Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id UAA04343; Thu, 13 Nov 1997 20:09:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 20:09:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199711140109.UAA04343@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #313 TELECOM Digest Thu, 13 Nov 97 20:09:00 EST Volume 17 : Issue 313 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Splitting Exchange Designations: Feasible? (Lee Winson) Siemens Euroset 221 S IWV / MWV (Translation) (TELECOM Digest Editor) Re: Phase Out of 10XXX Codes (Jeff Vinocur) 10XXX/101XXX Codes in Canada (Sebastien Kingsley) Re: MCI Cuts of 2/3 of ISPs Phone Lines (Scott A. Miller) Confidential? 800 Numbers? was Re: More on Fiber Sabatage (D. Burstein) Re: Updated Guide to North American Area Codes Wanted (Linc Madison) Books on Intelligent Networks (Robin E. Haberman) Re: New Brunswick, Canada Toll-Free Directories on Web (David Fraser) Re: Modem Users, Who You Gonna Call?; Not Bell Atlantic (John McHarry) Re: Modem Users, Who You Gonna Call?; Not Bell Atlantic (Thor L. Simon) Re: Modem Users, Who You Gonna Call?; Not Bell Atlantic (Chris Zguris) Re: CallerID Info Needed (Rich Courtney) Re: InTRA-LATA Carrier Verification (John R. Levine) 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: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (Lee Winson) Subject: Splitting Exchange Designations: Feasible? Date: 13 Nov 1997 04:28:22 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS A major reason North America is running out of telephone exchanges is competition by new local companies. At present, each new local company must be assigned a full exchange code in each area served, giving it 10,000 numbers per area. The problem is many new carriers won't need anywhere need that many numbers, so numbers are wasted. Would it be _feasible_ and _practical_ to change this so exchange codes could be split between carriers per geographic area? (Codes would NOT cover multiple geographic areas.) That is, say 215 548-1xxxx would be assigned to Bell Telephone, 548-2xxxx would be assigned to Comcast, 548-3xxx would be assigned to AT&T-Local, etc. There are two obvious issues: 1) Will the telephone companies accept this? I suspect the existing Bell companies won't while the new competitors would not. A lot of long time exchange codes have a certain "status" in some neighborhoods, for instance, in the Chesnut Hill section of Philadelphia (an affluent area), the 242, 247, 248 codes have a certain tradition/"class" associated with them and merchants want them. Likewise in suburban Moorestown NJ, where merchants seek 235 (BElmont). Those long-time codes tell consumers that a store is in a nice area. Where it comes to marketing strategies, these guys go for blood. 2) The second is technical. Can the tandem and long distance routing switches be programmed inexpensively to split up calls by this scheme? I suspect since they're gonna have to reprogram switches to route calls to the new competitors anyway it wouldn't be too hard. By the way, who is paying for connecting up the new companies -- the new ones or the existing Bell companies? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 21:39:07 CST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Siemens Euroset 221 S IWV / MWV (Translation) I had asked for some help translating a message here recently, and the several replies I received are summarized below. > Ich habe folgendes Problem : Wie kann ich das oben genannte Telefon > fest von Impulswahl auf Mehrfrequenzwahl umstellen ?? Und auch wieder > zurck. Temporr ist bekannt ... :-)) The translators say he is asking: "I have the following problem: How can I permanently set the above mentioned telephone from pulse to tone dialing? And back again. I know to temporarily make the change." The same translators more or less all agreed on this answer: There is a whole era of telephones in Germany from the mid eighties that were pulse dialing phones, but could, on a per call basis, be switched to tone. Tone dialing is about 5 years old in Germany, so the purpose was to be able to use phone banking, etc. after the connection was made, just like many phones here, when in pulse mode, can be set to tone by pressing a dedicated key, or * for the duration of the call. Upon hanging up reverting back to pulse. More than likely this person does NOT have the option to permanently set his phone to tone. This is common in Austria where, for the last 15 years, the Austrian Post Office has been installing Austrian-Made Kapsch brand telephones with 16 buttons. 