Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id MAA05354; Fri, 24 May 1996 12:58:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 12:58:10 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (Patrick A. Townson) Message-Id: <199605241658.MAA05354@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #247 TELECOM Digest Fri, 24 May 96 12:58:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 247 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Regulators, Telcos and Internet Services (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Heart Pacemakers and Digital Cellphones (Nigel Allen) Voicemail Signaling (K. Daniel) Interesting New Spam Twist (Ron Mackey) Assignment of Caller ID (Randall Gellens) Summer Courses at Oxford (course@garnet.berkeley.edu) The Bridging of Madison County (Mike Pollock) Seeking NEBS Standards (garin@clbull.frcl.bull.fr) Fax and Modem on Same Line as Telephone (Karl Pospisek) ANSI Spec for T1 Signaling Bits (Rich Dodge) 888 Toll Free Numbers (Randy Weiss) Network Outages (Jonathan Wells) How Long Ago Was This Made? (Dale Miller) MFS Intelenet Quality of Service (Mark Stone) Reminder: Area 888 is Overlay, Not Split (Carl Moore) Friends at laramar.com (Roy A. McCrory) Will Sprint Comply on June 1? (Stephen Magee) Telecom Company in Eritrea (Bengt Gorden) Please read the message at the very bottom of this issue. It is quite important. It is how I survive with your help. Thanks. PAT] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rishab@nntp1.best.com (Rishab Aiyer Ghosh) Subject: Regulators, Telcos and Internet Services Date: 24 May 1996 10:34:53 GMT Organization: Best Internet Communications After the ACTA/ISP letter filed with the FCC there has been much debate on the role of regulatory authorities, and how telcos allegedly use them to bully smaller Internet companies. Most recently, the {Economist's} lead business story criticised telcos for complaining about flat-rate Internet charges and volume-independent local tariffs. Although I don't believe that telcos should be seeking regulatory sanction to face the "threat" of ISPs in a competitive market, the fact is that the markets are not competitive, in more ways than one - the telcos are not free to set tariffs at will, for example. Attached here is my response to the {Economist} article. Rishab ps. flamers note: I would love the flat-rate Internet pricing model to continue; I just wonder whether it can. The Editor The Economist 25 St James's Street London SW1A 1HG UK 12th May 1996 Sir, Mr Khanna's comment on telecom companies' seeking regulatory protection against Internet providers (May 11) is disingenuous; your own suggestion that they provide more data services themselves simply misses the point. What is at stake is the future of the Internet's flat-rate pricing model: can it survive? In the hypothetical situation of free competition, telecom companies would not have to "pray for regulators" to save their skins. They would then be free, as they now are not, to insist on volume-based prices for local calls or even bulk leased circuits. Competition may reduce what telecom companies could charge, but need not force them to adopt the Internet's pricing model. You seem to ignore that the Internet is not some mysterious, intangible entity, but simply a network of communications links usually leased from telecom companies. When Sun Microsystems abandons its "expensive global network" and links its offices worldwide through the Internet, in all likelihood its data will pass through the same (or similar) physical cables. Most of the Internet's physical infrastructure - the "backbone" - is built by telecom companies, and operated either by them or by networking companies that lease their lines. If telecom companies refused to unconditionally lease circuits at low, volume-independent rates, the Internet's flat-rate pricing could become unsustainable. It is quite irrelevant whether or not telecom companies "see the Internet as an opportunity." If they do, and offer data services, they could still charge based on volume; without regulatory interference, they could force Internet providers to charge based on volume as well. On the other hand, they could see an opportunity not in the Internet per se, but in volume-independent pricing. But such an opportunity in flat-rate pricing may not exist. Unlike replicating information on the Net, laying cables requires a lot of money. Today's flat-rate Internet pricing is a result of the excess capacity on telecom networks, developed with the networks' immense earnings from voice telephony. Earnings are necessarily lower with a flat-rate pricing model where revenues, like costs (of infrastructure, if not service) are fixed. The next decade will see tremendous growth in _voice_ telephony in Asia's huge, unsatisfied markets, providing much higher returns on infrastructure investment than fixed-rate Internet services. So, given the competing needs for investment - and despite the rapid growth in