Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id JAA10717; Wed, 12 Feb 1997 09:06:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 09:06:08 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199702121406.JAA10717@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #40 TELECOM Digest Wed, 12 Feb 97 09:06:00 EST Volume 17 : Issue 40 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson TN Consumers/Lower BellSouth Fees To IXCs (Mike King) Re: "Satellite Phone" Scam Hits Internet (John R. Levine) Re: "Satellite Phone" Scam Hits Internet (Steve Bagdon) Free Comparative PCS Pricing Information (Richard C. Harris) Caller-ID Provided via Pager - Real-Life Puzzle (Clive Dawson) Re: Really Strange Problem (David E. Sorkin) Global 800 Numbers (Judith Oppenheimer) Traffic Engineering - Training and Consulting (Mario A. Castano) IP: Internet Access Coalition Report on the RBOC Conjection (D. Farber) Re: Can Caller ID Be Provided As DTMF Tones? (Mike Sandman) 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 hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@massis.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: Mike King Subject: TN Consumers/Lower BellSouth Fees To IXCs Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 21:22:17 PST Forwarded message: Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 16:49:42 -0500 (EST) From: BellSouth Subject: TN Consumers/Lower BellSouth Fees To IXCs BellSouth ...........................................February 10, 1997 Tennessee Consumers May Not Get Full Benefit NASHVILLE, TN -- Consumers will not receive the full benefit of lower instate long distance rates created by BellSouth's $9.5 million reduction in access fees unless the long distance companies change their ways. The Tennessee Regulatory Authority is expected to approve Tuesday a reduction in fees that the long distance companies, including AT&T, MCI, Sprint and others, pay to BellSouth for connecting calls to their networks. The reduction is scheduled to take effect on February 15. A second reduction of $8 million is scheduled to become effective July 1, 1997. BellSouth, today, called on AT&T and MCI to carry out their promises and pass the entire reduction on to consumers in the form of lower instate long distance prices, instead of pocketing part of the reductions as has been their previous pattern. The reduction in access charges to be approved by the TRA will apply to all long distance carriers, who generally follow AT&T's lead in changing their prices. "Over the past five years Local Exchange Telephone Companies, including BellSouth, have reduced their interstate access charges by more than $9 billion, while long distance rates have increased more than six times over the same period," said David May, regional director for BellSouth. "We believe all consumers, including more than 65 percent who do not subscribe to discount calling plans, should benefit from these reductions." "The issue here is whether long distance companies pass all the access reductions on to customers, not that access charges exceed actual costs, as the long distance companies contend," May added. Current access charges are approved by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Tennessee Regulatory Authority to support the concept of universal service. "The principle of universal service provides a subsidy from higher-priced services, such as long distance, to keep basic telephone prices low so that all consumers can afford to have a telephone, regardless of their locality and the actual cost to provide the service," May added. The FCC is currently examining the best method to reduce access charges closer to their costs while maintaining affordable prices for all consumers. Their findings are due by May 8. ### Note: A line graph showing "Trends in Long Distance Rates and Exchange Access Charges" is available. Call Karen Williams at 615/214-5874 or your local BellSouth manager to receive this information, or visit BellSouth's News Center at http://www.bellsouthcorp.com/headlines/bell_releases/97/feb/021097b.html. For more information contact: David May, 615/214-5901 --------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 97 00:58 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: "Satellite Phone" Scam Hits Internet Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > Geosynchonous satellites, such as those used for satellite television, > can not be used for satellite-phones very effectively because of a > time delay (2/3 of a second) that is produced in conversations, due to > the fact that each satellite orbit 22,300 miles from earth (even at > the speed of light, it takes nearly a second to make the round trip). Your arithmetic is off -- a geosync satellite hop adds 1/4 sec of delay, and they have been used for many years for long distance phone service. If anyone still remembers SBS, the phone company started by IBM and others and finally folded into MCI, it used satellite links for all of its long distance connections. The delay was noticable, and kind of annoying, but not bad enough to make the service unusable. On the other hand, it is indeed completely implausible that any sort of cheap personal service could use geosync satellites, for two reasons. The main one is power. 