12 dialing keys, Redial, Store, Memory and "K", which allows outpulsing tones for the duration of the call. For some incredibly stupid reason, you are limited to 16 tone digits after pressing "K" making non-operator assisted calls via USA Direct impossible. Grrr. -------------- Thanks to those who responded with assistance. PAT ------------------------------ From: chip76@ix.netcom.com (Jeff Vinocur) Subject: Re: Phase-Out of 10XXX Codes? Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 02:24:00 GMT Organization: WWWHHS Reply-To: chip76@ix.netcom.com (Jeff Vinocur) On Mon, 03 Nov 1997 13:30:08 -0800, Telecom@LincMad.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) wrote: > Is there a phase-out date set yet for the elimination of the existing > 10XXX carrier codes in favor of the new 101XXXX codes? I got a mailing > from the "Dime Line" folks (whom I do not recommend, BTW) and noticed > that the little stickers now say "DIAL 1010-811" instead of "DIAL 10811". That reminds me -- I was using a pay phone last night (at a high school in a somewhat rural area). I can't recall the carrier, I am vaguely thinking Universal Telecom or something similar. Anyway, I was trying to call home (we have an 888 number for such situations), and it rejected it. I first thought perhaps my dad had restricted the calling area, so I tried 1-800-CALL-ATT to use the calling card instead. Same thing. It simply didn't like toll-free calls. I've never seen this before, has anyone else? I realized after a couple seconds that I could use 10ATT, which worked -- although their phone tree didn't like me and I ended up having to recite numbers to an operator. Speaking of phone trees, I've got a PBX question. My school's phone tree (new, so I haven't had a chance to find out specs) prompts first "If you know your extension...", but certain extensions for some reason require an operator intermediary. Is there any way around this? The operator has rather minimal hours and we'll end up in a room with a perfectly good phone but no way to receive calls. Jeff Vinocur chip76@ix.netcom.com http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/3768/ ------------------------------ From: miind@hotmail.cam (Sebastien Kingsley) Subject: 10XXX/101XXX Codes In Canada? Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 08:04:02 GMT Organization: Xenon Technologies Group Ok, first of all, I KNOW what a PIC (primary interstate carrier) code is (10xxx/101xxx), and what they are used for, but my question is, how are they used in Canada? The reason I ask this is because it was my understanding that they WEREN'T used in Canada. But, I recently obtained a document from Industry Canada, that contains PIC codes for many Canadian RBOCs and other long distance carriers. Here are a few of them: BC Tel - 10323 Bell Canada - 10363 Fonorola - 10507 London Telecom - 10960 Likewise, it was my understanding that the use of the special 950 exchange WASN'T used in Canada. However, this same document lists 950-xxxx dialups for Canadian companies too!?! Here are a few of them: BC Tel - 950-5226 BC Tel - 950-5322 Fonorola - 950-5507 Canadian Tire - 950-5303 Vancouver TE - 950-5826 Could someone PLEASE enlighten me on this subject? If they aren't used here, then why do Canadian companies have them assigned to them? And if they ARE used here, are they used in the same manner as in the USA? Here in BC Tel country, dialing 10xxx will result in an intercept message. Dialing a 950 dialup results in a similar fashion. People at the telco tell me that they aren't used, but they cannot explain why BC Tel are assigned a 10xxx code, and a 950 dialup. TIA for any help on this puzzling subject. ------------------------------ From: samiller@BIX.com (Scott A. Miller) Subject: Re: MCI Cuts Off 2/3 of ISP's Phone Lines Date: 12 Nov 1997 14:07:34 GMT Organization: Galahad On Sat, 1 Nov 1997 10:58:32 -0600 sewilco of TELECOM Digest wrote this re MCI Cuts Off 2/3 of ISP's Phone Lines: > At 7 p.m. Wednesday, MCI told US Internet that it could not handle > the volume and duration of Internet connections made by US Internet's > customers Does US Internet have the legal resources to test the "circumstances beyond control" contract boilerplate that MCI is undoubtedly using as a legal band-aid? Scott A. Miller samiller@bix.com samiller@bellatlantic.net ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (Danny Burstein) Subject: Confidential? 