Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id XAA29686; Thu, 19 Dec 1996 23:53:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 23:53:37 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612200453.XAA29686@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #670 TELECOM Digest Thu, 19 Dec 96 23:53:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 670 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 510 Splits to 925 (Tad Cook) 925 Selected for East Bay Area (John Cropper) BellSouth Blows It (Ed Ellers) GSM is GSM is GSM - Not (Lloyd Matthews) Book Review: "The Internet Revealed" (Video) (Rob Slade) Web TV: Another Challenge to the Dataquest Survey (David Scott Lewis) 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. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: 510 Splits to 925 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 14:02:19 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) And the New Number is ... 925; Plan Filed to Split East Bay's 510 Area Code SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 19, 1996--An area code relief plan has been submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission that would split the 510 area code in San Francisco's East Bay and create a new area code -- 925 -- to serve part of that area. California Code Administrator Bruce Bennett submitted the 510 area code relief plan on Wednesday to the Commission for review and final approval. Bennett said the plan is supported by the telecommunications industry and reflects customer input received during three public meetings in October. Introduction of the new 925 area code, which will be California's 19th, is planned for March 14, 1998, and is needed to meet the rapidly growing demand for additional phone numbers in the 510 area code, which currently serves Contra Costa and Alameda counties and very small sections of Solano and San Joaquin counties. Under the plan, the existing 510 area code would be split using the east-west topographic boundary of the Oakland Hills. The details are as follows: -- Customers in the existing 510 area code west of the Oakland Hills would keep the 510 area code. Some of the communities in this area include: Oakland, Berkeley, Hayward, Fremont, Richmond, Hercules, El Sobrante, Crockett and Pinole. -- Customers in the existing 510 area code east of the Oakland Hills would receive the new 925 area code and would need to change the area code portion of their telephone number. Some of the communities in this area include: Martinez, Concord, Walnut Creek, Orinda, San Ramon, Moraga, Sunol, Livermore and Pleasanton. The CPUC is expected to issue a final decision on the 510 area code relief plan in the next few months. Persons who wish to comment on the plan may write to the: California Public Utilities Commission President P. Gregory Conlon 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Bennett said two 510 area code relief options were presented to the public for comment during meetings in October: a north/south split that divided the 510 at the Contra Costa and Alameda County lines, and an east-west split similar to the plan submitted to the CPUC. The east-west plan was modified to incorporate public comment and input from elected officials, Bennett said. `The north/south plan to split along county lines did not receive strong public support,` he explained. `People told us the county line divisions were not as significant as the community of interest that exists between various areas.` Instead, people generally preferred the east-west plan, with some suggested modification. `We heard concerns that the east-west plan should leave west Contra Costa County in the 510 due to a strong community of interest between cities there and in northern Alameda County. We were able to make that adjustment with little impact on the life of the 510 area code.` As proposed, the new 925 area code would last about 13 to 16 years, while the reconfigured 510 would have enough numbers to accommodate growth through the year 2004, a lifespan of about six years. While customers who receive the new 925 area code will have to change the area code portion of their telephone number, the new three-digit code will not affect the price of telephone calls in any of these areas, Bennett said. `Call distance determines call price and is not impacted by the creation of a new area code,` he said. `What is a local call now will remain a local call regardless of the area code change. `It's also important for customers to know that PBX's, private phone systems, auto-dialers, alarms and other telecommunications equipment will have to be re-programmed to recognize the new area codes,` said Bennett, adding that people should check with their equipment vendors to see if their equipment needs to be reprogrammed. `Historically, area codes always had either a `1' or a `0' as the middle digit for identification purposes, but all of those codes have been used.