestad@ccmail.telemax.no ------------------------------ Subject: Small ISDN Phone System Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 02:52:05 CDT From: Bob Izenberg Reply-To: bei@AUSTIN.sig.net I've been asked by a family member about small home ISDN phone and data services. The existing installation is a three set AT&T set-up serving three phone lines. I'd expect them to either stay with three voice lines, or drop back to two and to add a 2B+D circuit. What equipment might fit their needs? What costs should they expect? bob izenberg phone: +1 (512) 306-0700 sig.net network operations bei@sig.net ------------------------------ From: Al Niven Subject: Transparent Callback Date: 7 May 1996 03:50:19 GMT Organization: Video, Voice, and Data, Inc. The principles for integrating a transparent callback system for a hotel or office PBX are identical to voicemail integration. Dialers like Recall or Vive Synergy sit between telco and PBX. This box sits on the station side and can provide voicemail too. With the proper Dialogic cards, it can even provide fax to fax via email. Transparent callback for large office or hotel: PC approximatly $2,000; Used dialogic board approximatly $500 per four ports up to 20 ports in one pc (voicemail and transparent callback only); Transparent callback software and integration $2,500; Voicemail software - depending on features. I got paid to write a manual "voicemail made easy" by the largest reseller of AT&T equipment in the world, to teach his distributors how to put voicemail on pbx's. The second half of that manual is available for free (the first half described pc's!) in the callback resellers library in the compuserve telecom forum. Rather than kludging a non-pc based system for hotel and large office for transparent callback, one could provide a pc based system that would satisfy many needs: transparent callback, fax to fax via email, voicemail, and whatever else the hotel or large office may want: fax on demand, faxmail, etc. Al Niven Video, Voice, and Data, Inc. 292 Fifth Avenue, #201 NY NY 10001 212-714-3531 ------------------------------ From: David Yewell Subject: Re: No More 10-ATT-0 Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 21:28:17 -0700 Organization: Netcom zev wrote: > Correction: you can still use your AT&T calling card: just dial 102880 > (1-0- ATT-0) first, or dial 1-800-CALL-ATT first. AT&T will handle > local calls, as will any other IXC these days. Zev, could be that way in your part of the world, but I was in Monterey CA yesterday, and could not use 102880 to call within the area code. The LD provider on the pay phone was not ATT, so I thought I could get ATT access with 102880 - no luck, just "sorry your call cannot be completed as dialed". Dave Yewell ------------------------------ From: lr@access4.digex.net (Sir Topham Hatt) Subject: Re: No More 10-ATT-0 Date: 7 May 1996 20:26:31 GMT Organization: Intentionally Left Blank zev (zev@wireless.attmail.com) wrote: > Correction: you can still use your AT&T calling card: just dial 102880 > (1-0- ATT-0) first, or dial 1-800-CALL-ATT first. AT&T will handle > local calls, as will any other IXC these days. Nope sorry, 10ATT0 + local call doesn't work here. Does work through 800 Call ATT. Ron ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 20:21:22 -0500 From: walkerrb@www.hendrix.edu (Babu Mengelepouti) Subject: Re: Directory Assistance Charges jlance@usa.pipeline.com wrote: > I call toll-free directory assitance (800-555-1212) frequently to > obtain toll-free listings. Starting two months ago, my phone company > began charging $.75 for each call. I was never told of this change in > charges until I received my bill. After much complaining, they > removed most of the charges. I thought phone companies can't charge > for 800 and 888 numbers. Is this true? I've heard of Sprint/United Telephone doing this. A friend of mine in Sprint/United Telephone territory in Florida had the same problem (coincidentally, he got slammed to Sprint long distance at the same time). He refused to pay and contested it with the Florida PUC; the following month, they'd stopped charging (I have to wonder how much money they made from these fraudulent billings, however). 