800 Numbers? was: Re: More on Mass Fiber Sabotage Date: 13 Nov 1997 01:49:46 -0500 Organization: mostly unorganized In The Old Bear writes: [lots of good stuff about apparent vandalism disrupting telco, cable tv, and other services in Boston area] [snip] > The two companies, whose cables share a fiber optic conduit, > offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and > conviction of the vandals. [snip] > The companies have set up a toll-free, confidential hot line > (800-298-9790, ext. 8120) for tips about the vandalism. State and ^^^ > local police from several communities are investigating. Confidential, (secret) and 1-800 do _not_ go hand in hand. danny 'then again, this is a telco we're talking about' burstein dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: Telecom@LincMad.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Updated Guide to North American Area Codes Wanted Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 23:27:28 -0800 Organization: LincMad Consulting; change NOSPAM to COM In article , Kevin Mocklin wrote: > First, I'd like to say thank you for the Digest and associated Web > pages, they are a great resource! > I am not currently a subscriber to the list, but a few years back I > followed for a while, and obtained a nice text list of area codes > which also included a breakdown for each area code similiar to the > following: > 314 Saint Louis and Columbia, (Eastern) Missouri > The file also had a bunch of other general information in it. I don't have a shell script to do this, but I have a couple of static area code lists on my web pages. < http://www.lincmad.com/cities.html > lists the area codes by state and then by number, with a detailed list of cities and towns in each code, including many upcoming splits. It includes the entire NANP. < http://www.lincmad.com/cityjump.html > is the same list, but has the added feature that you can add an area code or two-letter state/province abbreviation and jump to that area; e.g., "cityjump.html#415" or "cityjump.html#CA" I am currently testing this page, since I am a little bit concerned that some browsers may choke loading a page with over 300 "anchor points" in it. If you test out this page, please let me know if it works for you or if you have any problems. I ultimately plan to replace "cities.html" with this list, if everything works smoothly. < http://www.lincmad.com/locator.html > is a streamlined list ordered numerically by area code. It gives the state and a couple of major cities for each area code. Of course, you can then flip back to the other pages if you need a more detailed listing. ** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@LincMad-com URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must change "NOSPAM" to "com" << ------------------------------ From: robineh@ibm.net (Robin E. Haberman) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 97 21:03:06 Reply-To: robineh@ibm.net Subject: Books on Intelligent Networks The following is a list of books on Intelligent Networks, protocols, signaling and their evolution. Engineering Networks for Synchronization, CCS 7 and ISDN: Standards, Protocols, Planning, and Testing, by P.K. Bhatnagar, IEEE Telecommunications handbook Series, 488 pages, 1997, ISBN 0-7803-1158-2, $79.00 http://www.ieee.org/ Intelligent Network, by Jan Thorner, Artech House, July 1994, 200 pages, ISBN 0-89006-706-6, $40.00, Ph: 1-800-225-9977 (for orders) Intelligent Network, by Thomas Magedanz & Rudu Popescu-Zeletin, Internationl Thomson Computer Pree , 1996, 222 pages, ISBN 1-85032-293-7, $29.95 http://www.thomson.com./itcp.html Signaling in Telecommunication Network, by John G. Van Bosse, Wiley Series in Telecommunications & Signal Processing, $74.95 (ordering information unk) Signaling System 7, Travis Russell, McGraw Hill, 1995, 470 pages, ISBN 0070549915, $65.00 Telecommunications Protocols, by Trvis Russell, McGraw Hill, page 409, 1997, ISBN 0-07-057695-5, $ 44.95 http://wwwcomputing.mcgraw-hill.com The New Telecommunications, a political economy of network evolution. By Mansell, Robin. Sage Publications, London - Thousand Oaks - New Delhi, pages 260. 