Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id WAA07221; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 22:20:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 22:20:05 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199709250220.WAA07221@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #259 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Sep 97 22:20:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 259 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T '00' Directory and Other AT&T 'Gimmicks' (Mark J. Cuccia) 559 Announced For 209 Split (John Cropper) Slammed - Fraud? (Charles Beatty) Security Alarm Problem Due to Area Code Change (oldbear@arctos.com) Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack (Patrick Tufts) 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, 24 Sep 1997 15:47:01 -0500 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: AT&T '00' Directory and Other AT&T 'Gimmicks' The New Orleans area does _NOT_ yet have this AT&T '00' Directory. When I dial '00' from a line 'PICd' to AT&T (or 10(10)288+0(#/0) from any non-restricted line), I route via the Jackson MS AT&T #5ESS OSPS switch (601-0T, JCSNMSPS06T), where I hear the AT&T 'sparkle' jingle with audio brand/logo. I then hear the recorded instructions to enter the number I wish to call, or for an operator -- to enter '0' or say 'Operator'. (The 'live' operators that I reach can be located anywhere along the southern part of the east coast, from Maryland to Florida -- i.e. BellAtlantic's old C&P territory or BellSouth's old Southern Bell territory). But I understand that the AT&T OSPS switch which serves Minneapolis MN (in the US West territory), 515-0T, in Des Moines IA, is now giving the option to enter/say '1' for Directory Assistance, upon dialing an AT&T '00' Operator. A friend in Minneapolis 'three-wayed' me to his AT&T '00' code, so I could hear the new prompts AT&T is now giving. AND FROM WHAT HE TOLD ME, THIS DIRECTORY OPTION (for lookups of US numbers) is HANDLED BY ***EXCELL-AGENCY***, and is _NOT_ the AT&T OSPS operator initially reached searching a database or verifying listings from the far-end genuine-Bell/LEC 'inward' directory operator! OKAY ... so here is yet ANOTHER gimmick from AT&T! :( BTW, when AT&T's operators connect to directory operators outside of the NANP (i.e. 'international' and overseas countries) it now costs anywhere from $7.00 to $10.00, depending on the country! :( Maybe the ITU should develop a standard number, similar to the NANP's 555-1212, which would work in _any_ participating country's code, for customers around the world to _dial_ to a directory assistance operator in the far-end country's LEC! Stan Cline (roamer1@pobox.com) is CERTAINLY correct that AT&T is getting more and more 'gimmicky' about a lot of things. And IMO, there are a lot of 'bugs' in these new gimmick services. Let's see, there's: "True" (?) Messages International-Redial Directory-Link and others I'm not going to go into any detail on the above three named services, as I've gone into detail on the problems associated with them in past issues of TELECOM Digest. Unfortunately, if one doesn't need or want one of these new features or services to intrude on a call-setup, it can be difficult -- even IMPOSSIBLE to have the prompts turned off for your calling-card or line. I have been successful in having the prompts turned off for Directory-Link from my line (for 1+ calls), however I have not been able to have AT&T turn off the prompts on outgoing calls billed to my AT&T or BellSouth calling card numbers, such as for when placing calls to (Canadian/Caribbean) NPA-555-1212 when I'm not at home. International Redial (on my home line, 1+) could have been a nice AT&T feature, but its prompts came in on (non-suping) calls to numbers being intercepted by the far-end LEC with a new number referral. I finally had to have AT&T turn off International Redial from my home line. Presently, True-Message prompts don't intrude 1+ calls dialed from my home line, but I have not been successful in having it turned off on my outgoing calls billed to my AT&T/LEC calling card numbers, nor having True-Message prompts being disabled on any AT&T-handled incoming calls to my line, since I have forwarding to cellular, as well as voicemail on my line, therefore True-Message prompts to the calling party aren't necessary! While many LECs are offering "if called-line is busy/unanswered you can record-a-message for delayed delivery, for-a-FEE" services/prompts similar to AT&T's True-Messages (on 'direct-dialed' local and intra-LATA calls), the LEC-provided services is usually something that one can turn-off