Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id IAA25172; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:09:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:09:21 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199702191309.IAA25172@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #45 TELECOM Digest Wed, 19 Feb 97 08:09:00 EST Volume 17 : Issue 45 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Indiana Girds for Telecom Fight (Tad Cook) 765 Ready to Arrive (James E. Bellaire) Dallas Telephone Customers Can't Call Forward From Old Numbers (Tad Cook) Book Review: "The Java Tutorial" by Campione/Walrath (Rob Slade) SONET OC-48 "SVC"? (David P. Wiltzius) Destiny Telecomm (was: Prepaid Phone Card Collecting) (Robert Holloman) Nevada Wants LUCKY 7-7-7 for its Forthcoming NPA Split (Mark J. Cuccia) Newbridge Mainstreet For Sale (davew@cris.com) 800/888 Confusion Messes up Advertising (TELECOM Digest Editor) Help With Motorola Advisor Gold Pager (Lawrence Rachman) March CTI Meeting Announcement (Robert Becnel) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Indiana Girds for Telecom Fight Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 22:32:17 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Indiana Lawmakers Prepare for War among Nation's Largest Telephone Companies By Cam Simpson, The Indianapolis Star and News Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Feb. 19--Lawmakers are girding for war among the nation's largest telephone companies after news Tuesday that negotiations broke down on legislation that aims to control the shape of competition in the state's $1.4 billion local phone service market. Representatives from AT&T, MCI and other long-distance providers withdrew from talks with local phone companies, saying they would fight passage of any telecommunications legislation this year. They charged that legislation before lawmakers will hurt the state's consumers by protecting companies such as Ameritech that currently enjoy local service monopolies. Ameritech and other local service providers say they were working toward compromise just as the long-distance companies pulled out. Cable television providers and the state's largest consumer group, the Citizens Action Coalition, also called for lawmakers to defeat telecommunications legislation this session. Debate over the legislation has been marked by intense lobbying. More than 30 lobbyists are registered as combatants in the fight. The decision by the long-distance companies to withdraw from talks means that campaign will only intensify, players on both sides said Tuesday. Ameritech, GTE and other local service companies must fight on the Senate floor to keep their legislation alive, while long-distance lobbyists will fight to kill it. Both sides have friends in both political parties. "Within the next 10 days or so, I think at least 49 senators are going to be sick and tired of talking to telephone lobbyists," said Ron Gifford, a lawyer with Baker & Daniels representing AT&T. "I'm already tired of them," said Sen. Beverly Gard, a Republican member of the Senate Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee, where the telecommunications bill is pending. "I think it's gotten a little bit out of control." Lawmakers on the committee complain of being deluged by phone lobbyists attempting to talk to them on the complex details of the proposals. Indiana's part-time lawmakers do not have staff members, meaning they often rely on lobbyists to decipher complicated issues. The administration of Gov. Frank O'Bannon has refused to let state regulators comment publicly on how the telecommunications legislation may affect consumers. However, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission has said no legislation is needed this session. The federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 promised to open local telephone markets to the kind of competition experienced in the long-distance industry since the government-ordered breakup of Ma Bell in 1984. However, it's up to the IURC to implement key local competition provisions. Ameritech and the other local service companies are pushing Senate Bill 426, which is sponsored by Sen. Morris Mills, the Republican chairman of the commerce panel. Ameritech says SB 426 would give it the flexibility to compete on a level playing field with the long-distance giants. Long-distance companies say the legislation, which allows local companies to deregulate for some services on their own, allows Ameritech and others to crush competitors before competition could take root. Mills continued Tuesday working on compromise proposals that he says address the concerns of the long-distance companies. He put off a committee vote for one week. "We've been trying to work toward a compromise here, but it's almost like we're compromising with ourselves now," Susan Brock Williams, a lobbyist for Ameritech, said. "I think this is really going to hurt the process." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 14:08:23 EST From: James E. Bellaire Subject: 765 Ready to Arrive Ameritech sent out bill inserts in the February mailings (although I only received one in one of my Ameritech bills) entitled '765 ready to arrive' and announcing: ON FEBRUARY 1, 1997 AREA CODE 765 WENT INTO EFFECT The maps and prefix list were as previously published on their website, the only new information (at least for TELECOM Digest participants) was the dialing instructions: > o To place a local call into another area code, you should > DIAL THE AREA CODE + THE SEVEN-DIGIT NUMBER. > o Within the same area code, local calls can be completed by dialing > the seven-digit telephone number. > o When calling long distance into another area code, you should > DIAL 1 + AREA CODE + THE SEVEN-DIGIT NUMBER. Ameritech is now accepting 1+10 digits on local calls, so I can dial 1+10 to