Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id BAA16110; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 01:45:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 01:45:12 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612120645.BAA16110@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #658 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 Dec 96 01:45:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 658 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays (trumanjs@primenet.com) Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays (Nils Andersson) Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays (Toby Nixon) Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays (Christopher W. Boone) Re: Yet Another PAY-per-Call (was Re: Further Notes on 555) (Clive Feather) Re: WebTV Sad Story (Jeff Becklehimer) Re: WebTV Sad Story (Jack Decker) Re: WebTV Sad Story (Craig Macbride) WebTV vs. Client and Display Technology (Lauren Weinstein) 900 Psychic lines (Frederick Woodruff) Job Opportunity - HP OpenView Specialist (Virginia) (Zon Hsieh) Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines (Greg Stahl) Telecom-Related Chuckles (Stan Schwartz) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: trumanjs@primenet.com Subject: Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays Date: 10 Dec 1996 08:36:03 -0700 Organization: Primenet Services for the Internet When programming the Win 95 dialer leave the area code field blank and under telephone number enter 281-XXX-XXXX. As far as I know Atlanta, Dallas and Houston have to use this scheme if they are in one area code and the ISP dialup is in another. ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays Date: 9 Dec 1996 20:26:16 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com In article , Christopher Wolf writes: > Do you or any of your readers know how Win95 users in cities with new > areacode overlays (like 713/281 in Houston) can get their systems to > recognize when and when not to dial a 1 when using the dialing > features built into Win95? There must be numerous people that have > found and addressed this problem -- what's the fix? I do not know how the dialler in Win95 works, but there are several generic solutions. 1) Program all numbers with area codes, including local. Tell your dialler to always add the one. (You will have problems with international) 2) Program all numbers with 1+ac+number. Tell your dialler never to include a one. (It probably won't anyway, the number will not look as if it started with an area code). NOTE: Since Jan 95, all areas are "supposed to" accept 1+own area code + number, but this is not universally implemented. Example: Carson City to Reno, same ac will not accept 1-702-xxx-xxxx. By the way, with the advent of comm equipment being carried around the world, there is an immediate need for allowing "same country country code" also. GSM already allows this, you can program your phone with e.g. +1-818-555 1212 and it will dial that number from any country. (The GSM switch edits this string as necessary before pumping it out to the landline network.) Obviously, some of the smarts can be put in the dialler software, but wouldn't it be nice to merely edit in the international access code for the country you are in (should be standardized to 00 BTW, but until that is done, it is relatively painless to reprogram your dialler to "current international prefix"). Then you enter all your numbers as cc+ac+number in your database. Thus, in the NANP, 011-1-ac-number should be made to work!). I obviosly realize that the software can be jimmied, e.g. by entering a null international prefix, the cc =1 will be taken as initial 1, and the call will actually work! HInts to programmers of diallers etc. To summarize: To Bellcore and telcos: Make 011-1-ac-number work. To dialler software programmers: Consider the international case, and that the caller may move from one country to the next! Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 12:45:44 -0800 In TELECOM Digest V16 #654, Christopher Wolf asked: > Do you or any of your readers know how Win95 users in cities with new > areacode overlays (like 713/281 in Houston) can get their systems to > recognize when and when not to dial a 1 when using the dialing > features built into Win95? There must be numerous people that have > found and addressed this problem -- what's the fix? Microsoft is working on a fix for this that will ship in future upgrades to Windows 95 and Windows NT 4.0. In the meantime, the best workaround is to enter your area code in the Area Code field, and the entire 10-digit local number into the "Phone Number" field of your application, such as Dial-up Networking, like this (assuming you're in 713 and dialing 281-555-1234 as a local call): Country Code: United States of America Area Code: 713 Phone Number: 2815551234 The Telephony part of Windows 95 (and Windows NT 4.0) will match the area code to the area code you entered in Dialing Properties, and treat the call as a local call, omitting the "1" prefix for long distance calls. the length of the local number is not checked, so the result will be that all ten digits get dialed. The main disadvantage of this workaround is that it defeats the "location independence" that Dialing Properties is intended to provide. If this was a notebook PC, you took it to New York, and set you dialing properties so