Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id HAA10580; Thu, 23 Oct 1997 07:53:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 07:53:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199710231153.HAA10580@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #289 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Oct 97 07:53:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 289 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson NYS-PSC Orders Rochester Telco to Give Service Rebates (Danny Burstein) New York Makes Slamming Illegal (Curtis R. Anderson) Spamford Canned Again! (Bill Levant) Pac Bell High Installation Charges For "HiCap" (Carlos Rimola) Canada's New Area Code (Tad Cook) Enterprise, Ringdowns, Rate & Route (Mark J. Cuccia) Old Bell System "Underground Cable" Warning Sign (Mark J. Cuccia) Toll-Free 3rd Report & Order, and NANC (Judith Oppenheimer) 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: * telecom-request@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 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. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 17:42:44 EDT From: Danny Burstein Subject: NYS-PSC Orders Rochester Telco to Give Service Rebates from the PSC website: STATE OF NEW YORK Public Service Commission John F. OMara, Chairman Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 Further Details: (518) 474-7080 http://www.dps.state.ny.us FOR RELEASE: IMMEDIATELY 97084/93C0033 PSC DIRECTS ROCHESTER TELEPHONE TO REBATE ALMOST $1 MILLION -- CUSTOMERS WILL SEE A ONE-MONTH REDUCTION IN THEIR BILLS SOON -- Albany, October 22 -- The New York State Public Service Commission today directed Rochester Telephone Corporation (RTC) to rebate $953,000 to its customers for failing to meet certain service quality standards in 1996. The rebate will appear as a one-month reduction of approximately $2.60 in customers bills beginning within 60 days of the Commissions written decision, which is expected to be issued soon. Under a restructuring and multi-year rate stability plan (commonly referred to as the Open Market Plan) approved by the Commission for implementation on January 1, 1995, Rochester Telephone is required, at the very least, to maintain a certain level of service quality based on specific annual service quality measurement categories. These measurement targets include, among other things, measuring how well the company reduces reports by customers of trouble on their line, returns service within 24 hours to customers who have lost it under normal operating circumstances, keeps appointments to repair and install service, installs new service within five business days and reduces complaints to the Commission. The almost $1 million in rebates for 1996 represents the maximum amount of penalties the company could have incurred for that year under the Plan. As the Commission moves the telecommunications industry forward into a more competitive local service environment, phone companies will have to respond to market forces that will require them to improve customer service, John F. OMara, Chairman of the Commission stated. The Open Market Plan we adopted for Rochester Telephone is designed to maintain and improve service quality for cus tomers during a transition to full competition where they will have a choice of providers. To the extent the company fails to keep its service quality high, we will continue to require rebates to customers. In addition to the rebates, the Open Market Plan requires Rochester Telephone to withhold payments of quarterly dividends to its holding company, Frontier Corporation, if annual service quality targets are not met. As a result of its failure to meet the targets in 1996, the company has paid no quarterly dividends in 1997 and must continue to withhold such payments until it rectifies the service quality deficiencies. dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 01:08:56 -0400 From: Curtis R. Anderson Organization: Gleepy's Henhouse Subject: New York Makes Slamming Illegal According to WGR radio, Governor George Pataki has signed into law two bills intended to combat the act of "slamming" committed by disreputable long distance carriers. One bill will allow the New York Public Services Commission to fine the carrier up to $1,000 per reported offense for slamming. The other bill will allow courts in the state to impose fines of up to $100,000 per day for carriers who willfully continue slamming business customers. It is reported that this is the first time such a law has been passed by any state. Curtis R. Anderson, Co-creator of "Gleepy the Hen", SP 2.5?, KoX http://www.servtech.com/public/cra/ | Illegitimus non Carborundum ftp://ftp.servtech.com/pub/users/cra/ | Don't let the bastards mailto:gleepy@intelligencia.com | grind