Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA21948; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 02:47:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 02:47:28 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199709240647.CAA21948@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #258 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Sep 97 02:46:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 258 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? (Paula Pettis) Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? (G.L. Waltman) Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? (Eric B. Morson) Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? (Ken Dulin) Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? (Linc Madison) Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack (Ray Morian) Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack (Louis Raphael) Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack (Trey Valenta) Re: Tonight's Monday Night Bandwidth Chat 7-8PM Pacific Time (Dan Seyb) Re: Here We Go _Again_ ... AT&T National Directory Assistance (Stan Cline) Re: Here We Go _Again_ ... AT&T National Directory Assistance (Ed Ellers) Re: Here We Go _Again_ ... AT&T National Directory Assistance (John Grout) Re: Hooking Up Two Computers to a Cable Modem? (John R. Levine) Re: Hooking Up Two Computers to a Cable Modem? (Leonid A. Broukhis) Re: Radio Vigilantes (James Bellaire) Re: MedicAlert and 209 Split (jf@oxy.edu) I've Fallen, and I Can't Get Up! (Harry Bowman) 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. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paula Pettis Subject: Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 20:28:12 -0400 Reply to Thad Jacobs: Please check out our website. We have all of the existing NXX's but not the future ones. We update our software every month from the FCC tariff number 4. Paula Pettis Stuff Software 1249 Silver Palm Drive Altamonte Springs, FL 32714 Voice: (407) 290-2301 Fax: (407) 290-0079 http://www.stuffsoftware.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would like to point out that Paula Pettis has been a long-time regular supporter of the Digest and she maintains a link via the Telecom Archives web page which is well worth the time you might spend to take a look at the services her company offers. Her area code lists mentioned above are very complete and accurate. PAT] ------------------------------ From: G. L. Waltman Subject: Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? Date: 23 Sep 1997 17:46:20 GMT Organization: Air Products and Chemicals Bellcore offers a good amount of information at http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/index.html The information is updated monthly. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 15:22:37 -0400 From: Eric B. Morson Reply-To: EasyE1@aol.com vSubject: Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? The most comprehensive NPA/NXX site is run by my friend John Cropper in NJ. His URL is http://www.lincs.net/areacode.htm Eric B. Morson EasyE1@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Ken Dulin Subject: Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 12:43:17 -0500 Organization: Arch Telecom, Inc. Reply-To: kend@archtelecom.com Thad Jacobs wrote: > Is there an online location to obtain, new and existing NPA and NXX's > by state for the whole country? Is there a list of new ones to come > and when their proposed effective date is as well? Your information is at http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/update97.html Ken Dulin Arch Telecom, Inc. kend@(badspammer)archtelecom.com remove (badspammer) to email http://www.archtelecom.com ------------------------------ From: Telecom@Eureka.vip.best.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: New and Existing NPA/NXX Index? Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 23:51:53 -0700 Organization: No unsolicited commercial e-mail! In article , Thad Jacobs wrote: > Is there an online location to obtain, new and existing NPA and NXX's > by state for the whole country? Is there a list of new ones to come > and when their proposed effective date is as well? There are several. My web pages at < http://www.best.com/~eureka/telecom > focus on the new area codes and their mandatory effective dates, although I'm in the process of preparing a comprehensive listing by state and city, and some other new features, along with updating the basic info. (I just returned from a two-month vacation, so the pages are still on the July update.) John Cropper, a frequent contributor here, maintains web pages at < http://www.lincs.net > (That's an acronym LINCS; no relation to my name.) He has all area codes listed in a variety of sorting orders, and information about definite, proposed, and speculated future changes. Both pages also provide a variety of links to other sources. ** Do not spam e-mail me! ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * Telecom@Eureka.vip.best-com >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 18:32:16 -0700 From: Ray Morian Subject: Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack >> Letter to Cyber Promotions' customers by Sanford Wallace, President... > >> Dear Customers, 8< bunch of Spamford's whining deleted >8 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What a rotten shame! So is Spamford > still out of service or has he managed to snooker other ISP's and/or > networks, etc into handling his nasty traffic? I wondered why my > inbox had so little spam when I checked it early today, and now I > know. Whoever was doing the pinging which caused this to happen, you > have the heartiest congratulations of net-people everywhere. PAT] I agree totally with you Pat! :) I also called AGIS's NOC and engineer as listed on the email and congratulated them :) ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well now, I certainly cannot condone > any unlawful activities, which I guess would cover a commando raid on > Spamford's heaquarters, busting up his computers, tearing down all his > circuits, etc. I mean, I would not be surprised to see it happen one > of these days/nights, knowing human nature as I do, and knowing how > *really bitter and angry* a lot of netters are over his antics, but I > still cannot and would not condone it. Violence is never an answer to > the problems of the net. 8< snip >8 ] True, but humans being humans, the worst qualities of some people do tend to show through. Ray ** From and reply-to headers ROT-13'd to discourage other spammers ** Morian -- morian@globalserve.net -- http://www.globalserve.net/~morianFinger for copyright statement/disclaimer & PGP public key. ------------------------------ From: raphael@willy.cs.mcgill.ca (Louis Raphael) Subject: Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack Date: 23 Sep 1997 02:11:53 GMT Organization: McGill University Computing Centre Kevin Podsiadlik (kjpodsia@spd.dsccc.com) wrote: > A moment for the Internet history books, to be sure. Indeed. Maybe, just *maybe*, a serious dent in the spam problem will be made. A few weeks ago, I had given up on the Internet, having decided to filter out what I could until the soon-to-come end. Now, I think that there may be a bit of hope - I've started complaining to spammers admins (etc) again. I'm also including my last twenty days worth of spam as a free "gift" to spammers whose addresses I can figure out for *sure*. It comes standard with an offer for a permanent subscription, to be activated by the sending of a second UCE. So far, no takers. No remove mechanism is provided, as subscription is strictly voluntary ... :-) ------------------------------ From: trey@zipcon.net (Trey Valenta) Subject: Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack Date: 23 Sep 1997 23:09:54 GMT Organization: Alternate Access Inc. In nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes: > I suggest simply redirecting any spam you get from anybody, > especially if it has any forged address information, or any hint of a > false health claim or other scam, to the new Federal Trade Commmission > spam reporting point, "uce@ftc.gov". The FTC has the power to take > action, so send them the evidence they need to do so. I suggest you DON'T do this. I can't find the article now, but the FTC recently put out a statement that the large numbers of people who were doing this is putting severe strain on the systems. Seems many have set their procmail scripts to do forwarding on any suspected UCE/spam. According to the FTC, they don't want to see the messages unless it's definately fraud related and overall abuse will result in them pulling the plug on the address or tracking the person down who is flooding their systms. I'll still look to see if I can find this post. Trey Valenta trey@zipcon.net Seattle, WA ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Tonight's Monday Night Bandwidth Chat 7-8PM Pacific Time Reply-To: d.seyb@telesciences.com Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 12:52:07 -0400 From: Dan Seyb Egad, Pat. I can kind of forgive the fact i didn't see the notice of the Monday night chat until Tuesday morning. From the header, the email reached me around 9PM yesterday. If I had been at work then, and I had read the mail immediately, I could have participated. What really annoyed me was the URL they listed for more information. (http://207.68.136.82/bandwidth/category1/forum5/cool/focus.htm) When I tried to view it, a popup window asked for an id and password. Their option, but I don't play that game. But that password window would NOT go away. I hit Cancel. The window came back. I hit Ok. I got an error message window. I hit Cancel on that window. The original password window came back. I hit Ok again. The error window came back. I tried Ok this time. The password window came back. Repeat until tired of it. I finally gave up and killed the entire session. Kind of a shame, too. If wireless access was wide spread and priced even reasonably close to wired modems, I would definitely be interested, and so would several of my friends. dan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The timing on that message was really strange. I got it just three or four hours before the on-line meeting was due to start (I think about 6 pm central time) and probably would have not used it at all except that I was in the process of working on an issue of the Digest and figured that if I got it out right away probably a third to half the readers would see it in time if they cared to participate. I wish I had gotten a little more advance notice on it. I did not bother to go check the web page but just pushed it out ASAP in the issue then being prepared. I sort of appended it to the issue then in preparation. PAT] ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Here We Go _Again_ ... AT&T National Directory Assistance Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 02:00:58 GMT Organization: missing Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com On Mon, 22 Sep 1997 14:58:27 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > AT&T on Monday began testing its new ``00'' Info national directory > assistance service in Minneapolis, Seattle, Phoenix, Denver and > Portland, Ore. > Um, does AT&T not realize that "00" is _taken_ as a dialable? They are also offering this from the Atlanta area. I