1993 from the table of contents page of New Telecommunications: Acknowledgements viii Introduction ix 1 The Biased Structuring of Telecommunication Networks 1 2 The Intelligent Network - Changing Technologies and Institutions 15 3 Early Network Transformations - the US Experience 46 4 Latecomers or Innovators? The European Policy Challenge 69 5 The Intelligent Network in the United Kingdom 110 6 The Intelligent Network in France 125 7 The Intelligent Network in Germany 136 8 The Intelligent Network in Sweden 148 9 Collaborating with Rivals in Telecommunication 159 10 Intelligence for Flexibility for Whom? 192 11 Challenges for Policy and Regulation 215 Glossary 233 Bibliography 239 Index 254 Ph: 1-805-499-9774 (for orders), http://www.sagepub.com Robin E. Haberman ------------------------------ From: jdfraser@nbtel.nb.ca (David Fraser) Subject: Re: New Brunswick, Canada Toll-Free Directories on Web Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 13:58:18 GMT Organization: NBTel Internet On Sat, 8 Nov 1997 15:13:18 EST, Nigel Allen wrote: > The New Brunswick Telephone Company recently announced that it will be > providing its own free directory database at > http://www.nbtel.nb.ca/powerpages As project manager for PowerPages, I had thought of posting an announcement about this to various newsgroups, but didn't want to seem to be *advertising*. However, now that someone else has mentioned it, I can chime in...:-) > The NBTel service appears to be more current than the Canada411 service. Yes it is. PowerPages is updated twice daily from our customer information system. We would have liked to do it more often, but that would taken some major reworking in said cust info sys. As well as white pages listings for residence and business, it has the blue pages listings for the provincial government (federal coming real soon now) and reverse directory. Extra listings that customers put in the phone book are also in PowerPages (e.g. fax, e-mail, web, etc.). Regards, Dave Fraser (jdfraser@nbtel.nb.ca) ------------------------------ From: mcharry@erols.com (John McHarry) Subject: Re: Modem Users, Who You Gonna Call?; Not Bell Atlantic Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 03:52:25 GMT Organization: Erol's Internet Services On Sun, 9 Nov 1997 21:38:38 EST, Eric William Burger wrote: > Especially in residential suburbs, Bell Atlantic is heavily relying on > SLC96's (compression). That's not good for modems, but ok for voice. > BA's not likely to "fix" a signficant cost reduction for themselves. This is not correct. Some SLC96s concentrate, that is they have fewer DS0s to the CO than they have lines subtending. The lines contend for the available bandwidth (DS0s). Others simply digitize the lines onto DS0s. (Both handle signalling, ringing, test, and other functions as well.) Compression would be to encode the signal to less than a DS0. It may be that there is a compression option on the SLC5, SLC96's successor, but I am not aware of it, and doubt that it would make economic sense in the US. I am not too familiar with the codecs used in SLC96, but I have never heard that they are any better or worse than those on CO line cards. It does use robbed bit signaling, but that is probably de minimus. There are, however, two ways a SLC96, or other digital loop gain device could degrade modem signals. The first, and probably the worse, is if an integrated SLC does not have its remote terminal properly configured to clock off the T1s. This will cause a lot of slips, and these are well known to trash data. The second is if the SLC is run in the 'universal" congfiguration. This adds another digital to analog conversion to the system and introduces some additional degradation. I hope this helps, but telco residential service folk would likely not understand a word of it. ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Modem Users, Who You Gonna Call?; Not Bell Atlantic Date: 12 Nov 1997 16:51:03 -0500 Organization: Panix Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com In article , Eric William Burger wrote: > Forwarded message from Robert J. Perillo: >> Actually, the problem isn't ... This decision is seen as a marketing >> move to stimulate demand for ISDN lines, and assymetrical digital >> subscriber line service (ADSL) when it becomes available next year. >> It's really ... the limitations of Bell Atlantic's voice-grade >> circuits, he said. Standard voice lines operate at 300 to 3,000 hertz, >> but a 28.8 modem requires a range of 465 to 3,520 hertz, he said." > Especially in residential suburbs, Bell Atlantic is heavily relying on > SLC96's (compression). That's not good for modems, but ok for voice. > BA's not likely to "fix" a signficant cost reduction for themselves. Wrong. The SLC96 does not, as usually installed, "compress". The specific problem with many of the SLC96, SLC