you down ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:07:35 EDT Subject: Spamford Canned Again! According to today's (10/21/97) __Philadelphia Inquirer__, AGIS cut Cyberpromo's links again "...early Friday (10/17/97) morning, just hours after the expiration of..." the Federal Court order that got Spammy back on line last month. Presumably, this one will stick. If no one will sell Spammy access, what's he gonna do, buy MCI ? Then again, why not; most of the recent spam seems to originate on MCI.net, and everyone else is trying to buy MCI anyway. Hope they'll take his check.... :-) Bill ------------------------------ From: Carlos Rimola Subject: Pac Bell High Installation Charges for "HiCap" Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 21:07:27 -0700 Organization: Telebit, Inc. Hello, I am having a difficult time dealing with Pac Bell and would appreciate some feedback on my experience: Some background - I am a developer of ISDN drivers and protocols and for the past 3 years or so I have been using a switch simulator from Teleos (now Madge Networks) to do most of my PRI testing. The Teleos switch does quite a nice job but once in a while you need a real PRI line to verify your work or reproduce problems. As a result of this, I (and my current employer) decided to order a PRI line into my house where I do most of my work. The original quote from Pac Bell for this service was as follows: Monthly Installation ------- ------------ HiCap (T1 line) $350.00 $1267.00 PRI Interface $220.00 $750.00 2 way trunk $16.13 $70.75 Dialing plan (2) $150.00 $400.00 Trunk $16.13 $70.75 DID Block (20) $15.00 $150.00 --------------------------- Total $767.26 $2708.50 In addition to the above, we also ordered 2 BRI lines for a cost of $78 monthly and $650 installation. I agreed to all of the above and was assigned to an account rep who told me that I would eventually hear from "engineering" in regards to an installation date. About 3-4 weeks later I heard from Pac Bell "engineering" and the mode of communication quickly went from very courteous and informative to short and exasperated. The engineer who was assigned to my installation told me my HiCap (T1) line would be installed on Oct 27 and that I would need to have a trench dug up to the sidewalk near my house because I did not have enough wire pairs coming into the house. The same engineer indicated that Pac Bell would not be able to do the work on the trench and that I should be prompt because they would be ready to install the HiCap (T1) on the 27th. He told me to have the trench ready no later than the 25th. The next day, as I was starting to inquire into construction companies that would do the trench work, I got a call from the Pac Bell business office calling to let me know that my install date had been delayed to the first week of Dec. I then called my account rep to discuss the delay and she, in turn, decided to conference call the "engineer". When the latter came on the line he was clearly annoyed that I had gotten the account rep involved. After a rude "I already told Carlos I would call him with more details" he indicated that he would try to expedite the installation and would get back to me. The next day, the engineer got back to me -- via a terse legal fax stating that I would have to pay an additional $7083.71 in installation charges! Quoting from the letter - "This is to confirm arrangements made between CARLOS RIMOLA and PAC-BELL-ENGINEER (name withheld) of Pacific Bell, for the cost of special construction to provision a HICAP (copper T1) at xxx address", later on it states "CARLOS RIMOLA shall: Pay in advance a non-refundable lump sum of $7083.71...". Note that there was no discussion whatsoever of a legal agreement on the phone. (The additional install charges bring the original cost of isntallation close to $10,000) BTW, no breakdown of the additional work was provided, just the $7083.71 quote and the provision that the "offer" is only valid for 30 days. I have a couple of questions on this - 1) How common are these high additional charges and how do I know that it simply isn't an arbitrary charge by an engineer who is having a bad day? 2) What recourse, if any, does one have for having this investigated/ resolved? I would appreciate any help/feedback on this. I would specially like to hear from people who have had a T1 line installed at their residence and what their experience has been like. Thanks in advance.. Carlos Rimola Tel 408-266-1666 Fax 408-266-0170 crimola@bayarea.net crimola@itk-tele.com PS. Please copy responses to crimola@itk-tele.com ------------------------------ Subject: Canada's New Area Code Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 13:44:51 PDT From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Canada's new area code for