Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA14153; Tue, 24 Dec 1996 01:22:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 01:22:27 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612240622.BAA14153@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #676 TELECOM Digest Tue, 24 Dec 96 01:22:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 676 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "Hidden Agendas" in Web Blocking Softtware (Monty Solomon) Representation At The FCC Hearings On Jan 23rd (Gordon Jacobson) Calling U.S. Toll Free Numbers From Abroad (Kimmo Ketolainen) California PUC Split on NPA Splits (Tad Cook) Re: 385 or 435 to be Used for Utah (Paul Robinson) World-wide Cellular Phone Rental? (Joel M. Hoffman) EIA 602 Information Wanted (Rafy Carmon) More on California Geographic Split Decision (Tad Cook) NPA 570 For Colorado (Mark Cuccia) Last Laugh! Not Exactly in the Holiday Spirit, But .. (Cliff McGlamry) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 21:33:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: "Hidden Agendas" in Web Blocking Software Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Excerpt from PRIVACY Forum Digest V05 #22 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 96 15:23 PST From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator) Subject: "Hidden agendas" in web blocking software Greetings. While the ability of parents to control their children's access to web pages via specialized "blocking" software has been widely touted, it's becoming apparent that problems are already appearing. First, there seem to be a variety of "rating" services, all promoting their own mechanisms (and logos of course) to web sites. A site operator might be excused for throwing up his or her hands at the confusion and being rather reluctant to deal with any of them. Now it's becoming known that at least some of the available blocking software packages apparently include what might be called "hidden agendas". These silently block not only obvious topics like "porn", but also access to animal rights, feminist, liberal, and other sites that have been identified as being on various conservative and other "hit" lists. What's of particular concern (regardless of one's personal political leanings) is that the users of such packages may not even be aware that such broad blocking is going on -- or who is being blocked. In one case, the manufacturer of such software threatened legal action when the software's database of blocked sites was "decrypted" and the list published. The same manufacturer also reportedly added an entire ISP's domain to the software's block list, apparently because that was the ISP where the entity publishing the list (and associated information about the blocking) had their web site and e-mail addresses. Such episodes could tend to cast a shadow on the entire category of "parental control" software. Clearly, the ability of parents to control access by their children to materials on the net is important. But it's also important that it be completely clear exactly what and who is being blocked, and that hidden political or economic motives not be embedded within such software. I would therefore recommend that parents only use blocking software where the *complete* list of default blocked sites and site "certification" criteria are made publicly available by the manufacturer, without any special provisos or conditions. Such software should also allow the parent to modify and update that list (either to add or delete arbitrary specific sites as they choose, regardless of whether or not a site bears a particular "stamp of approval" from a "certifier"). Any blocking systems that do not meet these criteria should be considered unacceptable. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 02:34:52 -0500 From: Gordon Jacobson Subject: Representation At The FCC Hearings On Jan 23rd On January 23, 1997 one or more of our esteemed collegues will be testifying before the FCC, concerning the request from several Telcos to burden ISP/IAP providers with usage charges for dial-up connections provided to subscribers. It is imperative that we arm our representatives with as much information, research and support as we can during the next few weeks. Of particular concern are all facts related to the assertion by the Telcos that Internet dial-up users have significantly raised the average call length which the Telcos use to calculate how many ports they need on a switch and that such "increased average call length" will require enormous Telco investment in new and/or expanded plant that must be paid for by the ISPs/IAPs. From the page one article in December 16th issue of Communications Week, we are aware that a coalition of Major Computer and Data Communications companies (referred to as the Data Coalition) will be filing a report in January contradicting the Telco claims. We are interested in hearing anything that may be of use to us. Please respond by email to the address in the header of this message. Regards, - GAJ Home Page: http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~gaj1/home.html ------------------------------ From: kk@iki.fi (Kimmo Ketolainen) Subject: Calling U.S. Toll Free Numbers From Abroad Date: 23 Dec 1996 