the area code was 212, it would dial "1-713-2815551234", which obviously wouldn't work. You would need to have TWO connection settings, one for use in 713, and one for use everywhere else (including 281!). Like I said, it's a workaround, not a solution. It doesn't hurt you on desktop systems, though. The solution we're working on will allow you to specify, on a location-by-location basis, how to dial calls to particular NPA-NXX pairs (as 7 digits [the default if the NPA is the same as the current location], 10 digits, or 11 digits [the default if the NPA is different]). It won't be easy to configure, but, unfortunately, that's the penalty we pay for the LECs and PUCs being unable to agree on a permissive 11-digit dialing plan (which 11 states already have). Toby Nixon, Program Manager, Microsoft Corporation ------------------------------ From: Christopher W. Boone Subject: Re: Win95 and Areacode Overlays Date: Mon, 09 Dec 1996 07:17:13 -0800 Organization: ABC Radio Network Engineering - Dallas Christopher Wolf wrote: > Do you or any of your readers know how Win95 users in cities with new > areacode overlays (like 713/281 in Houston) can get their systems to > recognize when and when not to dial a 1 when using the dialing > features built into Win95? There must be numerous people that have > found and addressed this problem -- what's the fix? Houston is NOT an overlay ... it became a split as of November 2, 1996. The 713 NPA is completely inside the Beltway and the 281 NPA is outside and covers the subburbs of Metro Houston But in an overlay, you must dial ten digits ... and have ALL the local prefixes to your exchange entered if you dont wish to dial a 1+. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Dec 1996 22:08:59 +0000 From: Clive D.W. Feather Reply-To: clive@demon.net Subject: Re: Yet Another PAY-per-Call (was Re: Further Notes on Use of 555) Organization: Clive's laptop (part of Demon Internet Ltd.) In article , "Mark J. Cuccia" writes: ... an awful lot, most of which I agree with. However, he also writes: > Over the past few years, we've seen International PAY-per-call scams, some > in the NANP Caribbean, and some to numbers (but not necessarily locations) > outside of the NANP. I don't see how you can class these as scams. With the +1 809 and non- NANP numbers, you pay *exactly* the same as a call to a "genuine" number in that area. Provided it's clearly presented as an international call the way a genuine call would be presented, what's the problem? Clive D.W. Feather | Associate Director | Director Tel: +44 181 371 1138 | Demon Internet Ltd. | CityScape Internet Services Ltd. Fax: +44 181 371 1150 | | Written on my laptop - please reply to the Reply-To address ------------------------------ From: beck@slidell.com (Jeff Becklehimer) Subject: Re: WebTV Sad Story Date: 9 Dec 1996 05:26:22 GMT Organization: slidell.com inc, Slidell Louisiana Alan Bishop (a@corp.webtv.net) wrote: > - we transcode images and other media types. For example, image > creators often make their images too detailed or store them in > a format that doesn't compress as well as it should. We fix that > in the proxy before transmitting them over the slow link to the user. > It also means that if we want to support a media type, we don't > need a new client release: we just add it in the server and convert > it to an existing one. Just curious, does this violate copyright laws? Also, when you say an image is "too detailed" does this mean you also resize or reduce the number of colors of the images to make them fit on the screen? Jeff Becklehimer slidell.com, inc. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Dec 1996 12:21:59 -0500 From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: WebTV Sad Story Dave Sieg wrote: > I had an interesting phone call from a guy who had bought one of the > "WebTV" boxes. It sits on the top of the TV and hooks to a phone > line, allowing "unlimited Internet Access" for only $19.95/month". > This guy had MS and was bedridden, so this seemed perfect for him. He > paid $450 for the box and wireless keyboard, hooked it up, and started > surfing the web. Now he has discovered that the box is making long > distance calls at 10-15 cents/minute! He had already run up a > sizeable phone bill! After reading Dave's article, I went to WebTV's "WebTV Service Phone Book" page at http://www.webtv.net/HTML/home.retail.html At this site you supposedly can find out if a local access number is available for a given exchange. But they are pretty ambiguous about whether you will actually be making a local or toll call. For example, I typed in 616-842-0000 as a number to check, and it came back with this: "Calling from 616-842-0000, WebTV has one local and one toll number. "Because you live in an area with both local and toll numbers, WebTV may sometimes be a toll call. However, the WebTV box will make an effort to always call the local number, minimizing your phone bill!" BUT - this page seems to tell you what you want to hear. If you type in 616-842-xxxx, it tells you it has a local number in the 842 exchange. If you use 616-846 instead, it says the local number is in 616-846! Substitute the 847 prefix, and it says the access number's in 847, and using 844 says the local number's in 844. Unless they have local access lines in all four of the Grand Haven, Michigan exchanges (which I would think is rather unlikely), something is