22,000 miles is a long, long, way to send a radio signal, which means that your base units have to have relatively large and carefully aimed antennas and fairly large batteries. The smallest such units I'm aware of are the size of a laptop computer, cost three thousand dollars to buy, plus $2.80 per minute on the phone, and have various other limitations that make them unsuitable as a replacement for cellular and landline phones: they take 40 seconds to set up, aim the antenna, and make a call, you can't use them while in motion, and they need a line of sight to the satellite, either outside or through a window. If you still want one, check out Comsat's web site at http://www.comsat.com/planet1/. They're not licensed for outgoing calls in the U.S., by the way. The other reason why geosync will never be mass market is limited bandwidth. Each satellite can handle only 2,000 conversations and the number of slots in the sky for geosync satellites is very limited, since they all have to be over the equator, far enough from other satellites using the same bands to avoid interference, yet visible from the entire area which they're supposed to cover. The satellite phones I described above can only use four (4) satellites, which means only 8,000 in use at once in the entire world. Iridium and its competitors will address the power and bandwidth issues by using larger numbers of satellites in much lower orbits, but they'll still only be interesting if you are in areas with no other kind of phone service. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, http://iecc.com/johnl, "New witty saying coming soon." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 06:16:37 -0400 From: bagdon@rust.net (Steve Bagdon) Subject: "Satellite Phone" Scam Hits Internet Van Hefner said > Geosynchonous satellites, such as those used for satellite television, > can not be used for satellite-phones very effectively because of a > time delay (2/3 of a second) that is produced in conversations, due to > the fact that each satellite orbit 22,300 miles from earth (even at > the speed of light, it takes nearly a second to make the round > trip). Huh? Yes, InMarSat is in geosynchonous, but I believe you have your time off slightly. If the speed of light is 250,000miles/sec (just a nice, round number, people!), then that would be about a 200ms delay. > If a phone conversation is taking place somewhere the first > satellite does not reach (such as from the U.S. to Japan) TWO > satellites must be used in a relay fashion. This produces a time delay > of 1 1/3 seconds in the conversation. This is one reason why most long > distance traffic is carried underground/undersea via fiber optics, and > NOT via satellite. The time delay not only makes conversations much > more difficult to carry on, but makes the transmission of faxes, the > internet, etc. nearly impossible in many cases. Data on Motorola's > system is only guaranteed at 2400 baud! After exhaustive (and quite irritating!) debugging, I was able to get 14.4 faxes through via InMarSat *sometimes*, and 9600 faxes 99% of the time. No, that single satellite hop (fax modem, earth station, satellite, earth station, fiber to local town, fax modem) did *not* cause that many problems. What *did* cause problems was when using CamSat's IOR (Indian Ocean Region) earth station in Turkey. The AEOR (Atlantic East Ocean Region) and AWOR (Atlantic West Ocean Region) are both serviced in New York (Long Island?). And the POR (Pacific Ocean Region) is serviced in California (Long Beach?. That would mean that in over 75% of the world (three-fourth's of the satellites) your satellite hop terminates on an earth station in the continental US, so you are pretty much guaranteed quality land-line phone service to your phone in America. But again, in the IOR the earth station is in Turkey. There was at least one particular incident when the fiber-optic line from Turkey to New York went down (AT&T? ComSat equipment in Turkey?), meaning that ComSat had to bounce the signal off *another* satellite to get the fax from Turkey to New York (earth station, satellite, earth station, satellite, earth station, fiber to local town). And *that* would be a 400ms delay, causing serious faxing problems. My only complaint with ComSat's customer service line was that when I called them about faxing problems, they were only doing tests from Turkey to the remote earth station - not thinking to include the delay from New York to Turkey. *I* had to tell them to think of the Turkey-New York line. It took a few hours, and a humbling call on their part, to finally admit the problem. They did call me back when the fiber line was back up, though. So the answer is - no, you should *not* have problems faxing at 9600 over InMarSat. Steve B. bagdon@rust.net (h) USFMDDKT@ibmmail.com (w) Katharine aNd Steve (KNS) http://www.rust.net/~bagdon '91 MR2T (K&N FIPK, Mr.2PP boost controller. For sale, again.) '85/'85/'91T MR2 (parts car) '90 Camry All-Trac (project car) ------------------------------ From: NMKL79A@prodigy.com (Mr. Richard C. Harris) Subject: Free Comparative PCS Pricing Analysis Date: 12 Feb 1997 01:53:34 GMT Organization: Prodigy Services Company 1-800-PRODIGY Subject: Free Comparative PCS Pricing Information I have recently completed a data base for every PCS BTA market detailing the winning bids for the