` These new number combinations allow area codes to be any three digits from 220 to 999, creating an additional 5 billion telephone numbers nationwide, Bennett said. Bennett also noted that when the new 925 area code is introduced in March, 1998, there will be a six-month `permissive` dialing period during which callers can dial either the old or new area code. San Francisco's East Bay is the latest in a series of regions in California requiring area code relief. Today, California has 13 area codes, more than any other state. Plans call for doubling that number from 13 to 26 over the next five years to keep up with the state's record telephone number consumption. That consumption is being spurred by the high-technology explosion of fax machines, pagers, cellular phones and modems for Internet access along with the onset of local competition in California's telephone market. Ten of the 13 new area codes will be introduced by mid-1998. Plans for the 510 area code were collectively developed by a telecommunications industry group representing more than 30 companies, including Pacific Bell, AT&T, MCI, Sprint, AirTouch, Pagenet, AT&T Wireless, MFS Communications Co., Teleport Communications Group (TCG), the California Cable Television Association and others. CONTACT: Pacific Telesis John Britton, 415/394-3764 URL: http://www.pactel.com ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: 925 Selected for East Bay Area Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 17:32:23 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Reply-To: psyber@mindspring.com ... from Contra Costa media (newspapers) Published on December 19, 1996 Area code east of hills to be 925 By GEORGE AVALOS Staff writer Telephone customers in the East Bay will have another number to memorize: 925. That's the new area code planned for most of Contra Costa County and a big swath of Alameda County. Phone officials Wednesday announced the decision, which is necessitated by the huge demand for new telephone numbers. It will become California's 19th area code when it takes effect in March 1998. The cities and towns west of the East Bay hills that are near Interstates 80 and 880 will retain the 510 code. The communities east of the hills, primarily those near Interstate 680 and Highway 4, will receive the 925 code, said Bruce Bennett, California code administrator. Why are the hills being used as the line of demarcation? Economic and social factors, along with topography, are among the big reasons. At one point, telephone officials intended to split the East Bay along the Alameda-Contra Costa county line. But after meetings last month with political leaders in West Contra Costa County, they followed the hills. The older industrial regions west of the hills would keep 510 and the newer suburbs east of the hills would get 925. "We found the county line was not as significant a factor in preserving a community of interest as the actual commuting, social and living habits of the population," Bennett said. When the split goes into effect, about 66 percent of the East Bay's phone customers will be in the 510 region, while about 34 percent will be served by the new code. Customers who now can make local calls in the East Bay will continue to be able to do so, even if the call travels between the 510 and 925 areas. The telephone industry is scrambling to create the new number because the region quite literally is running out of phone numbers. "The 510 region is in jeopardy," the San Ramon-based Bennett said. "It could run out of phone numbers before a new plan is implemented." At the current rate of consumption, the 510 area will exhaust them in the second half of 1998. Plans for the new number and the geographic split have been submitted to the state Public Utilities Commission. Pacific Bell intends to disclose a new area code for the South Bay region currently served by 408 sometime after Christmas. But it's the East Bay, not Silicon Valley, that's California's hottest spot for new phone numbers. For the first 11 months of this year, 118 prefixes have been added to the 510 roster -- up 24 percent from the number for all of 1995. Only 182 prefixes -- roughly 1.8 million phone numbers -- are available to be assigned in the 510 area. About 77 percent are in use today. Rapid expansion The business and population boom in parts of the East Bay helped fuel the startling demand for phone numbers. But Bennett believes a new trend -- the advent of local telephone competition in California -- has suddenly become an equally crucial factor. About 58 percent, or 68 prefixes, have been assigned to companies that are competing against Pac Bell. Another 33 percent, or about 40 prefixes, were assigned to Pac Bell to meet the demands of its own customers. About 8 percent, or roughly 10 assignments, were for wireless services, such as cellular phones or pagers, Bennett estimated. That's a big change from recent years, when new technologies helped the East Bay become the state's fastest-growing telephone market. "In 1995, about 60 percent of the new prefixes were for wireless