on a per-call or per-line basis from a particular line with an end-office-based *XX/11XX code (I think it is *02/1102 and *03/1103). But AT&T's True-Messages is a bit different, as it is based on the OSPS operator switch, and its prompts intrude on calling card calls when not at home. As for AT&T's choice of routing to directory assistance for (US) NPA-555-1212, I think that AT&T is now routing to Excell-Agency (instead of the genuine called-end Bell/LEC directory operator for calls to _MOST_ (US) NPAs on 555-1212 calls. This now includes AT&T handled calls to Alaska, 907-555-1212. I'm not sure about Hawaii, whether AT&T is routing to Excell (or some other contract agency) or rather continuing to route to GTE-Hawaii; I don't know if AT&T-handled calls to CT's 203 and 860 directory continues to route to SNET directory or if it now routes to Excell; Neither do I know if AT&T continues to route to Cincinnati Bell on AT&T handled calls to 513-555-1212, or if AT&T now routes to Excel. I do know that AT&T does _NOT_ route the following LECs anymore when a customer dials 555-1212 for one of those LEC's NPAs: US West, Pac*Bell/Nevada*Bell and Southwestern Bell, Bell Atlantic and NYNEX, but rather routes to Excel. (However in the case of AT&T-handled calls to 555-1212 for Bell Atlantic's old C&P states/NPAs [MD, DC, VA, WVa], the routing is to CFW, which is a genuine incumbent _independent_ LEC, located in the Virginia area. CFW is supposed to have access to the actual BellAtlantic directory database). I assume that AT&T-handled calls to an Ameritech NPA for 555-1212 is also now routing to Excel, but I don't know for certain. Therefore, while I do place the vast majority of my traffic via AT&T, I am now placing _ALL_ calls to directory (outside of my local Bell South area 1/0-411) via Sprint, as 10(10)333+1+NPA-555-1212 (when dialing from home), or via one of several Sprint 800- access numbers, and billing to my Sprint FON-cards or one of my BellSouth calling-cards. AT&T _DOES_ continue to route calls to the genuine LEC directory operator for Canada's NPAs on 555-1212 (it seems that Excel doesn't even try to (mis)compile Canadian data. And for the Caribbean NPA(s), AT&T routes 555-1212 to either its "AT&T, What Island, Please?" intercept-and-route (and monitor the connection) operator; or they are beginning to route Caribbean NPAs (except for 809 itself) 555-1212 directly to the island's directory operator itself. And AT&T routes 670-555-1212 to the Northern Mariana's own directory operator, and 671-555-1212 to Guam's own directory operator. Other 'gimmicks' of AT&T that I don't like ... When I dial '00' from a line 'PICd' to AT&T, or 10(10)288+0(#/0), I would prefer to go LIVE AND DIRECT to a HUMAN BEING who answers the line. I do NOT like having to hear a litany of menu-prompts (even though I can DTMF enter '0' to cut-thru), nor those _pre-recorded_ generic male and female voices: "AT&T, How may I help you?" "AT&T, What is the number you are calling from?" "AT&T, the overtime charge is ..." "Thank You" etc. Nor do I like the inquiry from the operator (as Stan mentions), "Would you like for me to place a call for you at the OPERATOR-HANDLED rate?" NO! I'm only calling the operator for a nameplace, a rate, an area code or dialing instructions, etc. I am still going to dial the call MYSELF, and SAVE! And if I am having trouble getting through, I would like it to be the way it was up until about five years ago ... _IF_ I explain to the AT&T operator that there is a trouble condition, she would handle the call for me, but at the cheaper customer-dialed rates. But OH NO, they don't seem to want to do it that way anymore! :( Of course, if all of the operator 'teams' are all busy, I can understand a pre-recorded message coming on the line and stating that all operator positions are busy at the moment, and to continue to hold for the next available operator. But _I_ still want '00' (or similar) to route to a live person, and _not_ automated prompts/responses. AT&T operators are _still_ the only operators who can handle certain types of calls which MCI and Sprint don't choose to do. And if AT&T (or any carrier) wants to introduce a new service or function (such as Directory Link, True Messages, International Redial, etc), there SHOULD be some form of industry numbering and dialing standard, as well as operational standard, agreed upon by the industry forums and Bellcore NANPA/TRA/etc. Even if other companies don't choose to introduce the new service, at least there will be a standard out there so as not to cause customer dialing confusion or conflicts whenever other carriers begin to provide the same new service. At least the industry has attempted on a numbering/dialing standard with SAC-NPA 500 (although THAT still isn't 100% perfect!). Most features provided by most LECs SEEM to follow some form of Bellcore or ATIS forum dialing/numbering and network operations/interconnection standard. Is the "voice-with-a-smile" going to be COMPLETELY replaced by a robot? 