corresponding MTA's in the A & B auctions and the winning bids in each of the C,C re-auction,D,E,& F auctions. As companion to this information, I have compiled certain demographic information by county including population, population growth, median household income, and population density. I will be happy to provide this information on a single market for anyone who will send me an e-mail with the following: Market of Interest (Name and BTA #); Fax Number (Prodigy doesn't accept, to my knowledge, file attachments in e-mail); Some piece of information from my web site (www.snj.com/harris). As you can see, I am trying to encourage visiting my web site for some value added piece of information in return. I would appreciate your comments both on the idea and for those who partake of the offer if it was worthwhile. Thanks, Rich Harris Harris & Associates ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Feb 97 18:20:53 CST From: Clive Dawson Subject: Caller-ID Provided via Pager - Real-Life Puzzle The recent query about Caller-ID provided via DTMF prompts me to relate a very strange occurence which turns out to be a pretty good "real-life" puzzle. I have a Panasonic answering machine with a feature which allows me to set up a phone number for it to call after somebody leaves a message. I have it set up so that the unit will call my pager and send a special code which tells me that a message is waiting for me on my answering machine. This has worked fine for years. This past weekend I was amazed to receive a page from my answering machine which sent a string of digits including not only my special code, but also the phone number of caller who had left the message! It took me a while to guess how this might have come about, and when I returned home and approached my answering machine, my theory was confirmed. Additional info: I do subscribe to Caller-ID, but it is not built in to the answering machine in any way. Also, this was not caused by the caller; i.e. he did not reprogram my answering machine in any way to change the call-back number. In fact, he didn't key in any numbers at all while leaving his message. This had never happened before, and probably will never happen again. Anybody care to guess what I saw when I arrived home? I'll send Pat the answer in a couple of days, or you can send me e-mail. Enjoy! Clive Dawson Austin, TX ------------------------------ From: David E. Sorkin Subject: Re: Really Strange Problem Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 01:35:11 -0600 Organization: MCSNet Services Reply-To: "David E. Sorkin" In TELECOM Digest on Feb. 8, Cliff Sharp reported finding several instances of multiple international calls made within a minute of each other on his telephone bill. Some calls were billed by MCI, others by AT&T. That reminded me of a story I read a few days ago on CNET (and more recent similar stories elsewhere), describing a scam involving a program that turns off a modem's speaker and causes the modem to dial Moldova (possibly a number which provides the perpetrator with kickbacks from inflated long distance charges, as in the recent 809 area code callback and pager scams). The calls billed to Mr. Sharp were to Australia, Germany, and some place billed as "DIEGOGRCIA", and were very short in duration, so I doubt that this is the same scam, but it could be one caused in a similar manner. The Moldova scam apparently involves software downloaded from web sites including "sexygirls.com" and "erotica2000.com", and available on individual web pages at other sites. The program, named "david.exe" or "david7.exe", would cause the user's modem to hang up its current connection and dial a number in Moldova (in the former Soviet Union), which would then reroute the call to an Internet provider in Ontario. (The phone number in Moldova is registered to the Ontario company, according to MSNBC.) Because the program turns off the modem speaker, the user might not ever realize what happened. The CyberTimes article reports that thousands of Internet users in the U.S. and Canada have been affected, and that neither AT&T nor Bell Canada is willing to forgive the charges, because the calls were to an overseas number. Solid Oak Software (producer of the CYBERsitter filtering software that blocks out web pages and words that are sexually explicit, feminist, liberal, critical of Solid Oak, or otherwise objectionable) issued a press release claiming credit for blocking access to some of the sites that distributed the Moldova scam software. - DES References: Clifton Sharp, Jr., Really Strange Problem, Telecom Digest, Feb. 8, 1997 Courtney Macavinta & Nick Wingfield, Sex Sites Scam Big Bucks, CNET News, Feb. 6, 1997 Alan Boyle, "Trojan Virus" Costs Porn-Seekers, MSNBC News, Feb. 8, 1997 Robert E. Calem, Internet Scam Costs Thousands in Phone Bills, N.Y. Times CyberTimes, Feb. 11, 1997 (free sign-up required to access this site; be sure to deselect the junk e-mail consent option if desired) Solid Oak Software, New Internet Scam Can Cost Users Hundreds, Feb. 5, 1997 Peacefire, CYBERsitter: Where Do We Not Want You To Go Today? [critique of Solid Oak's CYBERsitter software] David E. Sorkin ... 