Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA03442; Sat, 10 May 1997 00:41:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 00:41:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199705100441.AAA03442@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #115 TELECOM Digest Sat, 10 May 97 00:41:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 115 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled Publicly For First Time (Mike King) Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Information Superhighway (P Robinson) False 911 Calls, Payphones, etc. (Tad Cook) City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes (Lee Winson) The "Call Director" Telephone Set? (Lee Winson) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (George Gilder) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (Robert Weller) Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study (pastark@cloud9.net) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) 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 archives@telecom-digest.org 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: 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled Publicly For First Time Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 21:09:47 PDT ----- Forwarded Message ----- Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 08:56:30 -0700 From: sqlgate@sf-ptg-fw.pactel.com Subject: NEWS: 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 6, 1997 FOR MORE INFORMATION: Bonnie Ward (916) 972-3019 805 Area Code Relief Options Unveiled Publicly For The First Time Customers Will Get A Chance To Comment On Plans at Public Meetings in May and June [Editor's Note: This news release describing area code splits was issued by the California-Nevada Code Administrator, who represents the telecommunications industry as a whole. Final decisions on code issues are made by the California Public Utilities Commission. Pacific Bell includes such news releases as a service to our customers.] SAN RAMON, Calif. -- Residents of the 805 area code will have an opportunity to comment on two plans for adding a new area code to their region at a series of six public meetings in late May and early June. Doug Hescox, California Code Administrator, said a new area code is needed by early 1999 to keep up with the increasing demand for new telephone numbers in the region. That demand -- which is being seen across the state -- is being driven by several factors. The two primary are the onset of competition in the state's local telephone service market, with each new provider requiring its own supply of phone numbers, as well as the high-technology explosion of fax machines, pagers, cellular phones, modems for Internet access and other telecommunications equipment requiring phone numbers. The 805 area code currently serves all of Santa Barbara County, the majority of Kern, Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties, the north portion of Los Angeles County, and very small portions of Monterey, Fresno, Kings and Tulare counties. Dates and locations of the six meetings are: Wednesday, May 28 San Luis Obispo City/County Library 995 Palm St. Community Room 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Thursday, May 29 Santa Barbara City Hall 735 Anacapa St. Council Chambers * Use Parking Lot #10 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Thursday, May 29 Camarillo City Hall 601 Carmen Drive Council Chambers 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Tuesday, June 3 Lancaster City Hall 44933 N. Fern Ave. Council Chambers 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Wednesday, June 4 Valencia (Santa Clarita) Valencia Town Center 24201 West Valencia Blvd. Community Room 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Thursday, June 5 Bakersfield Beale Library 701 Truxtun Ave. Auditorium 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Customers unable to attend one of the meetings can send written comments by Thursday, June 5 to: California Code Administration 2600 Camino Ramon Room 1S900U San Ramon, CA 94583 Two plans proposed by the telecommunications industry for geographically splitting the 805 area code into two portions will be presented at the meetings. In a geographic split, the area code is divided, with part of the region keeping the existing area code and part receiving a new one. This means people who live or work in the area receiving the new code will need to change the area code portion of their phone numbers. The proposed split plans do not indicate which area will receive the new area code and which will keep 805. The public will have an opportunity to comment on which area should keep the 805 area code, as well as on the proposed split boundaries, at the meetings. Neither split plan would impact the price of calls. The price of a call is determined by distance and is not affected by the creation of a new area code. The details of the two plans are: * Divide the existing 805 area code on a north-south basis. Under this plan, the split line would run through the southeastern portion of the existing 805 area code. The area south and east of the split line would cover the vast majority of Ventura County, the southeastern portion of Kern County (including Edwards, Mojave and Rosamond) and most of the northern portion of Los Angeles County (including the Santa Clarita Valley, Newhall, Palmdale and Lancaster). The area north and west of the split line would serve all of Santa Barbara County, the vast majority of San Luis Obispo County and most of Kern County. The north area would also serve existing 805 customers in small portions of Monterey County (including Bradley and Parkfield), Tulare County (including Earlimart and California Hot Springs), the northwestern tip of Los Angeles County (Gorman area) and very small portions of Fresno, Kings and Ventura counties. * Under this plan, if 805 were assigned to the north, it would have a projected life of 10 to 11 years, and the new area code in the south would have a projected life of 12 to 14 years. If 805 were assigned to the south, it would have a projected life of 12 to 