the far north covers some serious area TORONTO (AP) -- Canada's far north gets its own area code today, serving a bigger area and fewer people than any other in North America. The new code, 867, has been assigned to the Yukon and Northwest Territories, which cover 1.5 million square miles between Alaska and Greenland. The area is larger than India, but its population in the 1996 census was just 95,000. India has more than 952 million people. Anne Grainger, a spokeswoman for the regional telephone company Northwestel, said there are only about 70,000 phones in the 867 area code. Until now, the Yukon and the western part of the Northwest Territories shared the 403 area code with Alberta, while the eastern part of the Northwest Territories shared the 819 area code with northern Quebec. The change was made primarily because steady growth in Alberta had pushed the 403 area code close to its limit. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 10:04:19 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Enterprise, Ringdowns, Rate & Route In response to Stan Schwartz' article (and Pat's notes) on "Enterprise" numbers and "Rate & Route" ... Yes, such operator manually translated (looked-up) Enterprise, Zenith and 'WX' numbers still do exist, but are grandfathered-in. They are still provided to 'existing' customers by the LEC (Bell and independent) local telcos, AT&T, Alascom (now part of AT&T), probably GTE-Hawaii, and the Canadian Stentor (and local independent) telcos. Don't expect a Sprint or MCI operator to know about any Enterprise, Zenith or 'WX' number! Similarly, there are still numerous remote/rural areas (hunting/fishing lodges, ranches, isolated villages, ranger stations, etc) all over the NANP area (US, Canada, much of the Caribbean) which can only be reached by operators of the telcos/carriers mentioned in the first paragraph. If you are trying to reach such a 'ring-down' point in your LATA (or when calling from within Canada), you call your 'traditional' LEC local/toll opearator with a single '0'. If the 'ringdown' location is outside of your LATA when calling from the US, you can only use the AT&T operator, (10[10]288)-0('#'/0); or use 800-CALL-ATT / 800-3210-ATT and then cut-thru to the operator. Such calls to 'ringdown' points are billed at AT&T/LEC Operator _HANDLED_ rates! As for "Rate & Route", in today's operator environment of computerized TOPS/OSPS terminals with database lookups, the "Rate & Route" operator has been mostly discontinued over the past ten years. I think that some telcos in Canada still have their "Rate & Route" operators. NANP (Bell System) "Rate & Route" operators were (are) reached as: Kp+(NPA)+(0XX)+141+St. The 'NPA' code and toll-office 0XX routing code are indicated in parenthesis, since originating local operator dialing/routing practices sometimes required the use of such codes, but not always. In a city/metro area such as New Orleans, the local cordboard or TSPS operator would only need to key Kp+141+St. This would reach an operator (sometimes in the same large room) at a large desk with the some or all of the primary AT&T Long-Lines (Kansas City MO) produced large routing and rating documents, such as the "Distance Dialing Reference Guide" (not all that big, but still a bit too bulky to be placed at every '0' operator's position), and the _BIG_ "Operating Rate and Route Guide" and the also big "Traffic Routing Guide". The "Rate & Route" desk would also have all of the flip-cards and multi-leaf bulletins that the operator positions would have (of frequently called points nationwide, and much of the local/regional frequently requested locations) in addition to the more comprehensive documents. Sometimes, the "Area Code Handbook", a much more comprehensive looseleaf document alphabetically listing all dialable towns, villages, neighberhoods, etc. in the NANP - would be included at a "Rate & Route" desk. All three of the above mentioned routing documents were looseleaf documents were updated monthly or sometimes even more frequently. AT&T LL in Kansas City would ship out an envelope of looseleaf pages to insert (with instructions as to what to remove), to virtually every possible operator center, toll switch location, etc. in North America and to many locations in other parts of the world which had need to maintain such AT&T LL documents. The "Operating Rate and Route Guide" and the "Traffic Routing Guide" were usually mounted on a 'display-rack', similar to what might still be seen at a catalog order center, etc. if such merchants still maintain paper records. This way, the "Rate & Route" operator had the documents angled at 45-degrees and opened up, right in front of her. She didn't have to keep digging-out, opening-up and flipping-thru individual binders of looseleaf pages. She