communications technology - it is likely that on the Internet, as elsewhere, price will become a factor of demand and supply. Sincerely, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh International Editor First Monday First Monday - The Peer-Reviewed Journal on the Internet http://www.firstmonday.dk/ Munksgaard International Publishers, Copenhagen International Editor - Rishab Aiyer Ghosh (ghosh@firstmonday.dk) H-34-C Saket New Delhi 110017 INDIA Tel +91 11 6853410; Fax +91 11 6856992 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 00:23:51 -0400 Subject: Heart Pacemakers and Digital Cellphones From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Organization: Internex Online (shell.io.org), Toronto, Ontario, Canada Here is a press release from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario. I found the press release on the Canada NewsWire web site at http://www.newswire.ca/ HEART AND STROKE FOUNDATION ADVISORY ON PACEMAKERS AND DIGITAL CELLULAR PHONES TORONTO, May 17 /CNW/ - Recent findings on the effects of digital cellular phone on pacemakers have raised concern among some Canadians. There is some experimental data suggesting that close contact between a digital cellular phone and a pacemaker can speed up or slow down the pacemaker. The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario advises that the risk to pacemaker recipients can be significantly reduced if simple precautions are taken. These include: . don't use your phone on the same side as your pacemaker unit; . don't carry your phone in your breast pocket or on your belt; . hold the cellular phone at least six inches away from your pacemaker unit; . if while using your cellular phone you begin to feel faint or dizzy, immediately turn off your phone; . if you suspect that your pacemaker has been affected by contact with a digital cellular phone, immediately contact your personal physician. To date, there is no evidence that analog cellular phones affect the functioning of pacemakers. Each year, approximately 10,000 pacemakers are inserted in Canada. It has been estimated that 100,000 Canadians are living with implanted pacemakers. Canadians who have questions concerning their pacemaker should speak to their personal physician. General medical and lifestyle information is available from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario's Healthline at 1-800-360-1557 or by contacting your local office of the Heart and Stroke Foundation. For further information: Corinne Hodgson, Manager Science Communications, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, (416) 489-7111, ext. 302. forwarded to the TELECOM Digest by Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen/ CV available on request ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 19:30:24 PDT From: TELCO Planning, K. Daniel Subject: Voicemail Signaling paulc@sulis.com (Paul Chehowski) wrote: > Does anyone know how telco voice mail systems manage to signal a > subscriber's phone when they have voice mail waiting? The signaling > seems to be done without taking the phone off hook, and it seems to be > done on a regular basis to the phone (if you disconnected the phone > and plug it back in the light on the phone will come back eventually). > Could someone point me to a reference on this type of signaling? Kelly Replied: > The signaling from your local telephone company signaling a sinle-line > telephone set is different than that used by a PBX to signal a single line > telephone set. Assuming you are talking about a PBX in a business, hospital or hotel, the signaling is almost always proprietary and even if you are a technician trouble shooting the problem, the manufacture will not tell you. Generally, the scenario is the voicemail application hardware has an RS-232 connection to the CPU of the PBX. The voicemail application launches a signal to the PBX alerting the PBX to activate message waiting. The voicemail also launces a signal when meesages have been retrieved or save, to the PBX to de-activate the voicemail. The PBX delays the activation or de-activaion or continues the activation after the phone was used by a hierarchial responsability routine. That is, Process all calls, process all data changes by system admin port, process all Input/Output devices attached to PBX last. If you are using a Telco Switch (CENTREX, DID or POTS Line), the Voicemail Application hardware is connected to the Central Office Switch in the same manner. The Telco Switch waits for instructions just like the PBX does. The Central Office signaling is well documented and several references are avaialable. Either application does not allow for any Voicemail application signaling through a PBX or switch to control the phone set. The phone set receives it's signals from the PBX or Central Office moments after the PBX or Central office has been instructed by the Voicemail equipment. Cellular and PCS phones are changing that. Cellualr and PBX phones are being equipped to handle the voice storage and prompting in a limited manner, within Firmware and dynamic storage chips. This is documented in TR-TSY-000283. Finally, if you are an Enhanced Service Provider, hoping to alert the Central office or PBX from your voicemail platform please reference Alliance Fro Telephone Industry Solutions Committee Infromation Industry Liaison Committee Documents for Issues 030 Message Ringback after Busy Transfer or Issue 033 Visual Message Indicator. Please feel free to call our office for the appropriate reference, based on the application that you want. 800-555-1234 (real Number). We have very little PBX reference but good documentation on Switching systems. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 96 09:21:00 CDT From: rem@dsiinc.com (Ron Mackey) Subject: Interesting New Spam Twist Organization: Distributed Systems International, Inc. I've recently seen some interesting SPAM in my days, but this one caught my attention because of the threat at the end. > From: heinkel@xnet.com (Abram Rutman) > Subject: HAIR LOSS?....MINOXIDIL USERS? > Organization: XNet - A Full Service Internet Provider - (708) 983-6064 > Now available in the U.S. PENTADECAN AND FA-BAO 101D. > Japan and West Germany's leading treatment for thinning hair. > 2.5X more effective than minoxidil. Featured on CNN, NEWSWEEK, > NEW YORK TIMES. DOCTOR recommended. For FREE information, > please call 1-800-555-8655 > *PLEASE NOTE THAT ANY CALLS NOT PERTAINING TO INFORMATION REQUESTS > WILL BE AUTO-BILLED TO ORIGINATING NUMBER UTILIZING > LONG DISTANCE SURCHARGES. Okay, this guy thinks it's okay to spam 10,000 newgroups with his garbage, but doesn't want to be bothered with junk calls himself. What I really would like to know is the legality of threatening to bill for an 800 call. Does this guy really have any legal recourse to stop offending junk calls to his 800 number or are we all free to spam his 800-number the same way he's been spamming us? Best regards, Ron Mackey Distributed Systems International, Inc. rem@dsiinc.com 531 W. Roosevelt Road, Suite 2 708-665-4639 Wheaton, IL 60187-5057 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It probably is not legal and he may be able to do it somehow if he has a contract with some sleazy telco billing agency. I'd say handle calls to 800-555-8655 with the same discretion as calls to Slaton: see to it whatever ANI they pick up is essentially worthless. Everyone passes several payphones in a day's time or knows of some trusty looparound. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 00:37:46 -0700 From: Randall Gellens Subject: Assignment of Caller ID I'm trying to find out if the 5ESS or other switches have the ability to assign what is used for the caller ID string, and if any LECs do this for subscribers. For example, a physician might want the back office line to have the directory number of the front office line for CLID purposes. Someone with multiple home lines might want them all to have the main number as the CLID. A business with a hunt group or PBX might want all trunks to have the CLID of the primary line. This would not only be a real convenience for the subscriber (easier to route public incoming calls to a primary number), but would also provide more accurate caller ID information. Instead of the DN of a random trunk, all calls from a company could show the CLID of their published number, making it easy to recognize. Calls from a doctor's back line would show the main number, instead of being marked private, making it more likely that the call would be recognized and promptly answered. (Some people regard with suspicion incoming calls marked private.) I thought there was some mention of this a few years ago in TELECOM Digest or perhaps Telecom Priv or Telecom Tech, but since CLID was a long way off here in California, I didn't save the information. Now that it will be here in a few weeks, I'm trying to track it down. I've spent hours searching archives with no luck. (I did find a few items in TELECOM Digest around 1991 where people asked the same question (one even mentioned that he too thought he remembered an earlier article saying it could be done), but I was unable to find any helpful replies.) I contacted Pacific Bell, and the person I spoke with was very helpful, thought it was a good idea, and suggested Pac Bell would do it if I could find another LEC which also did it. Please send any replies to me, or at least CC me. I'm afraid I'm somewhat behind in this digest. Any replies I get which were not CCed to the Digest I will summarize for the Digest. Many thanks, Randy@Pensive.Org ------------------------------ From: course@garnet.berkeley.edu Subject: Summer Courses at Oxford Date: 24 May 1996 00:16:25 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD SUMMER ENGINEERING PROGRAMME Short courses for professional engineers:- *Advanced Compression Techniques presented by Gordon Drury of DigiMedia Vision 4-5 July 1996: stlg575 *Communication Networks: Internet, SDH and ATM presented by Professor Pravin Varaiya and Professor Jean Walrand, of the University of California at Berkeley. 