800 and 888 numbers are toll-free. There were some 800 numbers in the past that billed based on ANI, such as phone sex lines and 1-800-GET-INFO (remember that?). However, all of those services clearly stated what the charges were before you got billed, and have since gone to alternate billing mechanisms. I am not sure whether this is by FCC rule or not. The only 800 number I'm aware of that you still get billed for calling is 800-855-1155 which is AT&T TDD Directory Assistance. I made the mistake of calling that from home with a modem, thinking that it was still free, and not only did I get billed (a charge I successfully contested because I was never told that I would be billed and never agreed to pay anything), but AT&T put me on their TDD Relay mailing list so I got solicitations from them oriented toward TDD users until I moved. I don't know if they still charge for calls to this number or not, but oddly enough it is dialable at no charge from a payphone. I'm calling from Saudi Arabia ... walkerrb@www.hendrix.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 19:40:40 -0500 From: bagdon@rust.net (S and K Bagdon) Subject: Re: PIN Operation and Non-Traditional Cell Phones dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) said > In johng@comm.mot.com (John > Gilbert) writes: >> I know how regular cellular phones operate with a PIN. What effect >> does PIN operation have on burgular alarm systems via cellular, RJ-11 >> backup devices using cellular and cellular data modems? Are >> manufacturers of these devices having to install new firmware to deal >> with PINs or are the carriers not mandating PINs on these numbers? > I would hope (sigh) that the cellular companies could and would > maintain a list of emergency numbers that could be dialed without a > pin, such as the 911 system. > Then again, _do_ these companies allow 911 to go through without a > PIN? If not, that could be a pretty big problem when you're in a car > crash and someone tries using your phone to call for help ... > Hmmmmmmmmmmm. A Worthy Question indeed: > If your cellular company requires a PIN, can you dial 911 without it? > Inquiring minds want to know. > (Please email responses back to me, dannyb@panix.com, and I'll summarize > the results. Oh, and please try _not_ to bother the 911 folk if you can > find out through other means) I dialed *611 (a PINless number) and asked the Detroit Ameritech rep, and they stated that I can dial 911 *without* a PIN. Short of dialing 911 (haven't had a reason to yet), there is no way to verify. Logic would dicate (and so would your example) that 911 should be a free call, PINless, and even attainable from *any* cell phone at all - those in service, those not in service, and even those that are confirmed stolen (*that* should start a lively debate). Concerning the PIN problem. To the best of my knowledge, Motorola's Cellular Connection (their intelligent RJ-11 adapter for the Bag/car, Brick and Flip) has a DTMF sequence that will *force* a SEND. Using '***' as an example of the force, you would dial 810-555-1212*** (to dial), wait for four seconds, then dial 1234*** (to send the PIN). Can anyone *confirm* this? I don't have a working Cellular Connection lying around, but will stop by the provider's office to find out for sure. Steve B. bagdon@rust.net http://www.rust.net/~bagdon Katharine aNd Steve Bagdon (KNS) ------------------------------ From: cstrnadl@austria.cp.philips.com (Christoph F. Strnadl) Subject: Re: ADSI Standards and Devices Date: Tue, 07 May 96 20:20:40 GMT Organization: Philips C&P In article , gwheeler@gate.net (Gerry Wheeler) wrote: > Klaus Zuenkler wrote: >> Can anybody give me a pointer to the definition of the ADSI standard >> and sources for compatible devices? > The Dialogic voice cards can generate the ADSI signalling, so there is > some coverage of the technique in their manuals. Dialogic has a WWW > site, so you might find a lead to a manual there. ADSI Spec: The ADSI spec is published by Bellcore (www.bellcore.com) in various TRs (Technical References) and SRs (Special Reports). The most prominent and most needed are: TR-NWT-001273 Generic Requirements for an SPCS to Customer Premises Equipment Data Interface for Analog Display Services. SR-INS-002461 Customer Premises Equipment Compatibility Considerations for the Analog Display Services Interface. You will certainly want to purchase these two if you want to get a start on the ADSI. If you want to get *all* of the various Bellcore specs pertaining to the ADSI (and also for CID, Calling Name Delivery, CID/Call Waiting, Call Waiting Deluxe) you may conveniently order it under the Family Requirments option: FR-12 Analog Display Services Interface (ADSI). The 1996 edition sells for USD 1546,-- (+ 15% shipping, I think). We have the 1995 edition: It's really worth its money! ADSI compatible CPEs: I know of at least three Type 3 (see SR-INS-002726 ;-) devices: Philips Home Services: ScreenPhone P100 http://www.philips.com/phs/ Nortel: PowerTouch 350 www.nt.com Alcatel: A 2595 www.alcatel.com Don't hesitate to contact me (off-line) for further information! A Type 3 equipment fully understands the ADSI spec; a Type 2 CPE only decodes Caller-ID information and a Type 1 CPE does not understand anything of the FSK bursts sent to it. Christoph F. Strnadl | "What's a cynic?" Technical Manager/ScreenPhone Services | "A man who knows the price of ORIGIN Information Technology / Austria| everything and the value of Tel +43 1 60101/1752 Fax +43 1 6023568 | nothing." (O.Wilde) cstrnadl@austria.cp.philips.com | #include ------------------------------ From: sdk@cci.com (Stephen Knight) Subject: Re: ADSI Standards and Devices Organization: Nortel Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 16:49:24 GMT In article , Klaus Zuenkler wrote: > Can anybody give me a pointer to the definition of the ADSI standard > and sources for compatible devices? Does anybody know about the > penetration of such phones? Here's some of the info you might want: You can get the documents listed below from: Bellcore Customer Service 8 Corporate Place, Room 3A-184 Piscataway, New Jersey 08854-4156 1-800-521-CORE (2673) (US & Canada) (908) 699-5800 (all others) (908) 336-2559 as listed from ADSI Guide References, SR-2727, Issue 3, June 1995: GR-30-CORE, Voiceband Data Transmission Interface (a module of LSSGR, FR-64 and ADSI, FR-12), Issue 1 (Bellcore, December 1994). TR-NWT-001273, LSSGR: Generic Requirements for an SPCS to Customer Premises Equipment Data Interface for Analog Display Services (a module of LSSGR, Fr-64 and ADSI, FR-12), Issue 1 (Bellcore, Demeber 1992); plus Revision 1, June 1995 and Bulletins. SR-INS-002461, Customer Premises Equipment Compatibility Considerations for the Analog Display Services Interface (a module of ADSI, FR-12), Issue 1 (Bellcore, December 1992); plus Bulletins. SR-2495, Guidelines for Writing Applications Which Use the Analog Display Services Interface (ADSI) For Data Communications (a module of ADSI, FR-12), Issue 1 (Bellcore, December 1994). Hope this helps, steve knight nortel rochester, ny ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 19:40:35 -0500 From: bagdon@rust.net (S and K Bagdon) Subject: Re: US West Cutbacks Shake Oregon Employees shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said: > Another thing you don't hear regarding the downsizing is that (at > least here in Portland) the "technical" folks have been working > *mandatory* 12 hour shifts (60 hour weeks) for over a year. I have > this from a friend who works there (and who shall remain nameless as > he'd like to keep his job!) > I've worked at places that used 12 hour shifts. But it is normally > used for areas that need 24 hour a day, 7 days a week coverage. And > they work things so that nobody does more than 4 days in a row, and > the average hours per week are around 48. > But US West seems to be doing this *solely* to avoid having to hire > more people. I rather suspect that overtime comes under a different > category than "base" per employee expenses. That would allo management > to look good for cutting the "base" expenses, even though the overtime > pay was eating up all the savings. Bell South (aka Southern Bell) did this in South Florida after Hurrican Andrew. The employees were lucky/unlucky, depending on which side of the equation you were on. Bell South didn't hire any new employees, and the overtime was killing the company. I don't know the intricacies about the union rules, but the employees I knew started telling stories about 12 hour days, 7 days a week, 16 weeks at a time. Anything over 8 hours was overtime, anything over 40 hours was overtime, if the worked more then 10 days in a row it was double time (something about the union declaring a 'default emergency'). It got confusing, but the guy basically worked 80 or so hours a week, and got paid for 150 or so. Long, grueling hours sitting at junction boxes, verifying leads, etc. Those who survived *prosepered*. Steve B. bagdon@rust.net http://www.rust.net/~bagdon Katharine aNd Steve Bagdon (KNS) ------------------------------ From: edhample@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 11:00:54 -0700 Subject: Re: US West Cutbacks Shake Oregon Employees In Volume 16 Issue 219, shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: > But this too shows the sort of problems the downsizing has caused. Why > else would outside contractors be installing switch gear *without* some > phone company techs keeping an eye on things? It is common in many industries to rely on outside contractors