call across the street if I really feel like it. 1+10 is not required on local calls, but I like it permissively. One final note, the test number is up and busy! 1-765-281-6988. The four second message now repeats instead of just hanging up on you after the first playback. James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Telecom Indiana Webpage http://www.iquest.net/~bellaire/telecom/ ------------------------------ Subject: Dallas Telephone Customers Can't Call Forward from Old Numbers Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 22:36:15 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Dallas-Area Telephone Customers Can't Keep New Area Code By Jennifer Files, The Dallas Morning News Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Feb. 18--Dallas-area telephone customers who changed to the new 972 area code will not be able to keep using their old 214 numbers for a fee, as state officials promised last fall. Because of the way telephone numbers are assigned, the service, called "remote call forwarding," would have tied up too many numbers, requiring another area code immediately, the Public Utility Commission of Texas said in a written statement. Phone customers, especially business owners, asked last fall to keep their old numbers so clients and other callers would be able to find them. To compensate for not offering the service, the commission said it would extend for one month, to April 18, the period during which Dallas callers can reach 972 numbers without dialing the area code. It will also use a message through June 18 to remind callers to dial area codes. The commission is taking similar measures in Houston. Some business owners who had feared the new area code would cost them business said the remote call-forwarding would have made little difference. "Too little, too late," said John Allan, president of Dallas-based Integrity Center. But Anita Reed, a motivational speaker, said that not having the option could have "a dramatic effect" on her business. "My name and phone number are on every piece of advertising material. It could appear that I've gone out of business." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 13:15:38 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Java Tutorial" by Campione/Walrath BKJAVATU.RVW 961027 "The Java Tutorial", Mary Campione/Kathy Walrath, 1996, 0-201-63454-6, U$39.76 %A Mary Campione %A Kathy Walrath %C 1 Jacob Way, Reading, MA 01867-9984 %D 1996 %G 0-201-63454-6 %I Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. %O U$39.76 800-822-6339 617-944-3700 Fax: (617) 944-7273 bkexpress@aw.com %P 864 %T "The Java Tutorial" This introduction to Java language programming has been "field tested" as a Web site prior to publication. It also uses a moderately interesting "ski trail" format to direct the reader/student through various streams of interest. Unfortunately, neither of these tricks is enough to make the book really stand out from the crowd of Java books. The material is clear enough, but isn't presented to any particular advantage. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKJAVATU.RVW 961027 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse ------------------------------ From: wiltzius@coral.llnl.gov (David P Wiltzius) Subject: SONET OC-48 "SVC"? Date: 18 Feb 1997 05:26:08 GMT Organization: Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab As I understand SONET rings are generally deployed with some level of redundancy. For SONET, the redundancy is a ring on standby: Idle and ready to transport traffic when another ring fails. Thought: Would telcos be interested in providing access to this "idle" ring at a much reduced rate? Clearly not for mission critical traffic, since the provider would not give any guarantees for access to this backup ring. I envision organizations scheduling access to a lot of bandwidth periodically (say once a day) to resync databases, perform inter-site backups, etc. I certainly could envision folks like DOE Labs using such a service. Meanwhile, the providers have a new source of revenue. ATM SVCs presently deal with small bandwidths ( Subject: Destiny Telecomm (was: Prepaid Phone Card Collecting) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 14:58:33 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Reply-To: holloman@mindspring.com Here are some of the specifics on the agreement between Destiny Telecomm and N.C., from http://www.state.nc.us/Justice/cpsmain/destiny.htm : Destiny and N.C. Sign Agreement Destiny entered into an agreement with the State on January 23, 1997. The agreement specifies conditions Destiny must follow in order to comply with North Carolina law. As long as they are in compliance with the law, Destiny may operate in North Carolina. Within one week of signing the agreement, Destiny was to provide copies of the agreement to all its North Carolina participants. The conditions under which Destiny may conduct business in North Carolina include the following: - Participants may receive no business benefit from their own purchases. - 70% of all sales must be retail sales to persons who are not connected to the Destiny sales force in any way, including as "Independent Representatives" or members of their households. - Should a retail customer later become a participant, his prior purchase shall be considered an internal sale not a retail sale. - In the event that retail sales are not maintained at the 70% level, all internal sales and recruitment efforts shall cease until the 70% level is achieved. - Participants shall not receive more than one "tracking ID number". - Participants who violate the above conditions shall be permanently terminated and forfeit all compensation resulting from the violation. In a previous post I wrote: > Seems prepaid phone cards are popular items of pyramid schemes and > borderline MLM companies. The NC AG office believed Destiny Telecomm's > $.56/minute phone cards were part of a pyramid scheme. See the > following links for details: > http://www.wral-tv.com/features/5investigates/1996/1118-phone-card-scam/ > http://www.wral-tv.com/news/wral/5investigates/1996/1119-phone-card-folo/ > http://www.wral-tv.com/news/wral/1997/0123-destiny-agrees-to/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 17:08:11 -0600 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Nevada Wants LUCKY 7-7-7 for its Forthcoming NPA Split A few years back, Nevada wanted to have 711 reserved for their area code in a future split, since it would be 'lucky seven-eleven' for the gambling state. However, N11 codes aren't to be used for NPA codes, as they are 'three-digit' short codes (i.e., 411 for Directory, 611 for Repair, 811 for Business Office, 911 for Emergencies, etc.). 