7sorkin@jmls.edu, http://www.jmls.edu/ Ass't Professor & Assoc. Director, Center for Info. Tech. & Privacy Law, The John Marshall Law School - (312) 987-2387 ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: Global 800 Numbers Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 12:59:58 -0500 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Reply-To: j.oppenheimer@worldnet.att.net My two cents: During the pre-Feb. 1 "priority application" phase of Global 800, MCI told me (once I got past the "I don't know what you're talking about, do you mean 888?") people, that my client would have to port their domestic 800 number to MCI, for MCI to obtain the matching global 800. Now, this isn't an ITU requirement, so I figured all right, I got one lady who doesn't know her butt from a hole in the wall. No surprise. So I spoke with someone else, different MCI sales office, etc. Same story. Then I got phone calls from other clients who'd called AT&T and Sprint. If they got through to someone who could help at all, ATT and Sprint had advised the same thing. No freephone application without porting the matching domestic 800 (or by Sprint, any 800 - one domestic number ported per global number obtained.) I don't know if this is Big-Three company policy or just local office sleezy marketing (although it seems too consistent for that), but the only carrier I contacted who I found knowledgable and satisfactory was USA Global Link. (a) no 800 domestic porting necessary; (b) no monthly service fee; (c) they immediately knew what I was talking about (how nice to call a carrier and not have to school their salespeople in order for them to sell to me!) If you're interested, you can call Chris Bush at 800 546-5737. I found him to be very helpful. Judith Oppenheimer ICB Toll Free News http://www.thedigest.com/icb/ ------------------------------ From: Mario A. Castano Subject: Traffic Engineering - Training and Consulting Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 10:17:39 -0500 Hello all ... First, let me introduce the company I am currently working for. CINTEL (Centro de Investigacion de las Telecomunicaciones, Telecommunications Research Center, established 1994) is a private, non-profit organization with 41 shareholders that represent the most important companies related with the telecommunications business in Colombia, including 23 local and long distance telephone service providers, universities, telecomms equipment providers and governmental institutions. We provide R&D, standardization, certification, consulting and training services to the whole telecomms sector in our country. Our objective is to collaborate in the technological development of the telecomms companies and services in Colombia. One of those telcos has asked us to organize for them short courses in traffic engineering. As I am not an expert in this subject, I would thank a lot to the TELECOM Digest readers that can advice me about the topics that modern short courses in basic and intermediate level traffic engineering should cover. We are also very interested in contacting individuals and companies that provide international consulting and training services in the following telecomms fields: - Telecomms business and marketing strategies - Strategic planning - Introducing new technologies and services - Service management - Network planning and optimization - Spectrum management - Regulatory frameworks - Legal aspects - CATV, ATM and PCS network design - Internet and Intranet Thanking you for your kind attention. Mario A. Castano Director, Planning Office CINTEL Centro de Investigacion de las Telecomunicaciones Av 9 118-85 Bogota Colombia Tels: +57 1 620 8178 620 8123 620 8137 Fax: +57 1 214 4121 Email: m.a.castano@ieee.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 22:43:38 -0500 From: Dave Farber Subject: IP: Internet Access Coalition Report on the RBOC Conjection From: James Love The Internet Access Coalition's report that demolishes the RBOC assertions on network congestion is available for a free download. It requires adobe acrobat ... http://www.itic.org/ppdocs.htm A few highlights .... the peaks for data and voice are pretty different. Because of the differences in calling patterns, the internet users have added to the switch daily load, lowering the average per minute costs ... which run about 9 cents per HOUR. ISPs are cheaper to serve, because the cost to the telco of delivering data to the ISP using an ISDN BRI line is much cheaper than 23 twisted pair POTS lines, which might be deployed to other businesses. Heavy Internet users are likey to have purchased second lines. Second residential lines generated $1.4 billion to RBOCs in 1995. The calls terminating at an ISP are "paid for" by the callers. In asking for termination fees, the RBOCs are asking to be paid twice for the same calls. As a group, residential Internet callers are not using the network such that they place higher demands on capacity than do voice callers. RBOCs have economical ways of taking traffic off the circuit switched network, that can be deployed now, should there be a need to do so. jamie ------------------------------ From: mike@sandman.com (Mike Sandman) Subject: Re: Can Caller ID Be Provided As DTMF Tones? Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 02:21:49 GMT Organization: Mike Sandman Enterprises Reply-To: mike@sandman.com Hi, We have a Caller ID device that does exactly what you want, using normal Caller ID from the phone company. You set up your application to receive DTMF first, before the greeting. When we sense that you answer, we spit out the Caller ID info in DTMF (just the phone number - no name), followed by a #. When your aplication sees the #, you'll have the number you wanted and you just start your normal greeting. When the unit is dialing the digits into your IVR, it splits the line so the caller won't hear the digits. BTW, Caller ID is provided in DTMF in maybe 30% of the world (BT in England is the biggest), but not the US. Mike Sandman 630-980-7710 E-mail: mike@sandman.com WWW: http://www.sandman.com Our 72 page catalog of Unique Telecom Products & Tools is on the World Wide Web. We have a fantastic assortment of Cable Installation Tools and Training Videos to help you use them. NEW "Basic ISDN", "Intro to T1" and Fiber Optic/CAT 5 Training Videos are now available. Also check out our Telephony History Page, which contains ads and articles from telephony related magazines from the first part of the century. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I strongly recommend that all Digest readers become aquainted with the catalog published by Mike Sandman and the telephone parts/supplies business he operates here in the Chicago area. Email him and request a copy of the latest catalog to be sent to you in snail mail. Do not worry about getting spammed, etc. Mike has been a trusted business person on the net and a regular participant here in this Digest for several years. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #40 ***************************** Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 09:09:01 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #41 TELECOM Digest Thu, 13 Feb 97 09:09:00 EST Volume 17 : Issue 41 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Slovak Telephone System Changes (Robin E. Haberman) UCLA Short Course on "Communication Systems Using DSP" (Bill Goodin) Book Review: "JavaScript: The Definitive Guide" by Flanagan (Rob Slade) LEC's Wanted Extra Charges From ISP's (John Stahl) Say the Words "Area Code" Before a Phone Number (Lee Winson) INMARSAT Phones in U.S. (Ed Ellers) Internet Access Coalition's Report Available (Erik Florack) ActiveX/Quicken = Overdraft! (Monty Solomon) Re: Really Strange Problem (Fred R. Goldstein) 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 hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@massis.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: robineh@ibm.net (Robin E. Haberman) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 97 20:25:51 Reply-To: robineh@ibm.net Subject: Slovak Telephone System Changes I have been following the articles in TELECOM Digest on the coming code changes for both the Slovak and Czech republics. As an international specialist and database developer on telephone numbering plans around the world I find I can offer something on the current topic. I received a fax from Dr. Peter Halus, Director of Telecommunication Division in the Slovak Ministry of Transport, Posts & Telecomminucations. I had been asking him about the country code change that will go into effect on 28 Febuary 1997. I would have sent mail before but I just returned from a Bellcore seminar on Numbering Strategies in Phoenix. I asked Dr. Halus if this code change will be the first step in other changes in their national telephone numbering plan and how I could follow along with each change. What follows is the text of a fax that he sent to me: "The numbering plan used today in the Slovak Republic is derived from the numbering plan of the former Czechoslovakia. Basic character- istics of the Slovak numbering plan established in the Technical Regulation TPT-S 1(1996) are the following: * open numbering plan, integrated for the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, present CC 42, introduction the new CC 421 from the 28th of February 1997 23.59 UTC, * numbering structure CC+NDC+SN, * variable number length, international number length is from 7 to 11 digits, after change of CC to 421 it will be international number length from 8 to 12 digits, N(S)N length from 5 to 9 digits, * international prefix 00, national prefix 0, * 82 geographical numbering area in the PSTN. Future plans: The new numbering plan is under consideration. Basic principles are the following: * decrease the amount of numbering areas from 82 to 25, * distinguishing of geographical and non-geographical NDC in accordance with international trends, present geographical NDC beginning with 7,8, 9 to move to NDC 2,3 and 4, * non geographical numbers 700 reserved for the personal numbering, 800 freephone, 8XX shared cost services, 900 premium rate services, * medium term objective the fixed length of N(S)N 9 digits, * changes will be made in two phases from 1999 to 2003 or 2005." I hope that this information can be of use to you. robineh@ibm.net.us ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Communication Systems using DSP" Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 18:34:00 -0800 On April 12-16, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Processing", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bernard Sklar, PhD, Communications Engineering Services, and frederick harris, MS, Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State