14 years, and the new area code in the north would have a projected life of 10 to 11 years. * Divide the existing 805 area code on an east-west basis. Under this plan, the area west of the split line would include the vast majority of San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties along with very small portions of Monterey, Fresno and Kings counties. The area east of the split line would include the majority of Kern County, the northern portion of Los Angeles County and very small portions of Tulare, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. * Under this plan, if 805 were assigned to the east, it would have a projected life of 14 to 16 years, and the new area code in the west would have a projected life of 8 to 10 years. If 805 were assigned to the west, it would have a projected life of 8 to 10 years, and the new area code in the east would have a projected life of 14 to 16 years. * At the meetings, details of the plans will be outlined and a public comment period will follow. Under state law, the telecommunications industry is required to hold public meetings and consider customer input before a final area code relief plan is filed with the California Public Utilities Commission. The Commission makes the final decision on the area code relief plan. A decision is expected later this year. ----------- Mike King * Oakland, CA, USA * mk@wco.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 00:05:50 -0400 From: Paul Robinson Organization: Evergreen Software Subject: Someone Who Became Road Kill on the Information Superhighway At another place, I work for another company answering Technical Support telephone calls for an Internet Service Provider. We allow people to register for the service by loading an automated installer program, which then, when finished installing the software, allows them to dial into the registration server to choose their username and password. I got a call from a woman who is not a user of the service, but a victim. In order to explain the entire situation I have to give almost the full number, however I have changed the number here - and not giving out her area code - in order to protect her privacy. The woman called, not because she is trying to use the service, but because people trying to use the service are calling her! Or rather, their computers are calling her, virtually any hour of the day or night. The woman's number would be something like 701-8001 in this example. Apparently, people's computers are calling this woman's number instead of our registration server. This doesn't make any sense, because in order to register for the service, a user's computer will connect to the registration server by dialing a toll-free number. For the purposes of this demonstration, I'll pretend the registration server's number is 800-123-4567. Had her number been the same as the last 7 digits of the number I could understand that it's somehow missing the 1-800, but her number is completely different from the number of the registration server even without the area code. The software to set up registration is fairly telephone savvy, allowing people to pick things like whether they have tone or pulse, if they dial a number such as "9" to get an outside line, or if they have to disable call waiting. If they select "disable call waiting", it is smart enough to give them the *70 code and even allowing them to change it if, for example, they have pulse dial. That's when it hit me. Consider the registration server's number with a cancel call waiting code, only don't put in the star, and you get 70-1-800-1 which is the woman's number. (The rest of the 800 number, which in this ficticious example is 234-567, would be ignored by the dial switch.) The *70 code for cancel call waiting, followed by the 1-800 number being dialed, only the star key got lost! As a result, some people are using the cancel call waiting code but somehow the star is not included. The woman felt a little better when I explained to her why she was getting these calls, and I said we would look into the problem and try to fix it. But it's interesting how a small and tiny error can cause someone major headaches. Or in this case, some poor woman whose number matches a misdialled call waiting code and a computer 1-800 number becomes, in effect, 'road kill' on the 'information superhighway'. Paul Robinson (formerly PAUL@TDR.COM) ------------------------------ Subject: False 911 Calls, Payphones, etc. Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 18:04:16 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > Pat, most (if not all) 911 systems out there today *CAN* hold the line > and trunk, just as most *real telco* operators can (i.e. TSPS/TOPS/OSPS, > and also the old cordboards as well). Unfortunately this *used* to be true with B911 and earlier E911, but with selective routing through tandems, the Called Party Control feature no longer works on 911 in many areas. Before selective routing, the trunks, which were configured like the TSPS/CAMA trunks mentioned above, went directly from the originating CO to the PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point). Just like a telco operator, the PSAP operator could hold up the trunk. But when selective routing started, all of the 911 trunks in an area would go via a tandem switch, where the ANI would be grabbed and they could be looked up in the database and routed to the correct PSAP. When they were rerouted, the PSAP operators lost this control. The old style ringback on these trunks was great, because the operator could hit a key which would cause the PSAP interface to send back TSPS ringback signalling, and ringing was sent back to the calling party directly on the metallic pair in the originating CO. Now with tandems in the way, the method used with redial is to grab the ANI and then put it into a dialer on a standard phone line, and the operator dials back. The old scenario that was great for the operator control of the trunk was that someone in a panic calls in a fire, and before the operator can ask "how big is the fire?" or any basic questions, the caller hangs up to phone their neighbors