711 has been reserved (in Canada at least) for either voice or text access (I don't remember which form of access - 511 has been reserved in Canada for the other form of access) to the TDD/TTY operator for the hearing impaired. NOW Nevada wants 'lucky 777' for use in its forthcoming NPA split. The only problem is that the second and third digits are 'identical'. (It doesn't matter that the first digit is identical to the second or third digit, however; just that the 'B' and 'C' position digits are identical.) Codes of _that_ format are reserved for 'Easy-to-Recognize' purposes. This continues the use of N00 codes for NANP-wide 'non-geographical' _services_, such as 800 for Toll Free, 900 for PAY-per-call, 700 for 'Carrier Services', 600 for Canadian Special Services, 500 for Personal Numbering. In the 'Toll-Free' arena, the '8s' are used for expansion, which include the current 888, the forthcoming 877, and the future 866, 855, 844, 833, 822. In the 'Personal Numbering' arena, the '5s' are to be used for expansion, which include 533, 544, 566, 577, 588. 522 might be used for PCS expansion if the 52x 'pseudo-NPA code' billing-identification situation with Mexico is ever resolved. 555 is _NOT_ available for assignment as an NPA code (due to possible confusion with 555-xxxx numbers), and 59X/89X can't be used for PCS or Toll-Free due to the middle digit of '9' being reserved for expansion of the NANP ten-digit number into one which is longer. Nevada has asked the INC for a waiver so that 777 can be turned into a "General Purpose Code" so that it could be reserved/assigned to the split of Nevada's existing and only NPA, 702. This topic is documented as Issue 108 of the INC (Industry Numbering Committee), and was discussed on 31 January 1997 at the INC's meeting in Seattle WA. It can be downloaded in MS-Word from the ATIS (Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions) ftp site. http://www.atis.org/atis/clc/iccf/inc/incissue.htm and scroll down to issue 108, ftp://ftp.atis.org/pub/clc/inc/108.doc 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: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 11:14:57 EST From: DAVEH Subject: Newbridge Mainstreet For Sale For Sale... Private Party. Newbridge Mainstreet 3624 with 12 LGS cards. Recently removed from service (we changed to T1 cards in our System 75) working, exc. condition, about 1 year old. $2250 obo (plus UPS). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 07:27:32 EST From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Subject: 800/888 Confusion Messes up Advertising Judith Oppenheimer wrote in a message I have misplaced to tell of Compuserve's efforts to promote itself by making reference to the constant busy signals one gets when trying to use America OnLine these days. It seems Compuserve acquired the number 888-NOT-BUSY and advertised it recently ... but the advertising was broadcast as 800-NOT-BUSY. ^^^ Of course this resulted in confusion since the 800 version was not in service. This was an embarassing, and costly mistake. I am not certain at this point if it was CIS which incorrectly prepared the advertising copy or if it was the television stations airing it which got it wrong. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 11:02:10 -0500 From: Lawrence Rachman Subject: Help With Motorola Advisor Gold Pager I've been recently using a Motorola "Advisor Gold" pager, and while fiddling with it one evening, I managed to get it into a 'test mode', where it displayed operating parameters and then, as I pushed buttons, exercised the graphic display and the noise maker. But try as I might, I can't seem to repeat the key sequence that started the whole thing off. Does anyone out there know the secret? Thanks in advance, Larry ------------------------------ From: becnel@crl.com (Robert Becnel) Subject: March CTI Meeting Announcement Date: 18 Feb 1997 07:29:04 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [Login: guest] ANNOUNCEMENT Contact: Tony Zafiropoulos (314) 537-3959 February 16, 1997 Barron Communications To Give Repeat Performance At CTI User's Group Topic: Ken Barron, President of Barron Communications, will speak on the particulars of the CTI voice mail VCM model by ComDial. Barron will display a visual demo of an interactive voice response (IVR) system software by ComDial as it is integrated into the complete package. Barron Communications represents the ComDial product line here in St. Louis. Barron Communications last spoke to the CTI User's Group on a similar subject in early summer along with a Novell Netware local reseller. Date/Time: Wednesday, March 5, 1997; 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM (approx) Location: Bridgeton Trails Library (Rm #1) - 3455 McKelvey Road St. Louis, MO (one block south of St. Charles Rock Road) Cost: None. New members welcomed monthly free of charge. Robert G. Becnel becnel@crl.com (email) http://www.crl.com/~becnel (www) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #45 *****************************