just dialed 00 (I'm PICed to AT&T) to check some rates for intraLATA calls for someone, and I was prompted with the usual options, plus this one: "For double-oh Info US Directory, press or say one" Also, I heard "For international directory assistance, press or say two". We all know how much AT&T charges for international DA ... It seems that AT&T is getting more and more gimmicky with calls to "00" -- every time I call for rates or other information, I'm asked if I want to have a call placed at the operator-HANDLED [high] rates. Then the voice-mail jail (say this, press that), and now this. For the record, I no longer use AT&T for LD DA, and haven't for several months -- I use LCI International on a casual-call basis (101-0432+) instead. Stanley Cline somewhere near Atlanta, GA, USA roamer1(at)pobox.com http://scline.home.mindspring.com/ spam not wanted here! help outlaw spam - see http://www.cauce.org/ ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Here We Go _Again_ ... AT&T National Directory Assistance Date: 23 Sep 1997 01:53:58 GMT Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Jay R. Ashworth wrote: 'Um, does AT&T not realize that "00" is _taken_ as a dialable?' All this means is that AT&T will now provide DA to callers who reach an AT&T operator by dialing 00. (Personally, I think Bellcore should have standardized 211 for the IXC operator, but who said they had a sense of history?) ------------------------------ From: j-grout@ehsn5.cen.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: Here We Go _Again_ ... AT&T National Directory Assistance Date: 22 Sep 1997 20:53:37 -0500 Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Reply-To: john.grout@reasoning.com Jay R. Ashworth writes: > The following article was seen on the AP wire, and is included here for > commentary, under the fair use provision of US Copyright law. > AT&T on Monday began testing its new ``00'' Info national directory > assistance service in Minneapolis, Seattle, Phoenix, Denver and > Portland, Ore. > By dialing ``00'' customers in those areas will be able to obtain > telephone listings for any place in the United States - even if > they don't know the area code or city. > Um, does AT&T not realize that "00" is _taken_ as a dialable? Yes, it is ... it's a way to reach an IXC operator (though probably not one customer in twenty knows that, especially AT&T's customers, whom it has swaddled with catch phrases like "always dial 1-800-CALL-ATT"). Since "00" is already a dialing loophole which allows people to reach the long-distance network (and the possibility of making a billable long-distance call on lines which haven't been designated in advance as unbillable), it should already be blocked by institutions who want to rigidly control or eliminate long-distance calls. My former employer, the University of Illinois, was sensitive enough to the possibility of fraud and unauthorized billing to designate its lines as unbillable (relatively common, I believe) _and_ to limit direct access to the network (via PIC's) to the "big three" IXCs (AT&T, MCI, Sprint), whom it trusted enough to not present it with unwanted charges (either via 10xxx+0+ or 10xxx+00). If AT&T is trying another end-run around these sorts of institutional billing controls, I believe it will be even more quickly stomped than their last effort (an egregious attempt to use a toll-free dialing prefix) ... and I hope it would cost them some angry institutional customers. John R. Grout john.grout@reasoning.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, having 00 available for all users should not pose any real problems as long as billed number screening is in place. The operator may answer without looking closely at the computer screen but as soon as she attempts to forward the call the computer will refuse to do so; the operator will not be able to get rid of the call lacking some acceptable (third number, collect or credit card) billing. And if the caller says 'collect' she won't be able to push the call out if the distant end also has billed number screening in place. Naturally this assumes the long distance carrier subscribes to the database of billing-denied numbers or has one of their own; but is there anyone anywhere whose 00 defaults to Integratel? ... PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 23 Sep 1997 05:53:53 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Hooking Up Two Computers to a Cable Modem? Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. > If possible, I would appreciate some detailed direction on what to get > and how to setup for a second computer on a single cable modem. The short answer is "you can't". The cable modem is a modem that plugs into a single PC and gives you a single IP address. The slightly longer answer is that there are systems that let your entire network hide behind a single IP address, doing translation on the fly. (The three-letter acronym is NAT.) Dedicated NAT boxes tend to be expensive but you might be able to find freeware for Linux. If you can get NAT set up, you'd plug the cable modem into the box running NAT, then connect all the other computers to that one using a regular Ethernet separate from the cable modem. If this sounds like it's more trouble than it's worth, you're probably right. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 640 Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Finger for PGP key, f'print = 3A 5B D0 3F D9 A0 6A A4 2D AC 1E 9E A6 36 A3 47 ------------------------------ From: leob@best.com (Leonid A. Broukhis) Subject: Re: Hooking Up Two Computers to a Cable Modem? Date: 23 Sep 1997 16:21:54 -0700 Marc Baime writes: > If possible, I would appreciate some detailed direction on what to get > and how to setup for a second computer on a single cable modem. Can > both machines run at the same time? Do I need a multiplexer? A hub? > Where does the cable need to be split? Before coming into the cable > modem? Coming out of the cable modem? The safest way to do it without violating the contract with the ISP is to install the second network interface card in your computer. A hub connected to the cable modem will not do it, because if you connect more than one computer to a hub, you'll have unauthorized nodes in the segment. Leo ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 23:10:50 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Re: Radio Vigilantes Ed Ellers wrote: > There are reports out of Elkhart, Indiana, that two people who have > taken a dislike to the operators of a local amateur radio repeater > have been devising some ingenious ways of jamming it (as opposed to > just transmitting jamming signals from their own location). For one > thing, they put small jammer transmitters inside beach balls and left > them at the beach. In another incident, they bought a new TV set from > Wal-Mart, installed a jammer inside, repacked it and returned it for a > refund; Wal-Mart then resold the TV to an innocent customer who didn't > know that he was "interfering with" emergency communications. > Supposedly one of their jammers even included a seismometer to shut it > down if it detected people walking near it (say, with direction-finding > receivers). The repeater in question is on the tower of a 50kW ERP FM station south of town. The repeater is used for Elkhart County SKYWARN, which provides severe storm spotting and disaster relief. Jammers have been found all over the place, including in the woods across the street from the tower site, floating in the Elkhart River, and hung on one of the AM towers in the array next to the FM. The perpatrators have trespassed on both the transmitter site and on private property near it. And they have been doing this occasional blocking for more than a year, usually using small transmitters in sandwitch sized containers. Local news reports have been sketchy. There has been coverage on South Bend TV Stations as well as in newspapers. But it is not a daily issue. A related report about a CBer in South Bend, who has a large power amp and kills most of his neighbor's TV, Portable Phones, and Radios (not to mention a church PA system) talking to his trucker buddies was aired last month. The local police reported him to the FCC and that was it. No local action has been taken. (He still has all of his equipment.) > The Elkhart police know who these characters are but have no jurisdiction > in the case; there has been no word on any action by the FCC. The repeater is outside of Elkhart City, so I must assume that you mean Elkhart County Police. Both Wal-Marts in Elkhart County are in Goshen, once again a job for County or State police (or Goshen City Police on that one part of the issue). > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Elkhart police most certainly > would have jurisdiction in some aspects of it. The incident with the > television set which was tampered with and returned constitutes fraud > against Wal-Mart and the re-buyer of the merchandise. The behavior in > general of the individuals involved would also most certainly qualify > as disorderly conduct and the Elkhart police could act on that as > well. Proof is the hard part. They would need to trace the exact television that was bought, returned and resold AND prove that the tampering was done by the people who returned it. Actually seeing these guys place a transmitter would be handy too. Their tampering is spread out enough that most of the leads die off before the next incident. I would love to see these guys caught and punished. But it needs to be proven otherwise they will just walk away. > Furthermore, police are charged with the duty of enforcing *all > laws* whether of a local, state or federal nature, however they would > of course refer a federal matter to federal authorities. PAT] I wonder what level the federal authorities would place this at? James E. Bellaire (JEB6) bellaire@tk.com Telecom Indiana Webpage http://members.iquest.net/~bellaire/telecom/ * Note new server - old URL should still work * [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Back in the 1970's there were a lot of guys with the knowledge and equipment to convert CB radios into ten- meter transceivers. They would buy new radios a dozen or so at a time in stores like Wal-Mart where the clerks had no idea how the radio was supposed to work and didn't care anyway after first ascertaining that the model being sold was using the Motorola 02-A programmable chip for channel selection. They would take these new radios back to their bench and 'do the mods', meaning they would cut a couple traces on the circuit board, add a jumper here and there, tweak a couple of the trim-pots to get the radio to oscillate properly at a greatly expanded coverage range and then sell these units to the general public with something like 80-120 'channels' or frequencies instead of the 40 authorized by the FCC. Guys who were good at it and had decent circuitry to work with and a very steady hand to adjust the trim-pots could get those radios to oscillate all the way up in ten meters, and clear down in many cases to the low 26-megs territory. Illegal as hell, but those modified units sold like hotcakes on the street. Well, accidents would happen now and then; the pirate tech- nician would forget to check his solder maybe, or leave the slightest bit of wire in contact somewhere it should not be and the chip in the radio would