00:25:37 +0200 Organization: Weyland-Yutani Group After the introduction of the 888 code earlier this year I made another set of test calls to both the 1800 and 1888 numbers. All about 50 test calls were made on a Telecom Finland card payphone which I suppose was connected to the local network of Turku Telephone, member of the Finnet Group of local telecoms (10019, the universal toll free fault report number rang at their office). Results in general: calls go through using the three following access codes: 00 - operator roulette, 994 - Telivo Ltd, 990 - Telecom Finland Ltd). I didn't test 999 (Finnet International Ltd) because the payphone was set to charge for all calls to this access code. The combination 990 1888 was the only one which didn't work. The subsitute codes 1880 and 1881 are not recognised, but the original codes 1800 and 1888 work flawlessly on every try (except 990 1888). An intercept message was played in the beginning of every call to warn about charging for every answered call, and charging did not begin until the other end answered *EXCEPT* on about every fifth call. Also, at least twice I dialed a *non-existent* 1888 number and charging started right away, during the intercept message from the U.S. I couldn't find any reason for this randomness. The most positive finding anyway was that most non-existent numbers (N-E below) were signalled straight to the local operator, and the local intercept message (4) was played. In the table below one can also find out that calls to some non-existent numbers were not catched locally. Dialled number|Intercept Dialled number|Intercept --------------+--------- --------------+--------- 00 1800 + 7D | 1, 2 994 1800 + N-E| 1 (!) 00 1888 + 7D | 2 994 1888 + N-E| 4 00 1800 + N-E| 3, 5, 6 990 1800 + 7D | 2 00 1888 + N-E| 1!, 5, 6 990 1888 | 6 (unprogrammed!) 994 1800 + 7D | 1 990 1800 + N-E| 1 994 1888 + 7D | 1 990 1888 | 6 (unprogrammed!) Intercepts: 1. "Access to the number you have dialed is not free of charge outside the United States. If answered, you will be charged international direct dialing rates for this call. If you do not wish to proceed with this call, please hang up now." (U.S. recording) 2. "The toll free number you have dialed is not toll free if dialed from outside the United States. You will be charged at international direct dialing rates. If you do not wish to be charged please hang up now." (U.S. recording) 3. "Your call can't be completed as dialed. Please check the number and dial again." (I could get this recording only once. It is an U.S. recording. I did hang up at this point, the recording probably continued in French or Spanish.) 4. "Valitsemanne numero ei (unreproduceable in 7-bit ASCII). Numret ni valde inte i bruk. Var god kontrolera numret. The number you have dialed is not in use. Please check the number." (Finnish - Swedish - English, local recording) 5. (Intercept sound - invalid number) "Numero ei ole (unreproducable in 7-bit ASCII) Olkaa hyv ja tarkistakaa numero. Numret inte i bruk. Var god kontrolera numret. The number is not in use, please check the number." 6. (Intercept sound - invalid number) Kimmo Ketolainen * kk@sci.fi * http://iki.fi/kk * Tel. Earth +358 40 55555 08 Studentville 84A, 20540 Turku, Finland * irc:Kimble#42 * Fax +358 22 50 22 40 SunOS weyland-yutani0 5.5 Generic_103093-03 sun4d sparc SUNW,SPARCserver-1000 ------------------------------ Subject: California PUC Split on NPA Splits Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 00:40:35 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Commission Split over How to Add California Area Codes By George Avalos, Contra Costa Times, Walnut Creek, Calif. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Dec. 23--California residents and businesses will continue to see area-code splits until at least 2000 as a solution to the state's telephone number crunch, officials decided Friday. A bitterly divided state Public Utilities Commission voted 3-2 to continue the present system of dividing a region geographically prior to adding a new area code. This procedure will be used to add the 925 area code to part of the East Bay while keeping the existing 510 area code in an adjacent section of the East Bay. The process of splits has worked smoothly to add area codes in California until the last few years. Lately, though, the proliferation of wireless telephones, pagers, fax machines, Internet accounts and new contestants in California's telephone market have ratcheted up the demand for new prefixes and forced an acceleration in creation of area codes. The PUC decided against using an alternative method called "area-code overlays." In this system, officials would retain the current area-code number and assign the new area code to any new numbers added in the same region. In an overlay system, a geographic region would have two or more area codes. Plus, people and businesses on the same block or in the same building could have different area codes, depending on when they were assigned their telephone numbers. Overlays also would require customers to dial a 10-digit number (the three-digit area code and the seven-digit number) to call anywhere, even within the same area code. As a result of the PUC's vote, people will be able to continue to dial a seven-digit