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- ------------------------------ From: John Cropper Subject: 559 Announced For 209 Split Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 17:40:03 -0400 Thanks to Eric once again for this tip: SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 24, 1997--The California Public Utilities Commission has approved boundaries for the geographic split of Central California's 209 area code, but has also reserved the possibility of modifying that decision pending the outcome of Fresno County's complaint case. The new area code, 559, to be introduced Nov. 14, 1998, will serve Madera, Fresno, Tulare and Kings Counties and small portions of seven other counties in the southern portion of San Joaquin Valley now served by the 209 area code. Needed to meet increasing demand caused by the deregulation of the telephone industry and the explosion of high technology, 559 will be California's 23rd area code. California has more area codes than any other state in the nation. The addition of the new 559 area code will not affect the price of telephone calls. A six-month "get acquainted" period will begin on Nov. 14, 1998 that will allow customers to dial either 209 or 559. During this period, people calling from outside the area can dial either the old 209 or the new 559 to reach customers within the 559 area code. Customers within the two area codes will also be able to call between the two geographical areas using only the seven-digit phone number for the six-month "get acquainted" period. New Area Code Boundaries -- The boundaries for the area code split generally runs along the Madera County line where it borders on Mariposa and Merced counties. The northern region will retain the 209 area code and the southern region will be assigned to the new 559 area code. -- The northern region which will retain the 209 area code includes: Tuolumne, Calaveras and Amador counties, most of Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus and Mariposa counties and very small parts of Madera, Fresno, Sacramento, El Dorado, Alpine, Alameda, Contra Costa and Santa Clara counties. Cities in the northern region include: Lodi, Stockton, Modesto, Turlock, Sonora and Merced. -- The new 559 area code will serve customers in the southern region that contains: most of Fresno, Madera, Tulare, and Kings counties, and very small portions of Merced, Mariposa, Mono, Inyo, San Benito, Monterey and Kern counties. Cities in the southern region include: Fresno, Madera, Hanford, Visalia, Lindsay and Porterville. The estimated life-span of the 559 area code is expected to be 13 to 15 years. According to California Code Administrator Doug Hescox, "It will be a long time before the customers in the south will have to worry about another area code change." Hescox noted that new area code could last up to four years longer than the 209 area code in the north. Public Input Crucial to Finalizing Area Code Boundaries Hescox, who coordinates area code relief planning statewide for the telecommunications industry, recognized the difficulty in determining which area was to retain the 209 area code. "A series of public hearings were held to receive comment specifically about which region should keep the 209 area code," Hescox said. "We received a lot of valuable information at these meetings and through letters that helped us in making our final recommendation." Several key issues were cited in retaining the 209 number in the northern region. Important factors include: a worldwide emergency medical information service and a major military support service are located in the north; the north has more telephone prefixes available and strong ties to its surrounding area codes, including those in the Bay Area. Call Price is Not Impacted by Area Code Split Introduction of the new 559 area code will not affect the price of telephone calls. "What is a local call now will remain a local call regardless of the area code change. Call distance and time determines the price of a call, not whether or not you dial an area code," said Hescox. Confirm Equipment Can Accommodate the New 559 Area Code In 1995, a series of new-style of area codes was introduced in North America, and 559 is part of this new series that can use any three digits from 220 to 999. This new