15-17 July 1996: stlg775 *Digital Microwave Measurements presented byTim Masson of Hewlett-Packard, Alan Jenkins, DPhil, and Andy Street DPhil, University of Oxford 24 June 1996 : stlg195 *Third Generation Personal Communication Networks presented by Mark Beach PhD, Peter Kenington PhD and Andy Nix PhD from the University of Bristol and John Kelliher from Orange Personal Communication Services 25-26 June 1996 : stlg575 GSM900/DCS1800 Digital Cellular System: Standards, Implementation and Deployment presented by a team from MOTOROLA European Cellular Infrastructure Division 8-12 July 1996: stlg995 Analogue Interfacing for Digital Systems presented by Jose Franca PhD from the Universidade Tecnica de Lisboa, co-author and editor of several books in the field. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My thanks to Harvey Stern for passing this along as he does regularly with courses at Berkeley. But for whatever reason, he failed to include information on how and where to register, etc. Hello, Harvey? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: The Bridging of Madison County Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 22:02:31 -0400 I want to construct a bridge. I have my first Watson card running my voice mail now, I have two switches here, and I'm looking at getting them both attached to a computer that can route by either ANI and or account codes. What I can't get from anyone anywhere is information on bridging equipment. Has the bottom dropped out of this market or am I looking in the wrong places? Thanks, Mike ------------------------------ From: garin@clbull.frcl.bull.fr Subject: Seeking NEBS Standards Date: 24 May 1996 08:39:41 GMT Organization: Bull Can someone tell me where I can find the NEBS standards? Thanks, Jean-Marc Garin (please reply bu e-mail J.M.Garin@frcl.bull.fr) ------------------------------ From: Karl Pospisek Organization: Alcatel Altech Telecoms Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 13:41:53 GMT Subject: Fax and Modem on Same Line as Telephone > From: A. Padgett Peterson > Subject: Preventing Picking Up on Busy Line > Pat, I have a real telco hardware question: I have been told that > there is a simple (e.g. one diode) circuit that can be used to > prevent a phone from picking up on a busy line. With FAX, modem, or > other data traffic picking up a handset can disrupt it. The solution is very simple, add two back to back zeners (any values from 5.6V - 18V) in series with the voice-phones line. The reason why it works is that fax machines and modems often have a larger offhook resistance than voice-phones and the series zeners force the voice-phones offhook resistance to be greater than the fax/modem resistance thus preventing a line disturbance when the voice-phone is taken off-hook. Note that this solution won't work if your equipment is far from the central office or the central office has low power SLICs [ Who needs 48V in 1996 :-) ]. Warning : in some countries, the Telcos own the whole line from the central office to the subscriber equipment and alterations may not be happily accepted. Greetings - Karl/// PS The 48V standard is here to stay. ALCATEL ALTECH TELECOMS - ENGINEERING DIVISION SUNNY SOUTH AFRICA ------------------------------ From: rich@netcommcorp.com (Rich Dodge) Subject: ANSI Spec For T1 Signaling Bits Date: 24 May 1996 12:34:48 GMT Organization: Network Communications Corporation Does anybody know which ANSI specification, if any, details the T1 signaling bits as they relate to setting up a phone call? Your help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Randy Weiss Subject: 888 Toll Free Numbers Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 14:52:27 -0700 Organization: Sol Tec, Inc. I am curious to know if anyone has the latest on the 888 Vanity Number Auction. Whether it will occur, when it will occur etc. Thanks in advance for any info. Randy Weiss rweiss@soltec.com ------------------------------ From: Jonathan Wells Subject: Network Outages Date: Fri, 24 May 96 03:26:42 EDT Please help: I am a student at the U of Penn, doing a graduate thesis. I am trying to compile information about telco network outages. I have searched all of the newsgroups hoping for a thread, but have not found much. Could anyone help me? If you have any information available about carrier network outages which effected your business, or you know where I might find such information, I would be very thankful.:) If I obtain anything interesting, I will post the results in this and other newsgroups for the benefit of others. Please post back to this group, or e-mail me directly. jonwel@mits.com ------------------------------ From: domiller@ualr.edu (Dale Miller) Subject: How Long Ago Was This Made? Date: 23 May 1996 23:30:01 GMT Organization: University of Arkansas at Little Rock While moving recently, I came across a very low-tech