only needed to flip through to the proper section of an entire document right there in front of her. There were also tabbed-dividers to easily locate the proper section. Prior to computer terminals/databases, local directory operators had similar local number listings paper records as well. Today, Bellcore maintains much of this rate/route/numbering information (documents such as the LERG, etc), in various formats (paper, fiche) and also electronic-data. As for the originating local/toll operator, these days she only needs to key the necessary requests into her computer terminal, and a database is searched to return the proper routing and rating info, rather than reaching Kp+(NPA)+(0XX)+141+St. As for customer requests to "Rate & Route", I can remember twenty years ago in my High School days being told that "we cannot connect customers to Rate & Route", although they _sometimes_ would connect me. Sometimes, the original TSPS operator would stay on the line with me (and cut me off if I asked for information that "only operators need to know about"), other times she would simply pass me on to "Rate & Route", and release her position from the connection. As for discontinuing "Enterprise" service? I would assume that your LEC or AT&T account representative _should_ have some information to simply discontinue the 'reference' and account as an "Enterprise" number. However, the actual dialable POTS number that the operator would dial-to (and automatically bill as 'collect') might not be a number Stan's company would necessarily want to disconnect The 'translated' number might actually be a published (or even non-pub) POTS number that still needs to be called to (from other company locations or employees), as well as to place calls from! NWORLASKCG0 (BellSouth #1AESS Class-5 Local "Seabrook" 504-24x-) NWORLAIYCM1 (BellSouth-Mobility Hughes-GMH-2000 Cellular-MTSO NOL) NWORLAMA0GT (BellSouth DMS-100/200 fg-B/C/D Accss-Tandem "Main" 504+) NWORLAMA20T (BellSouth DMS-200 TOPS:Opr-Srvcs-Tandem "Main" 504+053+) NWORLAMA04T (AT&T #4ESS Class-2 Toll 060-T / 504-2T "Main" 504+) JCSNMSPS06T (AT&T #5ESS OSPS:Operator-Services-Tandem 601-0T 601+121) 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: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:31:55 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Old Bell System "Underground Cable" Warning Sign Along major roads/highways in some parts of New Orleans, I've always seen these yellow signs on utility poles indicating that there is underground wiring in the vicinity, and to please contact the utility company PRIOR to digging or dredging. About ten years ago, AT&T put up some of their own such signs (with the post-divestiture 'fried-brain' AT&T logo) to call an 800 number before digging, due to a transcontinental underground cable in the vicinity. However, some of the older yellow signs with South Central Bell's name (with 1970's and present Bell logo), but _no_ mention at _all_ of BellSouth, are still around. They refer to a number (in the Metairie suburb), to call prior to digging. It is an 83x- number (I don't remember the last four digits). TODAY, I noticed a much _older_ sign still attached to a utility pole. It had the _OLD_ (pre-1970's) Bell System logo (the one which REALLY LOOKED like a bell), and the following text: WARNING: UNDERGROUND CABLE Before digging in the vicinity, please call (collect) or notify the Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company, at LAfayette-9-9632, 520 Baronne Street, New Orleans 12, Louisiana. I don't know if BellSouth still has any numbers 504-529-9xxx, but the 52x prefix was referred to as JAckson-x in the late 1950's and 1960's. There were/are _many_ 529 (JAckson-9) numbers assigned to general customers throughout the 52x area. However, Southern Bell's 'official' numbers in the 529-8xxx and 529-9xxx ranges _were_ called _LAfayette-9_ in the late 1950's! I just dialed (504) 529-9632, but I received a 'vacant line number' recording (SIT-tones and "We're sorry, you have reached a number that has been disconnected or is no longer in service. If you feel you have reached this recording in error, please check the number, and try your call again.") NWORLASKCG0 (BellSouth #1AESS Class-5 Local "Seabrook" 504-24x-) NWORLAIYCM1 (BellSouth-Mobility Hughes-GMH-2000 Cellular-MTSO NOL) NWORLAMA0GT (BellSouth DMS-100/200 fg-B/C/D Accss-Tandem "Main" 504+) NWORLAMA20T (BellSouth DMS-200 TOPS:Opr-Srvcs-Tandem "Main" 504+053+) NWORLAMA04T (AT&T #4ESS Class-2 Toll 060-T / 504-2T "Main" 504+) JCSNMSPS06T (AT&T #5ESS OSPS:Operator-Services-Tandem 601-0T 601+121) 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: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 14:33:32 -0400 From: Judith Oppenheimer Reply-To: joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com