University. As part of the course materials, each participant receives a copy of the text, "Digital Communications: Fundamentals and Applications", by Bernard Sklar. This course provides comprehensive coverage of advanced digital communications. It differs from other communications courses in its emphasis on applying modern digital signal processing techniques to the implementation of communication systems. This makes the course essential for practitioners in the rapidly changing field. Error-correction coding, spread spectrum techniques, and bandwidth-efficient signaling are all discussed in detail. Basic digital signaling methods and the newest modulation-with-memory techniques are described. Topics that are covered include: data encoding and baseband transmission; bandpass modulation and demodulation; channel coding: error detection and correction; defining, designing, and evaluating systems; modulation and coding trade-offs and bandwidth-efficient signaling; spread spectrum and multiple access techniques; digital signal processing tools and technology; non-recursive filters; signal conditioning; and adaptive algorithms for communication systems. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1990. The course fee is $1495, which includes the text and extensive course notes. These notes are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 14:51:11 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "JavaScript: The Definitive Guide" by Flanagan BKJVSCDG.RVW 961021 "JavaScript: The Definitive Guide", David Flanagan, 1996, 1-56592-193-3, U$29.95/C$42.95 %A David Flanagan %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1996 %G 1-56592-193-3 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$29.95/C$42.95 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 454 %T "JavaScript: The Definitive Guide" There is something contradictory in calling a book "the definitive guide" and then stamping the front and back covers "BETA EDITION" in large, bold, red caps. Flanagan, however, has done an admirable job of presenting useful and reasonable information about a product that hasn't even been finalized yet. The first half of the book is an introduction, the second half is a reference for JavaScript itself. The introduction could have been easier, particularly given the seeming intention that JavaScript should be for novices. On the other hand, JavaScript really can't be handed to beginners until it's finished, so this can't be considered a major fault. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKJVSCDG.RVW 961021 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse Please note the Peterson story - http://www.netmind.com/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ From: aljon@worldnet.att.net (John Stahl) Subject: LEC's Wanted Extra Charges From ISP's Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 01:24:02 +0000 The FCC is just finishing it's public response phase regarding the request from the LEC's for permission to charge ISP's something extra to connect with the telephone network. I responded to this (addressed to isp@fcc.gov) with the statements that follow and I thoiught it might offer some "food for thought": With respect to the requests by the LEC's to ask the FCC for approval to impose additional charges on ISP's (and hence persons' subscribing to these ISP's) for interconnection with the telephone networks, I urge the FCC to reject them. The following is offered in support of my rejection request: In the February 3, 1997 issue of 'Communication News' magazine, there appeared on page 51 an article titled "Study Says Bells Safe From 'Net". In it the author, John Rendleman, relates that a study, commissioned by a coalition of on-line and computer companies called the Internet Access Coalition, conducted by Economics and Technologies, Inc., a Boston research firm, concluded that, in the near term, the nation's voice telephone network won't be swamped by Internet traffic. This study refuted the claims by the Bell regional telephone companies that Internet traffic is harmful to the Bells' network. Further the article relates, "Consumer Internet access is not clogging the nation's public telephone network," said Paul Misener, chairman of the coalitions's steering committee and manager of telecommunications and computer policy at Intel. The 'Communication News' article further emphasizes that these are ridiculous requests for additional charges from the ISP's by the telcos; in effect branding the requests as 'two-faced' by indicating that: "In addition to exaggerating the negative effect of Net traffic, the nation's local telephone companies are profiting handsomely from the Internet by aggressively selling their own dial-up Internet access services to consumers, Misener said." I recently attended the ComNet show in Washington, DC, where I personally witnessed Bell Atlantic aggressively trying to sign up customers to their own Internet access service. Additionally, in a recent issue of Inter@ctive magazine, there featured a chart indicating that all of the RBOC's have either already initiated their own Internet access services (both dial-up and/or ISDN) or plan to become ISP's by mid-year, 1997. Many of this nation's Independent Telephone companies also have their own ISP services