item I had all but forgotten about. It's a yardstick. This particular one is emblazoned with "Beard's Furniture Co. - Little Rock, Ark. - Phone No. 7484". I know some SWBT folks read this group regularly, and I was wondering if anyone might be able to shed some light on the age of this item. Since I'm sure Little Rock wasn't in the forefront of telephone installation, I can't imagine that they had four-digit numbers for very long before moving to named exchanges. Thanks, Dale O. Miller - domiller@ualr.edu |University of Arkansas at Little Rock Systems Programmer/Network Manager |2801 S. University Ave. +1 501 569 8714 |Little Rock, AR 72204-1099 USA http://www.ualr.edu/~domiller/ |KC5NXW ------------------------------ From: mstone@inx.net (Mark Stone) Subject: MFS Intelenet Quality of Service Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 12:53:34 GMT Organization: Internet Exchange I would appreciate hearing about anyone's experience with MFS as a provider of long distance and/or local service. They seem to have attractive rates compared to the combo of NYNEX and MCI which I now use for my business. However, I do not know of anyone who uses them and has experience with their customer servie and overall quality of service. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 May 96 14:51:54 GMT From: Carl Moore Subject: Reminder: Area 888 is Overlay, Not Split The Digest reported some people trying to call 1-888-xxx-xxxx for a Motorola cellphone promo, not being able to reach it, then trying the same seven digits in area code 800 and thus flooding Methodist Hospital's info line with calls which could prevent some doctors from reaching it. Area 888 is an OVERLAY, so if you see 888-abc prefix, it was NOT formed by taking 800-abc and replacing that 800 with 888. People who reached that hospital info line were thinking along lines of geographic split. (Of course, area 800 was not a specific geographic area to begin with.) ------------------------------ From: Roy A. McCrory Subject: Freinds at laramar.com Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 20:41:02 MDT Reply-To: mccrory@erebus.fc.dna.mil Here is an interesting traceroute! traceroute to laramar.com (206.206.160.111), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets ... 7 fix-west.dren.net (138.18.192.1) 340.446 ms 310.164 ms 445.688 ms 8 * t3-0.enss144.t3.nsf.net (192.203.230.253) 551.775 ms 536.895 ms 9 ft3.cnss8.San-Francisco.t3.ans.net (140.222.8.4) 486.909 ms 330.764 ms 350.951 ms 10 ft0.cnss19.Los-Angeles.t3.ans.net (140.222.19.1) 370.615 ms 425.330 ms 514.858 ms 11 ft1.cnss112.Albuquerque.t3.ans.net (140.222.112.2) 553.906 ms 530.975 ms 676.150 ms 12 f0-0.cnss116.Albuquerque.t3.ans.net (140.222.112.196) 539.082 ms 712.952 ms 545.662 ms 13 enss365.t3.ans.net (192.103.74.46) 544.140 ms 572.753 ms 554.561 ms 14 LAWR.NM.ORG (129.121.254.10) 660.612 ms 532.430 ms 250.550 ms 15 nmintrac-technet.nm.westnet.net (204.134.77.74) 303.239 ms 255.813 ms 280.602 ms 16 * laramar.com (206.206.160.111) 428.662 ms 437.794 ms ... Regards, Roy A. McCrory mccrory@thuntek.net "Alas poor dragon, I knew him well!" URL * [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very interesting indeed. Thanks for passing that along. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Magee@cris.com (Stephen Magee) Subject: Will Sprint Comply on June 1? Date: 24 May 1996 14:13:02 GMT Organization: Concentric Internet Services I was wondering if Sprint will really comply this time to the FCC's requirement to pass caller ID data along with LD calls? I called their customer service and they said that it will happen, which is the same thing they said the last two times the dead line came up. June 1st is the date. Does anyone out there know? Steve Magee [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sprint customer service representatives are always quite well informed about the industry in general and their own company in particular, so if they told you it is true, I am sure you can accept what they say. They don't just make things up to placate some crank caller and get him off the line before he blows thier quota of calls handled every hour. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bengt.Gorden@abc.se (Bengt Gorden) Subject: Telecom company in Eritrea. Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 08:01:06 GMT Organization: KTHNOC, Sweden Reply-To: Bengt.Gorden@abc.se We are a couple of people that are about to go and work in Eritrea. This is in a very preliminary state. We need to get info about the telecom company in the country or in the neighbouring countries. Is there any kind person or persons out there that could be at assistance? It would be very much appreciated. Thanks in advance, Bengt Gorden, Sweden ------------------------------ 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: 847-329-0571 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. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #247 ******************************