get blown to kingdom come ... but not to worry, the pirates had a solution for that also. They would *carefully* remove the parts they wanted from the damaged radio and inventory them for use in *other* radios. Then they would *carefully* put the case back together so it appeared it had never been opened, put it back in the original carton, and take it with their receipt back to the store to get their money back or (more likely) a new radio. At Wal-Mart or K-Mart or wherever, the disinterested and not too bright sixteen year old clerk would just mark the unit 'defective' and toss it in a pile with others and give the customer his money back or a new radio. The pirate techs would not try this too often at Radio Shack; the clerks at Radio Shack after all would hand out xeroxed instructions for the mods about the time the customer was walking out the door with his new radio ("oh here, some customer left this 'hobbyist' guide to radios on the counter in case anyone wanted one ...") which were always anonymously written, etc on typewriters with a couple of crude drawings/sketches showing where the jumpers were to be attached and the traces cut. If you went back to Radio Shack the next day with a unit that 'seems to be defective' you better bet the clerk would stare you right in the face and tell you what you were full of. If the clerk himself was corrupt he'd snicker, toss the radio in the defects pile and give you a new one but some clerks would quickly stamp the phrase "as is, no refunds" on the customer's reciept and tell him that was so he could not go to some other RS store and 'try to hand them the same line of bull you just gave me ...' sending the pirate away with the junky radio. Whatever; a certain number of radios whether via Wal-Mart, Radio Shack or some discount store found their way back to Japan or Hong Kong or China to the one factory where all radios are made despite the brand name on the unit. Stores everywhere would return the 'defective units' for credit. Imagine then quality control inspectors in Japan opening up the radios and looking inside to 'see what was wrong' ... Japanese man takes off the cover, peers inside, flabbergasted, says to his co-workers at the factory, "Holy Chr---! Look at this! How did this peice of junk get passed quality control inspection? No heat sink, no zenner diode, no final, no knobs on the front! " ... Because of course whoever had 'done the mods' on that radio and blew it up in the process had cannibalized what was left on the circuit board to use in other radios he was repairing and then boxed it back up and took it to the teeny-bopper at the customer service counter at the mall to get a refund, and with a straight face yet. Finally the number of pirate radios in service got to be such a joke with people telling others openly 'you got channel 72 on your radio? I'll meet you there ...' that the FCC finally got sore about it. Any attempt to police individual users operating 'out of band' on the pirate frequencies was in vain. The FCC's response was one day to go to Motorola with a formal demand that they cease production of the 02-A chip. They also went to Fort Worth to meet with Radio Shack executives and told them to get their sales clerks to 'can the crap' and quit giving out illegal mod sheets 'under some thinly disguised BS having to do with the First Amendment and free speech.' Both Motorola and Radio Shack were threatened by the FCC with large fines and lots of grief if they did not comply. In Radio Shack's case, within a couple days the word went from Ft. Worth to the stores that there was never again to be any discussion of 'the mods'. The rule was, talk about the mods and you'll get fired. Within a year or so all new CB Radios had their frequency selection/tuning stuff in ROM (read only memory) chips and in the case of Radio Shack, with a checksum kind of thing where you could hack all you wanted, but if the checksum did not match the radio would just remain silent. In those years, I had a Uniden CB with a device called a 'digi-scan' attached with a ribbon connector in place of the usual channel selector knob. The Uniden radios could be expanded to six hundred channels. Those were great days -- or nights perhaps, as I seldom got on the radio much before midnight -- and like today's internet, once the general public found out about CB radio then shortly after that (with Johnny Cash's song) it was ruined for everyone. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jf@oxy.edu Subject: Re: MedicAlert and 209 Split Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 20:45:55 -0800 Organization: Flashnet Communications, http://www.flash.net Reply-To: jf@oxy.edu Why can't MedicAlert just purchase remote-call forwarding or foreign-exchange lines or work out something with the phone company? What am I missing here? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 11:01:33 -0400 From: Harry Bowman Subject: I've Fallen, and I Can't Get Up! There seems to be some confusion about what Medic Alert's product is. The "I've Fallen, and I Can't Get Up" gadget is marketed under the brand name "Lifecall". They appear to be sold in Canada, according to a web search, by VOXCOM Security Systems. The Medic Alert Foundation is a nonprofit, tax exempt corporation and therefore probably doesn't advertize on TV. There is a contact number on their web page (1-800-736-3342) for information. Their Director of Communications has two numbers listed, one of which is (209) 668-3333. I assume that means I have the right people. The page I found is at: http://www.social.com/health/nhic/data/hr0400/hr0494.html. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #258 ******************************