style of area codes has special ramifications for certain types of telecommunications equipment, which must be re-programmed to recognize the new format. "Historically, area codes always had either a '1' or '0' as the middle digit for identification purposes, but by 1995 all of those codes had been assigned," Hescox stated. "Due to this change in format, it's important for customers to know that PBX (private phone) systems, auto-dialers, alarms and other telecommunications equipment may have to be re-programmed to recognize the new-style area codes in order for calls to complete," added Hescox. Customers affected by the area code split should contact their personal vendors to determine if their equipment needs to be updated. Things to Remember During the six-month "get acquainted" period which will enable the customer to use either the 209 or 559 area code, customers are being encouraged to use this period to make important changes. These include: -- Change stationery, business cards and advertising to reflect the new area code; -- Notify friends, relatives, business clients and customers of the new area code; -- Update fax machine group calling lists that have numbers affected by the change; -- Reprogram speed dialers, auto dialers, alarms and PBX (private phone systems) to reflect the change (contact your equipment vendor for assistance); -- Reprogram outdial lists on personal computers that have numbers affected by the change; -- Check with wireless phone and paging service providers to find out if re-programming is required. The 209 area code relief plan was collectively developed by a telecommunications industry group composed of more than 30 companies, including: AirTouch, AT&T, AT&T Wireless, the California Cable Television Association, GTE, MCI, Pacific Bell, Page Net, Sprint and others. Public comment was gathered through a series of public hearings that were held in October 1996, and March and April 1997. The California Code Administration is an independent planning group that coordinates area code relief planning and administers numbering resources on behalf of the California telecommunications industry. Final decisions on area code issues are made by the California Public Utilities Commission. ------------------------------------ John Cropper voice: 888.76.LINCS LINCS fax: 888.57.LINCS P.O. Box 277 mailto:jcropper@lincs.net Pennington, NJ 08534-0277 ICQ: 2670887 FREE areacode information: http://www.lincs.net/areacode/ $17.95 unlimited analog, or $29.95 unlimited ISDN dial-up: http://www.lincs.net/internet/dialup.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 10:51:55 -0400 From: Charles Beatty Subject: Slammed - Fraud? Organization: Genome Database We were recently slammed. The story is a little more unusual and disturbing than simply being slammed though. Last month a service charge from Accutel of Boca Raton, FL showed up on our bill. I finally got through to a vice president at Accutel. She told me that they had purchased the cutomer base of a company called Christian Communications Group of Savannah, GA. The owner of Christian Communications is one Pastor Ralph Davis. He may also be doing business as Least Cost Routing. Now I don't believe for a second that Davis is a pastor, or that Christian Communicatons is anything but a scam. The disturbing part is that they have my wife's social security number. This is apparently sufficient to authorize a switch of LD carriers. Has anyone heard of Christian Communicatons? Least Cost Routing? "Pastor" Ralph Davis? Is there anything we can do to limit the distribution of my wife's SS# ? Do we have any kind of legal recourse? This is particularly upsetting since my wife's mother was just the victim of credit card fraud because someone got her SS#. Thanks in advance for any help or pointers. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 10:52:41 -0400 From: The Old Bear Subject: Security Alarm Problem due to Area Code Change The following item is excerpted from a copyright story which appeared in the {Boston Globe} on September 11, 1997: HOME SECURITY FIRMS SOUND ALARM ON TIMING OF AREA CODE CHANGES By Bruce Mohl The state's area code problems appear to be far from over, as alarm companies warned yesterday that tens of thousands of their customers won't have working alarms if the initial phase-in period for the new area codes is not extended beyond Dec. 1. Executives from four alarm companies told the Legislature's Government Regulations Committee that three months -- the current period when either new or old area codes may be used -- is not enough time to manually reprogram each of their customers' alarms. In most cases, home