Series 5, and similar systems which Bell Atlantic inherited from NYNEX is that they were wired back-to-back instead of integrated. This leads to unnecessary digital-analog-digital conversions and is responsible for the high-frequency roll-off and distortion which limits modem performance through such units. This is basically just NYNEX idiocy which Bell Atlantic is trying to sleaze its way out of instead of actually tackling the underlying technical problem. Considering that there are NYNEX central offices whose main frames haven't been cleaned in at least 20 years, this is not surprising. Wiring SLC -- particularly larger units like the Series 5 -- back-to-back instead of integrated creates a huge cable mess and typically a *very* nasty splice, requires two units instead of one, which obviously costs twice as much, presents at least twice the possiblity for human error (and these are NYNEX installers we're talking about here -- likely the worst in the industry) and causes the performance problem for modems that we're discussing. It's been standard NYNEX engineering practice for years. Somehow, this fails to surprise me ... Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?" ------------------------------ From: czguris@interport.net (Christopher Zguris) Subject: Re: Modem Users, Who You Gonna Call?; Not Bell Atlantic Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 18:01:20 GMT Reply-To: czguris@interport.net Tom wrote: > Here's a part that you might have missed ... One of my customers uses > a fax and modem on a pots line. The cable in the area is really old > and most pairs are suspect. He was complaining of modem drop outs. > I have a pretty keen ear for noisy lines, surprisingly :-) better than > most NYNEX repairmen, but knowing I needed better info than "just > sounds bad", I carry a "Side Kick" meter with me; it shows line > problems like leakage, cross, grounds, and noisy splices. > Well, as you can already guess, the NYNEX guy was less than impressed, > said that the line "sounded OK", and that he had never seen a meter > that could "Show Noise", but he changed the pair anyway -- to a WORSE > pair, and left. > A long argument insued with management, and finally they sent over a > repairman who found a good pair, and ended the story. I remember reading - in this digest, I believe - that the phone co. is _required_ to give you a line up to the spec in the tarriff. If a line is so bad that won't run fax, the line can't be up to spec. So, if a repairman simply says "it sounds good to me" can't you call them on the line _not_ being up to tarriff regardless? Christopher Zguris, czguris@interport.net http://www.users.interport.net/~czguris ------------------------------ From: Rich Courtney Subject: Re: CallerID Info Needed Date: 11 Nov 1997 15:35:47 GMT Organization: Norand Corporation Steve Pershing wrote in article ... > I am looking for information on what can be transmitted in the callerID > data burst, which is sent by the telephone switch between the first and > second rings. Just about any ASCII text! > The purpose is so that modem software can be programmed to act on the > incoming data to answer the phone in different ways, depending on the > data. Is the data to be generated by your own "switch"? Otherwise look at the originating number sent. IE: Only answer from list of employees only. > I know that there are bits indicating: "privacy, long-distance, > message-waiting", etc, but I am looking for a more-or-less complete list > of available data. Can you write computer code in C? I have a program that will generate data. > If anyone has this info or ideas where to find it, please drop me a > note. Check the Mitel Semiconductor web site. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Nov 1997 02:03:32 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: InTRA-LATA Carrier Verification Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg, N.Y. >> At one point, Worldcom told us to dial 700-4141 (we're in area code >> 610) to verify our inTRA-LATA toll PIC assignment. I did; it works >> just like (700) 555-4141. I tried it here in upstate N.Y. and got a recording from my inter-LATA IXC. But they're not my intra-LATA toll carrier. My intra-LATA IXC is New Yo, er, Nyn, er, Bell whoever they are, who happen to have decent rates for intra-LATA toll with one of their calling plans. 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 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #313 ******************************