Organization: ICB TOLL FREE - 800/888 news... commentary... consulting... Subject: Toll-Free 3rd Report & Order, and NANC On October 9, 1997, the FCC issued the THIRD REPORT AND ORDER in the matter of Toll Free Service Access Codes, CC Docket No. 95-155. It charged the North American Numbering Council (NANC) with finding replacement for Database Services Management Inc. (DSMI), and more ominously, asks the industry to defer to NANC in matters of industry guidelines, policy, number administration and assignment, as well as dispute resolution. The SECOND REPORT AND ORDER, issued in April, 1997, is the most industry-and-user-unfriendly ruling to date issued by the FCC, encouraged in large part by the NANC. It's worthwhile here to revisit some key elements of the April Order. The FCC declared: 1. A Presumption of Hoarding. Hoarding is defined as a toll free subscriber acquiring more numbers from a RespOrg than it intends to use immediately. Commission asserts the right to question the use of toll free numbers even if subscribers are paying their bills. Routing multiple toll free numbers to a single subscriber will create a rebuttable presumption of hoarding or brokering. Furthermore, "There is no way to determine if a subscriber is maintaining an inventory because it may soon have a need for the numbers, or if the subscriber is building a supply of numbers for possible sale, but in either scenario the numbers are unavailable for toll free subscribers that have an immediate need." Other factors that may be considered if a toll free subscriber is alleged to be hoarding or brokering numbers are the amount of calling of a particular number and the rate at which a particular subscriber changes toll free numbers." 2. A Presumption of Warehousing. Similarly, "...if a Responsible Organization does not have an identified toll free subscriber agreeing to be billed for service associated with each toll free number reserved from the database, or if a Responsible Organization does not have an identified, billed toll free subscriber before switching a number from reserved or assigned to working status, then there is a rebuttable presumption that the Responsible Organization is warehousing numbers. Responsible Organizations that warehouse numbers will be subject to penalties." 3. RespOrg Penalties. "We conclude that the Commission's exclusive jurisdiction over the portions of the North American Numbering Plan that pertain to the United States, found at 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act, as amended, authorizes the Commission to penalize RespOrgs that warehouse toll free numbers. We may impose a forfeiture penalty under 503(b). In addition, if a person violates a provision of the Communications Act or a rule or regulation issued by the Commission under authority of the Communications Act, the Commission can refer the matter to the Department of Justice to determine whether a fine, imprisonment, or both are warranted under 501 or 502 of the Communications Act. We also may limit any RespOrg's allocation of toll free numbers or possibly decertify it as a RespOrg under 251(e)(1) or 4(i). In addition, RespOrgs that falsely indicate that they have identified subscribers for particular numbers may be liable for false statements under Title 18 of the United States Code. We direct DSMI, and any successor toll free administrator, to monitor reserved numbers that are being automatically recaptured after 45 days and to submit regular reports to the Common Carrier Bureau, indicating which RespOrgs repeatedly reserve toll free numbers without having an identified subscriber." 4. Subscriber Penalties. "Toll free subscribers that hoard or broker numbers will be subject to penalties similar to those we will impose for warehousing [ie, note above: a fine, imprisonment, or both!]. The penalties may include, but are not limited to, a forfeiture penalty under 503(b) of the Communications Act. If a subscriber hoards numbers, that subscriber's service provider must terminate toll free service." As a practical matter, toll-free subscribers with multiple numbers are presumed to be hoarding, and/or brokering, and subject to all sorts of scary penalties. Although a number of petitions for reconsideration and clarification to the second order have been filed and are still pending at the FCC, by all appearances the NANC seems intent on enforcing the April order. It's activities should be closely monitored by the industry and 800 users. Judith Oppenheimer Publisher ICB TOLL FREE NEWS http://www.icbtollfree.com mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com with your name, company name and title to activate 15-day FREE trial subscription. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #289 ******************************