services," Bennett said. If the East Bay exhausts its remaining prefixes before the new area code can be used, officials will ration numbers or establish a lottery to assign them. Such a system is being used for the 415 code. Still more numbers Officials hope that the 925 code will last 14 to 16 years. Once the split occurs, the new 510 territory will last about six years -- before yet another new number is needed west of the hills. "Customer notifications for the new number and split will begin immediately," Bennett said. Even after the split, East Bay customers will have a grace period before they are mandated to use the new code. "We would start with permissive dialing, a six-month period when you could call either area code and get through," said John Britton, a Pacific Bell spokesman. "People will be warned they have to use the other area code. Finally, the calls won't go through unless they dial the area code." John Cropper voice: 888.NPA.NFO2 LINCS 609.637.9434 PO Box 277 fax: 609.637.9430 Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 mailto:psyber@mindspring.com http://www.the-server.com/jcbt2n/lincs/ ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: BellSouth Blows It Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 19:24:53 -0500 Organization: Mikrotec Internet Services, Inc. (MISNet) Last month I posted a note questioning the wisdom of junking a 13-year-old 1A ESS switch. As planned, BellSouth cut over the new 5ESS-2000 in the wee hours on December 7, and I'm sorry to say that the results -- at least as far as I'm concerned -- have so far been disastrous. I stayed up late that night, partly to see what would happen when the new switch went in, and as luck would have it the cutover crew pulled my line while I was connected to my ISP, Mikrotec. Oh well, they had to do it some time -- they couldn't sit around waiting for *everyone* to hang up. I have been getting consistent connections to this firm at 26,400 bps (with *one* good 28,800 bps connection) ever since I switched to them over a year ago; my connections to CompuServe's local node have also been at 26,400 bps since I got my V.34 modem in April 1995, and I had found that I could get consistent 28,800 bps connections to (800) 793-6675 -- this is the number Microsoft uses for ISP referrals, so it does me no good at all but *did* prove that my modem and my local loop were up to the task. It took an hour after this cutover before I could call the ISP, or anyone else outside my neighborhood, since they apparently cut over the subscriber lines first and then the interoffice trunks. When I could again call Mikrotec, I found that I could only get through at 24,000 bps! The same happened on CompuServe, and even on that Microsoft 800 number. What was even worse, when I tried BellSouth.net (the RBOC's own ISP) I could only connect at 21,600 bps. Since I figure that the cutover crew had to move smartly, I decided to give BellSouth and Lucent a few days to tweak things before reporting the problem, which I finally did on Friday, the 13th. (Great day for it, hmmm?) The rep told me that the problem would be fixed by 8 pm on Saturday. On Saturday afternoon I got an *automated* call to say that my service had been restored, and asking me to press 1 or 2 to indicate whether or not I was satisfied; since at this point I hadn't tried a modem call I pressed 2 for 'no,' just in case. I tried the modem, found that I was still connecting at only 24,000 bps, and called repair service back to say that the job was not done. They then said that they'd have it fixed by 5 pm Sunday. On Monday a technician showed up to work on the lines outside the house; I was at work, but he told my mother that they had found, and fixed, a bad splice somewhere in the line. Yesterday they were back and installed a new drop to my house, complete with a new 'demarc' box, even though I had explained that the problem was caused by the new 5ESS-2000 switch! Apparently someone had discounted my description of the problem and sent the outside plant guys out (in the cold and rain) to work on everything *except* the CO. On Tuesday afternoon I noticed a slight improvement in my modem connections -- Mikrotec and CompuServe were still managing only 24,000 bps, but that Microsoft 800 number was up to 26,400 bps. Unfortunately, that night we got a *lot* of noise on the line, so much that I couldn't hear what the other party was saying, and for a while the line was completely dead. It came back later that night but was still noisy on Wednesday morning; as of 9:45 Wednesday night it was completely dead, and the best 'repair' could promise was that it would be back on by noon Thursday. They did get it fixed just before 9 am today, and it does seem to have been the fault of the newly installed drop, but I still can't connect at any speed faster than 24,000 bps. I called BellSouth management to complain about the problem; they promised a call back (to my work number) later today, and someone did call back after I'd left for the