started; for example, Commonwealth Telephone in Dallas, PA has started their own internet service provider system called Epix.net, offering it via fiber optic links to other independent telephone companies throughout PA and Denver and Ephrata Telephone in Ephrata, PA, has started Red Rose.net with the same purpose in mind. How can these phone companies ask for additional charges from ISP's when they themselves are 'loading down' their own systems with Internet traffic. Thereby when asking for additional moneys from other ISP's, they seem to be of the intent to drive the other independent companies out of business through unfair competitive strategies, Is that a fair request? I maintain it is not! I can only I hope the FCC agrees with my thinking. Don't let the LEC's charge the ISP's, as they already have individual monopolies on telephone services; don't let them drive the ISP's out of business and have the computer network, too! John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Systems Consultants email: aljon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: Say the Words "Area Code" Before a Phone Number Date: 12 Feb 1997 20:20:39 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS With today's area codes covering a smaller and smaller area and with area codes and exchange codes looking alike, keeping track of phone numbers can get confusing. Someone could leave a message with a string of digits and the recipient wouldn't be sure if it's a ten digit number, a seven digit number followed by an extension, a phone mail address, beeper address, etc. A lot of people don't think to give their area code at all. Years ago the Bell System suggested saying the words "Area Code" before giving a phone number. I think today telephone administrators should train their users to do just that. In other words, EVERY time you leave your telephone number with someone, especially in a voice mail message, you should say: "My number is area code 311 555-2368". While you'd think people should know this, most do not: Train your users to speak S L O W L Y when giving a phone number. A stranger won't understand "fafafatuthresicate" spoke at 200 chars per second, let alone be able to write it down. I've received many important messages I wasn't able to return because I couldn't understand the caller's phone number. And of course be specific when giving a voice and/or fax number. Remember too electronic phone mail systems have pretty low clarity. In the old days every telephone had a crisply stamped number card showing clearly the area code, number, and extension. Today, many phones have only a scribled blur. I used a blank that has the words "AREA CODE" pre-printed and I make sure all phones under my control have a clearly legible number. Suppose a stranger is using the phone -- he probably won't know what area code he's in, esp in built-up areas. I've seen various standards in business stationery for phone numbers, which is very confusing. What does the +1 mean? I've always thought the conventional standard was (311) 555-1212 the area code is in parenthesis. No other codes/numbers shown except for extensions which may follow. I don't like numbers shown as 1-311-555-1234. In the case of 800 and 888 numbers, it may be appropriate to print in small letters "TOLL FREE" before the number. Of course, fax, beeper, and data comm numbers should be so identified. Thank you for your consideration. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 14:12:51 -0500 From: Ed Ellers Reply-To: edellers@mis.net Organization: PCM Magazine Subject: INMARSAT Phones in U.S. John R. Levine wrote: > The smallest such units I'm aware of are the size of a laptop computer, > cost three thousand dollars to buy, plus $2.80 per minute on the phone, > and have various other limitations that make them unsuitable as a > replacement for cellular and landline phones: they take 40 seconds to > set up, aim the antenna, and make a call, you can't use them while in > motion, and they need a line of sight to the satellite, either outside > or through a window. If you still want one, check out Comsat's web site > at http://www.comsat.com/planet1/. They're not licensed for outgoing > calls in the U.S., by the way." Some companies have obtained experimental licenses to use INMARSAT facilities on land in the U.S. for special purposes. This is the same sort of licensing used for testing new radio services; basically the FCC will grant experimental licenses for most any legitimate purpose that isn't covered by other radio services, assuming that no interference will be caused. (Experimental licenses are often used by equipment manufacturers to test new transmitters, either because the equipment hasn't yet been type accepted or because they can't get a regular license for the service for which the transmitter is designed.