number when they place a call in their own area code. A poll commissioned by some competitors of Pacific Bell found that 85 percent of the California phone customers surveyed would prefer to retain the seven-digit dialing system, said PUC President P. Gregory Conlon. But as California continues its hectic pace of adding phone numbers, officials may have to mandate 10-digit dialing (after dialing a 1 before the area code) anyway. "Eleven-digit dialing will come to us one way or another," said John Gueldner, a Pacific Bell executive. PUC Commissioner Josiah Neeper criticized area-code splits as a temporary measure that will do little more than soothe public concerns about dialing extra digits. "This is a choice between short-term compromise and toadying on one hand, and long-term vision," Neeper said. "Geographic splits are more costly than overlays and must be done too frequently." For example, officials this week disclosed plans for a 925 area code, effective in 1998, to ensure the East Bay doesn't run out of telephone numbers before then. The new 925 region of the East Bay should have enough phone number capacity to last 14 years. But the part of the East Bay that retains the 510 code will exhaust its supply of numbers only six years after the split occurs, which means the East Bay will have at least three area codes by the year 2004, Pacific Bell officials estimate. "We would go merrily on our way to nowhere" with area-code splits, said PUC Commissioner Daniel Fessler. "Seven-digit dialing is for those wedded to a 1950s, 'Leave it to Beaver' version of the telephone industry." But polls conducted on behalf of Pac Bell, GTE Corp. and other telephone companies suggest the current system has plenty of support. "All three surveys found that area-code splits are the preferred method for most people," said Thomas Pulsifer, a PUC administrative law judge. "The surveys also found concern about confusion over dual area codes in the same location or same neighborhood." The PUC on Friday also decided to cease nearly all regulation of California's cellular, paging and personal communications services. ------------------------------ From: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: 385 or 435 to be Used for Utah Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 01:39:22 -0500 Organization: Evergreen Software In article , John Cropper wrote: > Deseret News Archives, > Thursday, December 12, 1996 > None opposed the plan to assign area code 385 or 435... outside... > Wasatch Front... > Weber, Davis, Salt Lake and Utah counties ... several area codes > would require 10-digit numbers for local calls. > Local calling areas, dialing plans and rates, at least for US WEST > customers, would not be altered ... cellular phone customers in the > affected area would need to have their phones reprogrammed ... Fax > machines, modems or pagers would not need to be reprogrammed. Either the item was taken verbatim from a press release by someone who either doesn't know what they are doing, or the writer doesn't understand how technology works. Yes, pagers will not need to be reprogrammed. A pager is an incoming only device, it does not dial phone numbers. But *any* device that dials telephone numbers - which includes fax machines and modems - would need to be reprogrammed if any stored number is changed. If a number moves to a new area code requiring the new code to be entered, or if all numbers have to be dialed as ten digits, or any other change of that type occurs, then any stored numbers *must* be changed to accomodate that change. Now, technically a modem usually does not need reprogramming -- most people probably do not use the AT &Z telephone number list of up to four numbers that most modems do support -- but the database used by their software programs *does* need reprogramming, and for the purposes of this article, that is essentially the reprogramming of the modem which is required that I am referring to. But a fax machine, which includes the ability to store frequently dialed numbers in speed-dial buttons, would need it. Also, the fax machine's own telephone number -- sometimes referred to as the CSI field -- would need to be changed to reflect a new area code if it was changed or the CSI would show the wrong sender number (and in fact, may constitute a violation of Federal Law if a cover sheet does not show the correct number.) (Formerly ) Paul Robinson Evergreen Software ------------------------------ From: joel@exc.com (Joel M. Hoffman) Subject: World-Wide Cellular Phone Rental? Date: 23 Dec 1996 17:11:39 GMT Organization: Excelsior Computer Services In the back of an airline magazine, I saw an offer for world-wide cellular phone rental, where I would pay only for calls (probably at quite a high rate), and nothing for renting the phone or the cellular service. But I forgot to keep the advertisement. Does anyone have any details on this sort of service? At the moment I'm mostly interested in Israel, but in the coming months Europe, too. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ From: Rafy Carmon Subject: EIA 602 Information Wanted Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 00:46:39 +0300 Organization: Motorola - MCIL I need urgent information regarding the EIA 602 standard. Does someone knows where such info might be available? Any information will be helpful, http/ftp sites, docs, book references, etc. Thanks, Rafy Carmon | Smtp: rafyc@comm.mot.com DSP SW Group Leader, Digital Radio Dept. | X-400 email: CRC020@email Motorola Communications Israel Ltd. | Ms-Mail: BRC005@email 3 Kremenetski st. P.O.B. 25016 | Tel: +972-3-565-9131 | Tel-Aviv 67899 ISRAEL | Fax: +972-3-565-8754 ------------------------------ Subject: More on California Geographic Split Decision Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 21:30:16 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) PUC decision means millions will get change in area code SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Millions of California phone customers are likely to see their area codes change by the year 2001 under a policy adopted by the state Public Utilities Commission. In a 3 to 2 vote Friday, the commission decided that in order to accommodate millions of new phone lines, area codes running out of capacity must be split geographically. The decision will force an estimated 12 million to 15 million California residents and businesses to change area codes in the next few years, Pacific Bell projects. The commission rejected so-called "overlay" plans in which new area codes are introduced within the same geographic boundaries as existing codes, adding capacity without forcing customers to change. Of the 12 new area codes that Pacific Bell projects will be needed, new ones have already been ordered for the southern part of the 415 region and the 916 region outside of Sacramento County. Last week, the telephone industry petitioned the PUC to split parts of Contra Costa County from the 510 area code. Seven other area codes will likely split within the next few years -- including 408, 310, 619, 818, 714, 213, 209 and 805 -- and will have to be approved by the commission as needed. The 12th new area code will be a second split for 415 by the year 2000, according to Pacific Bell. The ruling was a setback for Pacific Bell, which had fought for the overlay option. The company argued that the plan would allow existing customers would not have to print new stationary and business cards or notify associates of number changes. "The transition cost to customers (of area code splits) will be in the tens of millions of dollars," said Pacific Bell spokesman Dave Miller. Explaining the ruling, the commission cited surveys showing that most consumers prefer area code splits to overlays. In a written statement, the commission said that "the greatest concerns about an overlay are having a mix of codes within the same household or business." Further, overlays require customers to dial 11 digits even on calls in their area code. Most of Pacific Bell's competitors, including major long distance companies that are entering the local market, favor geographic splits. If new customers all get new area codes, many people might be reluctant to switch providers, they fear. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 15:26:47 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: NPA 570 For Colorado I did check with Rate & Route -- I mean the AT&T Operator, to determine if there is a 570 local central-office prefix presently in the 303 Area Code in Colorado. Indeed there *IS*, for Idaho Springs CO, which is about fifty miles west of Denver. I think that it is used for some form of wireless functions, i.e. cellular/paging/mobile/etc. However, whether 570 is to be the new NPA for code relief for 303, or another code yet to be announced, there is the talk about the new NPA being an *overlay*, and with it the associated ten-digit local dialing for all local-area calls, whether within your 'own' NPA code, or to numbers with the 'other' NPA code. In other words: 570-NXX-xxxx would mean Area Code 570, plus whatever local exchange; while 303-570-xxxx will continue to mean Area Code 303, plus local exchange 570 *within the 303 area code*. With overlays and mandatory ten-digit local dialing, such things *are* possible, and actually make *more efficient use* of numbering/code resources than area code splits do. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: 23 Dec 96 12:50:50 EST From: Cliff McGlamry <102073.1425@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Last Laugh! Not Exactly in the Holiday Spirit, But ... For decades, two heroic statues, one male and one female, faced each other in a city park, until one day an angel came down from heaven. "You've been such exemplary statues," he announced to them, "that I'm going to bring you both to life for thirty minutes, in which you can do anything you want." And with a clap of his hands, the angel brought the statues to life. The two approached each other a bit shyly, but soon dashed for the bushes, from which shortly emerged a good deal of giggling, laughter, and shaking of branches. Fifteen minutes later, the two statues emerged from the bushes, wide grins on their faces. "You still have fifteen more minutes," said the angel, winking at them. Grinning even more widely the female statue turned to the male statue and said, "Great! Only this time you hold the pigeon down and I'll crap on it's head." ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #676 ******************************