to ask them to bring their hoses. With the old method, when they picked up, the operator was still there. With the newer system, they dial back like anyone else, and get a busy. > This is similar to many PBX systems and cellular systems. The trunk > (loop) that the PBX uses to place outgoing calls is the number that the > 911 center would have show up on their computer, *NOT* the actual > incoming number of the telephone on an employee's desk or in the hotel > room. The 911 center could hold the outgoing loop, but the PBX had > already disconnected the extension from that loop if they had hung-up. Proctor & Associates of Redmond, WA has the PBX-ANI system to solve this problem, and I think PBX manufacturers will be making this an optional feature on their systems in the future. This involves a PBX having its own 911 trunks that go to the tandem, and they can send whatever 7 or 10 digit ANI that they want, which will be cross-referenced in the database at the other end to see exactly where the PBX extension is. > Of course, many PBX systems today are enhanced enough to be more > compatible with 911 systems, or at least send out the actual > extension's incoming 7/10 digit number on calls to 911. Some cellular > systems might send the actual cellular phone number to the 911 center > on such calls, Coincidentally, the firm mentioned above also makes a similar system for cellsites which delivers the calling number and the cellsite facing. More expensive systems will also give an approximate lat/long coordinate for the caller. Tad Cook tad@ssc.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for the clarification. I know that in Skokie for example, the 911 dispatcher frequently calls to the agent at the train station asking that person to look around at the various payphones and see if it appears someone is attempting to get assistance. The reason is the payphones themselves are all one-way outgoing only lines. After the agent is gone at night, the only option the police dispatcher has is to send a car out there. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: City Fire Alarm Pull Boxes Date: 8 May 1997 22:22:16 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS Per the talk about 911 ... I was in Philadelphia and noticed the fire alarm pull boxes were gone. They used to be mounted on utility poles at corners. As a child, we were trained to know where the nearest pull box was to our home. If we used it, we were to wait there for the fire truck so they'd know where to go. Fire drill posters in buildings included the nearest street pull box. I was wondering if other cities have removed their boxes. They've been gone in Trenton NJ for years. Actually, when I was a child, I was confused by emergency training. I thought you would use the telephone to call police (dial Operator), but would have to run to the nearest pull box to call the fire department. In the early 1970s I had a tour of the Philadelphia fire dispatching center (this was pre-911 days.) At that time, it seemed most calls came via boxes, not the telephone. A pullbox caused a loud oscillator to beep the four digit code of the box. (I think the beep was duplicated in the fire house that served the location, but I'm not sure). The dispatcher identified the location, and telephoned (through a private direct line PBX) the fire house to provide details. Calls could also come in via a telephone, either the fire emergency number or from the Bell Operator, it was answered on a small Call Director phone. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The boxes have been gone in Chicago for years with the exception of schools, hospitals and residences for geriatric patients (old people's homes) where they are required by law. The reason is they were subject to too much abuse. People who like to play games would pull the alarm on a street corner box then run off before the firemen arrived to find nothing going on. With 911 working as effeciently as it does, and the prevalence of telephones, there is no longer any real need for the boxes anyway. PAT] ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: The "Call Director" Telephone Set? Date: 8 May 1997 22:29:17 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS In the 1960s, the Bell System introduced a "Call Director" telephone set, which was a key telephone set, but with many buttons. The handset was on the side, there was a dial (or keypad), then vertical rows of buttons. I was wondering: Were there any special features in a Call Director system that were not available in the six-button key sets? If so, could someone describe some of the features? Or, was a Call Director merely a keyset with more buttons to handle more lines? I know as the Bell System got more into cordless PBX systems, the operator's console looked like a Call Director, except there was an additional lamp next to each button to indicate supervisory status. I've seen such sets used on tiny PBXs as well as massive Centrexes. My question deals with Call Directors used as direct phones, not consoles. [As an aside, I've also seen Centrex operator switchboards using old fashioned 551/552 cord switchboards as well as the newer 608 cord boards. I now remember in the old days on Centrex, when you wished to transfer a call and flashed the hookswitch, you had to wait for your operator to do it. The newer ones gave you a dial tone.] Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'call director' phone sets could be used in various ways. The buttons could simply be incoming lines or they could perform other functions. It all depended on how the call director was wired. I saw a few of them wired to serve as monitoring units by supervisors in large customer service settings. Each customer service person had a phone (with calls tossed to them by an automatic call distributor) and each 'section leader' or supervisor had a call director with many buttons which enabled them to (a) pick up a call from any of the representatives and speak with the customer or (b) to monitor a call silently at any position. If they were requested to take a call from a customer, they simply pressed the associated button for the line. They had their own private line from the centrex making an appearance on one button, and the inter- esting part was how they monitored the workers: one button on the call director was for that purpose. They would depress that button then use the touch tone pad to enter the four digit extension number in their group they wished to monitor. It would just click right in silently so the supervisor could pretend to be making a phone call while actually listening to someone else's call instead. I've seen call directors at one company where the several buttons terminated 'tie lines' to different places. The unit I saw had (I think) 15 buttons; two were for extensions on the local PBX, one was a direct outside line bypassing the PBX, one was a manual, common-battery intercom; two or three others were used to activate buzzer signals at other 'intercom' stations and the other seven or eight had such esoteric labels on them as 'New York', 'Los Angeles' and 'Dallas'. If you went in on one of those it was a ring-down circuit apparently to the office of the company in the cities named on each button. And of course there was a hold key. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 10:17:05 EDT From: gg@gilder.com (George Gilder) Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Since cell phones are not exactly a rare technology, why on earth should we pay any attention to the claims of carcinogenic effects until the incidence of relevant cancers rises in the population using the devices? For all the mumbo jumbo from the radiophobes with their tortured rodents in tow, the fact is that there are fewer, not more, brain tumors and other cancers among users of cellular phones, computers, and other radiators, than among non users. Thus there is no problem whatsoever to explain. Period. On the contrary, voluminous recent evidence supports the proposition of hormesis -- that radiation below a threshold not approached by cellphones imparts a statistically significant increase in resistance to cancers among humans. Perhaps that is why cellphone rich regions such as Scandinavia and Japan lead the world in longevity and US users of PCs and cellphones live longer than non users. In general, all around the globe the use of electricity and other electromagnetic oscillations correlates almost perfectly with greater longevity. Unfortunately among the beneficiaries of this public health boon are product liability lawyers and their junk science accomplices causing lucrative plagues of hypochondria and litigation. George Gilder ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: Fri, 9 May 97 09:20:24 PDT From: rweller@h-e.com (Robert Weller) Organization: Hammett & Edison, Inc.-Serving the broadcast industry since 1952 The Royal Adelaide Hospital study is an "outlier," inasmuch as most other studies failed to detect any increase in the cancer risk ratio, and so duplication of its results is critical before any conclusions can be made. In my opinion, there are some serious flaws in this research. Dosimetry. Normally, this type of animal exposure is conducted in a constant field, anechoic environment, so that exposures are uniform and well-characterized. In this study, the exposure chamber was lined with aluminum. This lining, like a microwave oven, would be expected to cause "hot spots" in the fields, and the actual exposure levels may therefore be higher than indicated. Also, the energy absorbed is normally calculated by measuring remotely the forward and reflected power (the difference is the amount absorbed). In this study, power density measurements were conducted by a person in the chamber. The presence of someone other than the subject animal would perturb the fields and absorb energy, again causing the apparent exposure level to be lower than the actual level. Subjects. While I am less familiar with this area, the transgenic mice used in the research had genetic alterations in areas that are not contained in the human genome. Research using this type of subject is apparently somewhat controversial in most circles. Better subject choices might have been "P53" transgenic mice or unaltered rats. The "PIM1" transgenic mice are not at all like kitchen mice; they are more like sloths, and are about 15 times more likely to get certain types of cancer than "normal mice. The FDA has been pushing the Wireless Technology Research (WTR) organization, funded in the US by an industry blind trust, to use rats rather than transgenic mice. The future. Duplication of this research will require two to four years, but there have been other studies that failed to detect an RF-cancer link, so this study is just one data point. The standards-setting organizations in the US (ANSI/IEEE, NCRP) are designed to look at the "big picture," being uninfluenced by the results of any single study. Robert Weller, PE Hammett & Edison, Inc. Consulting Engineers San Francisco ------------------------------ From: pastark@cloud9.net Subject: Re: Cell Phone Cancer Study Date: 8 May 1997 20:17:31 -0400 Organization: Cloud 9 Internet, White Plains, NY, USA Stewart Fist (fist@ozemail.com.au) wrote: > A doubling of tumours in 100 exposed mice, is not an insignificant finding. > In fact, statistically, it is above the 1% level of confidence, and is > therefore highly significant. It is easy to make instant judgments on statements like this, but I would like to see some specific data. For instance -- how many of those 100 "exposed mice" actually had tumors? Suppose in a group of 100 "unexposed" mice, one develops a tumor, whereas in a group of 100 "exposed" mice two mice develop tumors. Is this significant? Look at it another way: In one group of 100 male casino customers, one person won money, whereas in a group of 100 female customers, two people won money. Is this doubling of winning customers statistically significant? Does it mean that women are inherently better gamblers? Does it mean that the casino's machines are prejudiced against men? One could put all sorts of spins on this ... Pete ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #115 ******************************