day. I'll let everyone know what I find out tomorrow morning. It seems to me that when someone reports a problem as being related to changes the telco has made, they should assume that the problem is related to what they did, but instead this sad bunch seems to think that I'm the twin brother of the Connecticut man who allegedly called 911 twenty-five times in a row to report a toothache! (It's said that he was arrested for cussing out the dispatchers; the police naturally offered him his 'one phone call,' and instead of calling a lawyer he called 911 and started cussing the dispatcher again.) I used to think that BellSouth was a better-than-average LEC, but at this point when true facilities-based competition does arrive it won't be a moment too soon for me. ------------------------------ From: Lloyd Matthews Subject: GSM is GSM is GSM - Not Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 18:17:20 +0000 Organization: TRW-SIG Sunnyvale Reply-To: lloydm@pop.svl.trw.com Hi - I have a GH388 GSM phone from Sprint Spectrum/DC which I'd like to use in PacBell's GSM service area in Los Angeles (and someday all of CA). But they use a CF388 phone, and possibly a different frequency (1800 vs 1900 MHz)? The people at PacBell Mobile Services said the phones were not compatible, and that their GSM was "better" than in Europe or DC. You'd think they'd go with the majority standard so they could collect roaming fees, unless the later phases of GSM service will only work with PacBell's system? The odd thing is that something is weakly pinging my phone in San Jose and giving me a No Access message. I can't figure out who the carrier might be, since Pac Bell isn't officially up yet in NoCal and they're supposedly incompatible anyway. How can I find out exactly which GSM systems worldwide use the GH388, and who the mystery carrier is in San Jose? And what's the point of a worldwide standard like GSM if everybody has a different, incompatible implementation? -- A frustrated non-user of Sprint Spectrum's "nationwide" service...which will be CDMA everywhere except DC..and the GSM "worldwide" standard... Lloyd Matthews (Lloyd.Matthews@trw.com) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 13:30:38 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Internet Revealed" (Video) VDINTRVL.RVW 960917 "The Internet Revealed", Gregory Giagnocavo/Tim McLain, 1995, 0-932577-24-5/-23-7/-22-9/-10-5, U$150.00 %A Gregory Giagnocavo %A Tim McLain %C 1866 Colonial Village Lane, PO Box 10488, Landcaster, PA 17605-0488 %D 1995 %G 0-932577-24-5/-23-7/-22-9/-10-5 %I Wentworth Worldwide Media %O U$150.00 800-638-1639 fax 717-393-5752 success@wentworth.com %P 3 hr (approx.) %T "The Internet Revealed" A video tape, by its nature, has difficulty in conveying the accuracy and detail of information that a book can. A video is also not suited to reference type material. A video is good for a presentation of highly graphical (but not highly resolved) material and the inclusion of audio content. Popular theory states that video is good for highly motivating, though perhaps superficial, introductory courses. Tape one is the usual gee whiz ad for the Internet. Tape two give a brief introduction to email (using Eudora). Tape three looks at some search tools. Tape four shows you how to point the pointer at an underlined word in blue until it changes to a hand and then click. It also gives you a fairly good introduction to Netscape and, if you are using Netscape, the second half of tape four may be the most useful part of the package. It's hard to review a video tape curled up in a corner, so my wife saw a good bit of this. Her response was that it was very boring, and she didn't know how I stayed awake through the whole four tapes. I can't really argue with that. The presentation is the standard talking head and screen shots. The screen shots, of course, lose a lot in clarity and readability. The organization fo the material could be a lot better, with many functions being described before you get to the reason you might want to use them, and some others being required before there is an explanation of how to use them. The content is highly system, and even program, specific, which is particularly unfortunate in the tape on search tools. In an effort to add some pizazz to the presentation, there are annoying special effects, such as silly themes and threads, cartoon characters that bounce onto the screen and definitions that race in from the side and (literally) screech to a halt. And, although there are some few handy tips that are seldom covered in the run of Internet books, the material is superficial. So popular theory is partly right, after all. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 VDINTRVL.RVW 960917 Distribution permitted in TELECO Digest and associated publications. roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@absolute.com I have seen progress in an egg. It's called "going bad." Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: David Scott Lewis Subject: Web TV: Another Challenge to the Dataquest Survey Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 11:18:42 -0800 Organization: Strategies & Technologies, Inc. (STI) First, please read this posting with a sense of humor. Second, I need to make a legal disclaimer: My comments are based upon inputs from a reliable source. However, I have NOT been privy to the actual survey questions put forth by Dataquest. With that said, I'll continue. It is my understanding that Dataquest asked the following type of question to Jane and John Q. Public: "Are you interested in accessing the Internet through your set-top box?" If Dataquest really asked such a goofy question, when Mr/s. Public don't even know what a "set-top box" is, then they should have expected overwhelmingly negative responses. Here are the type of questions they should have asked (remember, keep your sense of humor!): 1) Do you consider yourself a religious or spiritual person? If your answer is "no", please proceed to Question #3. 2. Would you like to hear prayers, scripture readings or meditations anytime of the day or night through your television? For example, would you like to hear a blessing by the Pope, an uplifting scriptural reading by Max Lucado, sayings of Muhammad, thoughts in solitude by Thomas Merton, Zen verse by Basho and Natsume Soseki, lessons in simplicity by Elaine St. James, essays on love by Rabbi Harold Kushner, "street" wisdom by Rev. Tony Evans, or meditations by Sisten Wendy Beckett -- at anytime -- through your TV? (NOTE: Saying "on-demand" instead of "anytime of the day or night" might confuse Mr/s. Public, even though that's a more linguistically appropriate phrase.) THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE. 3) Would you like to see pictures of scantly clad women (or naked bodies in general!) at anytime of the day or night? THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE. Boy, I'll bet Dataquest would have had a much, much different response! :-) Of course, it's possible to answer "yes" to questions #2 and #3, but an affirmative answer to at least one question is sufficient. And why not throw Christian and Gospel music "on-demand" into question #2; both are very popular. Matter of fact, why not ask a separate question on musical genres of all types? Anyway, you get my point. Mr/s. public couldn't care less about what we talk about in Online-News, comp.infosystems.www.*, comp.dcom.telecom, or comp.multimedia. But why should they? The 'Net to date has been a playground for the intelligentsia and illuminati. But offerings by WebTV, Sony, Philips, Bandai and many others to follow, will expand the scope of the Internet to include EVERYONE. IMHO, that's a good thing. Give people the freedom to use the 'Net as they choose; don't force feed them dribble on how to write better Java code (which is an admirable feat, but not at all relevant to Mr/s. Public). And remember, with WebTV your kids get their own "home page" with Yahooligans!, National Geographic Online, the Discovery Channel, and other features fit, targeted and appropriate for children. With the Sega unit they can play games and use any ISP. Fortunately, the offerings that already exist fit the needs of key market segments. If you're a Sega family, you may want the Sega unit. If you want to give a unit to your parents, WebTV is a great choice. (BTW, it _might_ be possible to use the Sega unit with WebTV as your ISP; if it isn't, it's something they should work on. Ditto for Bandai and WebTV. And I'll bet that GI and SA are making their newgen set-top boxes with optional PPP connectivity.) Frankly, Dataquest, Forrester and Web Week just don't get it. I pity those with such an obvious lack of vision. Stop chastising version 1.0 systems. (BTW, was the Apple I or Windows 1.0 a success?). Instead, look at the possibilities, especially with push technologies -- from Catanet and its cool Bongo development tool (courtesy of the hottest Internet company, Marimba) to the Enliven suite to the joys of Communicator and Constellation. (FYI, Communicator should be in beta by next week, albeit without Constellation.) Let's not forget that the Internet was developed in large part by funding from the U.S. government ... and paid for by ALL U.S. taxpayers, not just those with advanced degrees. I'm not asking for subsidies for Mr/s. Public; however, they shouldn't (and won't) be denied content that they want. What's on the Web circa December 1996 will bore the living daylights out of Mr/s. Public. However, WebTV and its cousins will bring about whole new opportunities for developing content ... and create an abundance of global entrepreneurial opportunities. Perhaps this is the real beauty of WebTV. For previous musings, go to: http://www.gina.com/wire/tn/tn960835.htm AND http://www.social.com/social/hypermail/news/index.html David Scott Lewis Strategies & Technologies -- The Internet Marketing Consultancy thewebguy@acm.org ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #670 ******************************