for many specialized jobs. The fact that no in-house supervisors where present is surprising. What alarms me is the seeming incompetence of these contractors. While I do not claim to be a practicing engineer, a good portion of my education was in electrical engineering (including an internship with Westinghouse). Both in my time in class, and in the field during my internship, it was constantly reinforced that you check, double check, and recheck a circuit before touching it. When de-energizing a live circuit, it is standard practice to open the disconnect, and lock it in that position -- it is standard practice for each engineer working on a circuit to place his own lock on the disconnect. In my intern days (which included many hours in telco switching facilities -- many of which have Westinghouse Electric switchgear and UPS's), it was not uncommon to see a disconnect with a dozen locks snapped on the lever insuring that it stayed in the open position. It must also be considered that telcos have their share of not-so- bright techs. I remember watching a telco tech working in a switching room at a building where I once supervised a facilities department. A fuse had blown on a three-phase disconnect panael which connected the telco UPS to the commercial power. The telco tech was struggling to determine which of the three fuses had blown using a voltmeter. He proceeded to place the probes across each of the three fuses, seeing the proper voltage across one fuse, and zero volts across the remaining two fuses. He quickly decided that the two fuses showing zero volts where blown. After replacing the fuses, the UPS still indicated that commercial power was down. It took me and two of my staff people to convince this clown that the fuse showing the voltage was bad (remember that the meter will have greater resistance than the good fuse). I guess a fancy telco title doesn't mean that this guy was awake through electrical theory 101. Ed Kleinhample Consultant - Land O' Lakes, FL. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought everyone knew that not only are you to cut the power to some device before sticking your hands in there, you are also supposed to discharge *what is left* stored in the capacitors, etc. Of course, everyone can forget now and then, with results ranging from slightly humorous to extremely disasterous. Now and then, people have asked me to look at their old television sets and radios to try and fix them. Often times it is something quite simple that I can fix. Also, you would be surprised how many people there are -- especially in somewhat rich and wealthy neighborhoods -- who are quick to toss out things for the most minor reason. For example, the electrical cord snaps off on their television set; to them that means 'it does not work any longer' and they set it out on the street at the curb for the garbage people on the next pickup day. Sometimes I get there before the garbage truck does however, and when I see these things with very minor problems which the rich people tossed out I haul them away. Now even if a television set has been unplugged for a couple weeks, you still are wise to get in and discharge those caps before you work. They can store the juice for a long time. Part of the fun in having someone watch the (relatively minor) repairs is having them up close sticking their nose inside while I 'innocently' take a large screwdriver with a very long plastic handle and go 'tapping around' inside the unit shorting those big old capacitors to ground. Sure enough, after a minute or two I touch one that is still loaded: a loud bang, a big flash as fire shoots out of the back of the television. The person watching jumps away in fright. With a little luck, I can get the same unit to do it two or three times before it is completely safe to get in there with my hands to do whatever. I forgot that little safety precaution once myself. I was looking at a RF linear amplifier, a device to take small radio signals and make them larger, i.e. four watts in gives fifty watts out, etc. I stuck my hand in there without thinking, and took that load myself. It knocked me off the chair I was sitting in and left me sort of dazed for a couple minutes, and very confused. Some people would say I must have never recovered because I am still quite confused. I'll tell you this much: that RF can burn and sting; oh, can it! Always remember to never put your hands in something merely because it is unplugged. Make sure it is totally discharged as well. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #225 ******************************