visits are required. Although they acknowledged their numbers are rough guesses, the executives said as many as 400,000 business and residential customers could be left without alarm service for fire, medical, and burglary emergencies starting Dec. 1. "The stage is set for a firestorm," warned Richard L. Sampson, president of American Alarm & Communications Inc. in Arlington. James W. Lees, chief executive of Sentry Protective Systems in Malden, said alarm companies need six to nine months to convert all the systems. He said 5,200 of his 8,000 customers would go without service temporarily if the initial phase-in period is not extended. Bell Atlantic has already asked the state Department of Public Utilities to extend the period when customers can dial numbers using either the new or old area codes, but only by one month to Jan. 1. Jack Hoey, a spokesman for Bell Atlantic, said the company will work with the alarm companies, but he cautioned that the transition process can only be delayed so long. "They're looking for time that doesn't exist," Hoey said. "In some cases, they may need to hire people to get the job done." Most alarm companies have already started charging their customers more to pay for the reprogramming effort. Sentry is charging customers $25 or $39.95, depending on whether a home visit is required. Plans call for the phase-in period to end Dec. 1, after which callers dialing the wrong area code will hear a recorded message telling them to redial. As of May 1, the new area codes begin full operation, and consumers dialing a number with the wrong area code could be connected to someone who has been given that number. Lawmakers were sympathetic to the alarm company concerns and expressed hope that the so-called permissive dialing period could be extended another three months. Otherwise, the lawmakers said, they may have to force the issue with legislation. "That would be unfortunate. What you're dealing with here is a mathematical and technical problem, not a political problem," Hoey said. Bell Atlantic is also appealing to the DPU to forgo a system that would require callers to dial 10 numbers (the area code and number) when calling people who are in the local calling area but in a different area code. Bell Atlantic says the system is confusing to customers. Lawmakers will also have to deal with a bill filed by Acting Governor Paul Cellucci to boot Belmont and Watertown out of 617 and back to 781 where the communities originally started. Senator Michael Morrissey of Quincy said he supports putting Belmont and Watertown back in 781, but his House counterpart, Representative Daniel Bosley of North Adams, said it may be too late and too costly to make the change now. Senator Warren Tolman of Watertown said reprinting phone books to correct the area code boundaries and distributing them to customers would cost between $3.5 million and $4 million. ------------------------------ From: zippy@cs.brandeis.edu (Patrick Tufts) Subject: Re: AGIS Pulls Plug on Cyberpromo Due to Ping Attack Date: 24 Sep 1997 17:40:49 GMT Organization: Brandeis University, Waltham MA Ray Morian writes: >> [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? According to news.admin.net-abuse.email, after he lost AGIS, Wallace got hosted on and immediately booted from four other ISPs (including Digex and BBNPlanet) in as many days. >> [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 According to the same newsgroup, Cyberpromo still owes Compuserve $30,000. Also, Cyberpromo promised $10/day for any outage experienced by one of their (spammer) customers. Wallace is probably maxing out his credit cards and fleeing for Mexico. Pat [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Has anyone attempted to contact him at his office (or home or wherever) and get the details on these latest allegations; i.e. money owed to Compuserve and his plans for the future? Is there any activity at his office at all such as phones being answered, a customer service rep on duty, etc, or is his office abandoned? The other day I was helping someone who has a problem with rodent infestation in their basement. I put out lots of 'nice, tasty food' the little guys would be sure to like -- heh! heh! -- and already today the results were obvious. Several bloated and quite dead little carcasses near the food dish I had prepared. This leads me to my final question for this issue: how severe is this rodent infestation on the net? Obviously Spamford was one of their leaders, but how many of the vermin still remain to be exterminated? Any guesstimates? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #259 ******************************