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 05:37:19 PST From: Eric_Florack@xn.xerox.com (Erik Florack) Subject: Internet Access Coalition's Report Available Recently, I've spoken to some of you regarding the Telcos and the internet, and though you might be interested in this bit of news ... /E -=-=-= The Internet Access Coalition's report that demolishes the RBOC assertions on network congestion is available for a free download. It requires adobe acrobat ... http://www.itic.org/ppdocs.htm A few highlights .... the peaks for data and voice are pretty different. Because of the differences in calling patterns, the internet users have added to the switch daily load, lowering the average per minute costs ... which run about 9 cents per HOUR. ISPs are cheaper to serve, because the cost to the telco of delivering data to the ISP using an ISDN BRI line is much cheaper than 23 twisted pair POTS lines, which might be deployed to other businesses. Heavy Internet users are likey to have purchased second lines. Second residential lines generated $1.4 billion to RBOCs in 1995. The calls terminating at an ISP are "paid for" by the callers. In asking for termination fees, the RBOCs are asking to be paid twice for the same calls. As a group, residential Internet callers are not using the network such that they place higher demands on capacity than do voice callers. RBOCs have economical ways of taking traffic off the circuit switched network, that can be deployed now, should there be a need to do so. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 11:27:11 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: ActiveX/Quicken = Overdraft! Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM FYI Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 07:49:32 -0800 (PST) From: Useful-Dot-Com Subject: ActiveX/Quicken=Overdraft! FYI: The original article is at C|Net: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7761,4000.html Hackers belonging to the Hamburg, Germany Chaos Computer Club have demonstrated an ActiveX control that will transfer funds from users' bank accounts without using a personal identification or transaction number. The Chaos crackers demonstrated their hostile ActiveX control on a German TV show to make their point about what they saw as the security risks posed by ActiveX. If made available on a web site, the control could install itself on a users' computer and covertly check to see if the popular personal-finance software package, Quicken, is installed. Continuing the scenario, if the control had found Quicken, it would issue a transfer order and add it to that application's batch of existing transfer orders. The next time the Quicken user paid their bills, the illicit transfer would be included, unnoticed by the victim. Quicken claims to have more than 9 million active users worldwide. Computer security experts, who have been highly critical of Microsoft's ActiveX, said this was just another example of why the technology should be abandoned. "ActiveX may be very useful for intranets, but it has no place on the Internet because of the security problems," said Kevin McCurley, a cryptography expert at Sandia National Laboratories. ------------------------------ From: fgoldstein@bbn.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: Really Strange Problem Date: 12 Feb 1997 16:52:28 GMT Organization: BBN Corp. In article , clifto@webspun.com says ... > We opened our latest telephone bill this morning to find a tremendous > surprise; several international calls to Australia, Germany and Diego > Garcia (?). There has to be some sort of equipment failure involved, > and I doubt it's anything I have connected. > 1 1-03 816A AUSTRALIA 61211966 Y 1 1.15 > 2 1-03 816A GERMANY 496997266111 R 1 1.38 > 3 1-03 823A AUSTRALIA 61211966 Y 1 1.15 > 4 1-03 824A GERMANY 496997266111 R 1 1.38 The German number is at least plausible, though I don't know if there is such a number. Does Oz have six-digit numbers in area 2? > AT&T: > No. Date Time Place Called Number Code Min Amount > 3 1-03 817A DIEGOGRCIA 246260003264 R 1@ 3.46 Now we're really spotting a loony. Diego Garcia is a small island. Its country code may be 246 but it wouldn't have 9-digit numbers. AT&T knows this. So it's taking a J-random billing string and trying to turn it into an international number. Since MCI is doing this too, the problem is probably at the local CO. So now the guess. This is probably an AMA (automatic message accounting) bug in the local CO switch, causing digits to be dropped and leading to weird dialed-number strings. A few years ago I saw the same problem with a user in Watertown, MA, then the only Ericsson AXE CO in the NYNEX network (and since replaced). What happened in Watertown was this: The user was trying to use AT&T 10288 to call an intra-LATA number (PIC didn't apply) in the 508-474 code. He dialed 10288-1-508-474-wxyz. The AXE mis-parsed the string. It handed off the call to AT&T, which apparently completed the call, but the AMA (it was a telco bill on behalf of AT&T, not generated by AT&T) dropped something. So instead of billing 1 508474 it billed 8474 which is country code 84, Viet Nam! I'm not sure you could even direct-dial Viet Nam on AT&T, but the bill showed it, and yes, AT&T did eventually drop the charges. So the caller might have been dialing some other numbers which, with dropped digits (probably leading), came out as country codes. Of course the fact that multiple calls occurred simultaneously may imply a more complex problem, but you can make two 30-second calls, each billed 1 minute, show up at the same (to the minute) time. Fred R. Goldstein k1io fgoldstein@bbn.com BBN Corp., Cambridge MA USA +1 617 873 3850 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #41 *****************************