seriously wrong here. What's even more fun is that if I put in an exchange in the Muskegon, Michigan local calling area, it tells me that there is a local number (in 616-727, which probably really is a local access number) but there is also a toll number in the 414-449 exchange -- so Web TV users in Muskegon might unwittingly be making calls across Lake Michigan to Wisconsin (I do have to give WebTV credit for figuring out that a call to Wisconsin would be less expensive than a call to Grand Rapids, which appears to be the next closest in-state access point, but they aren't always that smart -- callers from the Holland, Michigan area are sent to the Grand Rapids number as the toll access point, even though Wisconsin would in most cases be a less expensive call for folks in that area)! What appears to be happening (judging from some very limited testing) is that in some areas you are always told that there is a local access number and a toll access number. This is not universally true (for example, upon entering 218-448-xxxx it admits that there is no local access number and offers no alternatives), but in some cases where it does claim that local access is available the claim seems suspicious because the "local access number" always has the same exchange prefix as the caller's number (and they don't give you the last four digits so you can call and see if there's really a modem there). Further, even where a local access number is claimed, in many areas the second number (which is used if the first is unreachable) is a toll call, and the Web page does not indicate that there is any way to forbid toll calls (toll restrictors for your WebTV box, anyone?). Bottom line is, it's possible that a lot of WebTV users are going to be VERY surprised when they get their phone bills. Unless the folks at WebTV really are putting access numbers in all the exchanges where their Web page claims that access is available, I would not be at all surprised to hear that they are the target of a class action lawsuit filed by disgruntled purchasers (wanting to recover toll charges plus the purchase price of their units) somewhere down the line. I also suspect that many of the WebTV buyers of this year will be lining up to get a REAL computer and Internet connection next year -- if they aren't totally turned off to the Internet by the whole WebTV experience, that is! Jack [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it with the exchanges here in Skokie (847-673/674/675 and 847-329) and it consistently came back saying I had two local numbers, one in 312-509 which is correct and one in 847-480 which is also correct. PAT] ------------------------------ From: craig@rmit.EDU.AU (Craig Macbride) Subject: Re: WebTV Sad Story Date: 9 Dec 1996 21:39:28 GMT Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. Dave Sieg writes: > I had an interesting phone call from a guy who had bought one of the > "WebTV" boxes. It sits on the top of the TV and hooks to a phone > line, allowing "unlimited Internet Access" for only $19.95/month". > This guy had MS and was bedridden, so this seemed perfect for him. He > paid $450 for the box and wireless keyboard, hooked it up, and started > surfing the web. Now he has discovered that the box is making long > distance calls at 10-15 cents/minute! He had already run up a > sizeable phone bill! It already connects to a TV set and many people already have cable TV, so it would make sense to make the $450 box include a cable modem and just run over the cable TV lines to a net connection. No phone line costs; no long-distance charges; no having the phone line in use when trying to make or receive phone calls; _much_ faster connection. Of course, it wouldn't help if someone is outside the areas serviced by cable TV, but that may still mean a lot more people would be covered than they are by the WebTV ISP's local phone call areas at present. Craig Macbride URL: http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~craigm ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Dec 96 12:16 PST From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: WebTV vs. Client and Display Technology Greetings. WebTV appears to have a great deal of potential as a means for introducing segments of the population without PCs (a rapidly declining but still very significant number) to basic web services. They have developed an interface and methodology that appear to make the best posssible use of a limited display platform (that is, conventional televisions). For all of this they are to be congratulated. However, there are some fundamental limitations to that very platform that would seem to position WebTV as primarily a "transitional" technology -- that is, something from which many users will wish to quickly advance to conventional PC-based net access. One issue is the inability that users will have to make use of most of the wide variety of downloadable client applications upon which most advanced web applications are based. No doubt WebTV will work to make some versions available within their system, but it seems likely that many users will find themselves frustrated over and over again by not being able to hit that download button staring at them on the screen to get a new update for Adobe Acrobat, or a particular graphics or audio system, or whatever. Without a doubt, some users will be satisfied by the mix that WebTV provides within their architecture -- but others would seem likely to want to move on. Given the size of many standard client applications, it seems unlikely that more than a small percentage could be supported within the WebTV platform given the current relatively limited amount of non-volatile memory onboard the units. It's certainly true that later versions of the product could include more memory, disk drives, maybe even a VGA video output and so on -- but at some point we're just looking at basically a single or limited purpose PC -- and the economics of that kind of purchase become unclear against the discount pricing of conventional multipurpose PCs. I mentioned VGA output above, and that brings up another important limitation of the current WebTV unit. No matter how many tricks you play with direct video out and S-video interfaces, the bandwidth of conventional North American NTSC (or PAL/SECAM for that matter) televisions makes them generally unsuitable for displaying significant amounts of text. Those of us who built our own terminals 20 years ago remember all too well the "fun" of staring at flickering TV screens trying to read 80 columns of text. Sets have improved considerably since then, but the fundamental limitations are much the same. When is the last time you saw someone buy a computer with a 60Hz, interlaced display? -- that's what standard NTSC televisions provide. There's a good reason why 72Hz and faster non-interlaced displays have become standard (and why this very issue is such a battleground in the digital TV standards arena). The flicker and resolution limitations of conventional televisions just aren't well suited as computer displays. Sure, you can look at the graphics, and by resizing HTML text to larger fonts (i.e. shorter lines) you can definitely help the situation. But there are significant limits. Again, none of this is to diminish WebTV's accomplishment in creating a mass-market web product. But I think it is important to keep the technical realities in perspective. There may well ultimately be a melding of consumer products and conventional PCs, especially if reasonable digital TV systems become available at affordable prices. But existing televisions represent a very limited technical platform for such applications. --Lauren-- www.vortex.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When I used to do that sort of thing in the late 1970's -- make terminals out of old black and white television sets -- I found I could improve the display by changing the horizonal synch quite a bit. This essentially made it unusable as a television in the future (without restoring the horizonal to where it had been) but it worked for its new purpose. A couple other tricks which helped with the display was to adjust the yoke somewhat, and -- but you had to be most careful! -- wrapping some tin foil (for example, Reynolds Wrap) around the picture tube near the base where it connected to the yoke. This tin foil seemed to trap the ions or something. A word now to those of you who read this and decide to get in the back of your television set and experiment: *** discharge that bugger before you go sticking your hands in there *** ! Old television sets tend to retain a charge for a long time; a very long time in fact. I've seen sets that were turned off and unplugged for a week or more still be loaded with juice. Those capacitors take forever to leak it out. It makes quite a frightful but fun display for all the neighborhood kids. Invite them in to watch, then take a *very big* screwdriver with a plastic handle you can hold -- do not touch the metal part! Probe in there with the metal part of the screwdriver, touching it to those big caps you see in there one at a time and simultaneously to ground. Each time you do that, there will be a loud bang! and sparks will fly out of the back of the television at you. Don't worry; it won't hurt you, it just looks scary and mean. Do that three or four times or until the television set quits backfiring at you. Now it is okay to stick your hands in there wherever you want with no concern. Now should you forget that first and foremost safety precaution as I did one day when I was trying to work on a linear amplifier for a CB radio for someone, it'll knock you on your keister and you will spend the rest of the day with a sort of crazed look on your face, and some confusion in your thinking, just like old fashioned electro-shock therapy the state-run mental hospitals used to administer. That will teach you to keep your hands to yourself and not go sticking them places they do not belong. ... remember: unplug it completely; totally discharge those capacitors (you will know you are finished when the television/radio quits 'arguing' and backfiring at you) and then -- and only then -- put your hands in there to work on it. There are some who would claim that I still have not recovered to this day from taking that load twenty years ago. Maybe not. Maybe I still am crazed and confused. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Frederick Woodruff Subject: 900 Psychic lines Date: Mon, 09 Dec 1996 16:50:20 +0000 Organization: Seanet Online Services, Seattle WA Hi: I'm a journalist in Seattle trying to research the history of the 900 line, pay per call industry; particularly the 900 psychic lines that have proliferated over the past decade. If anyone can help me or point me in the right direction for my research I would really appreciate it. You can reach me directly at my e mail address: pal@seanet.com Thank you in advance, FW ------------------------------ From: zhsieh@telenet.com (Zon Hsieh) Subject: Job Opportunity - HP OpenView Specialist (Virginia) Date: 10 Dec 96 17:54:48 GMT Organization: Alcatel Data Networks JUST SOME OF THEM. Alcatel Data Networks Inc., one of the world's largest producers of advanced telecommunications equipment, is seeking a senior level Netork Management HP OpenView expert to join our Software Development team in Ashburn, Virginia. (near Washington D.C.) HP OPENVIEW SPECIALIST The incumbent will design, implement, and debug software in different network fault management functions and provide technical guidance to the team members. The incumbent must have extensive background in the following areas: o HP OpenView DM4.21 and/or NNM4.1, XMP API, and GDMO o C, C++, programming in a UNIX environment o CMIS, SNMP, MIB, and TCP/IP A BS, MS in Computer Science or Computer Engineer, or an equivalent amount of work experience in NMS is required. Successful candidates will also have seven plus years of experience in telecommunications with minimum of four years development experience with HP OpenView DM/NNM. Alcatel Data Networks Inc. offers an excellent compensation and benefits package. For confidential consideration, mail your resume to Mailstop 1F01 (indicating HP OpenView) at the address listed below or fax to HR (703)724-2348. One may send resume through e-mail to Zon.Hsieh@adn.alcatel.com. Alcatel Data Networks An Alcatel-Sprint Join Venture 44983 Knoll Square, Ashburn, Va 20147 EEO/AA Employer M/F/D/V, Smoke-free/Drug-free workplace ------------------------------ From: Greg Stahl Organization: Saint Lawrence University Park St. Canton, NY 13617 Subject: Re: Ethernet Over Power Lines Date: 12 Dec 96 05:21:09 GMT DataComm over power lines is used in alot of different places. One that I am aware is the mass transit subway system in Washington, D.C. called Metro. Although I cannot describe the details, the trains are powered by a "third rail" that carries 380 volts (I could be wrong about the voltage). The trains are computer controlled (speed, accelaration, decelaration, stopping) from the Metro network control center using sensors on the tracks and the operators. Basically, the computer slows the train down as it enters a station, then stops the train, the operator opens the doors, then closes the doors and starts the train on its way. All the datacomm to run the train is sent through the third rail. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For a number of years a long time ago the Chicago Transit Authority operated its telephone system in the subway via the third rail. The connections sounded awful, but it did work. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Stan Schwartz Subject: Telecom-Related Chuckles Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 00:14:25 -0500 (These are all from the Dilbert newsletter) Don't Ever Change I needed to make a phone call while at the library. When I asked for change at the counter, I was told that they didn't give change for the phone, only for the copy machine. So I asked for change for the copy machine and she gave it to me. Wrong Number: An Induhvidual went to the hospital emergency room. After seeing the doctor and taking medication, he went to the nurse's station to call home for a ride. He asked a nurse how to get an outside line to which she responded, "Pound nine." Thinking the nine button must be sticking, the Induhvidual pushed nine hard and dialed the number. He then got a recording that the call couldn't be completed. He asked again, received the same answer, dialed the same number and got the same recording. Frustrated, he asked the nurse a third time how to get an outside line. Clearly irritated, she answered through her teeth, "I told you, POUND NINE!" to which he replied, "OKAY!", balled up his fist and smashed the phone. [Editor's Note: Some readers might think this story is an urban legend and that's probably true. But it doesn't mean that Induhviduals aren't having this exact confusion everyday. This is why I never serve pound cake at my house.] Just the Fax, Ma'am: This conversation actually happened. Induhvidual: "Do you know anything about this fax-machine"? DNRC member: "A little. What's wrong?" Induhvidual: "Well, I sent a fax, and the recipient called back to say all she received was a cover-sheet and a blank page. I tried it again, and the same thing happened." DNRC member: How did you load the sheet?" Induhvidual: "It's a pretty sensitive memo, and I didn't want anyone else to read it by accident, so I folded it so only the recipient would open it and read it." Group Fax: A paralegal was given her duties the Monday she was hired. Among other things, she was responsible for sending out frequent faxes. She was fired on Wednesday when they discovered that because she didn't like using the fax machine, she was saving the faxes to send out all at the same time -- once a week, on Friday. She was indignant because she couldn't see what they were so upset about. ___________________ copyright notice: Reprinting This Newsletter -------------------------- Feel free to copy, post and distribute this newsletter within the bounds of good netiquette. Scott Adams ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #658 ******************************