Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA07393; Tue, 11 May 1999 23:40:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 23:40:03 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199905120340.XAA07393@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #80 TELECOM Digest Tue, 11 May 99 23:40:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 80 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Local Competition: Is it Really? (was Area Code For Wireless)(John Galt) ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types? (Brett Gallant) IVR and Q&A Database (Jeff Marrow) UCLA Summer Short Course on Turbo Codes (Bill Goodin) Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible? (mtr001deja@my-dejanews.com) Re: Siemens 2420 (support@sellcom.com) Re: Public Utility or Free Market? (Bill Newkirk) Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged (Linc Madison) Seeking Historical Date (Valda Fernald) New Archive CD ROM? (Matthew S. Russell) Re: Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol (Thor Lancelot Simon) 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 networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * 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. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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: John David Galt Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Subject: Local Competition: Is it Really? (was Area Code For Wireless Urged) Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 02:31:46 GMT L. Winson wrote: > The question is who will pay to modify all the existing switchgear, > tamden routers, and billing centers to accomodate more flexibility > in number assignments? The newcomers obviously want the baby Bells > to do it, and the baby Bells obviously don't. I don't think they should. > Some people argue the Bells, having enjoyed monopoly protection, are > morally obligated to do so. I don't see it that way at all. While > the Bells had a monopoly, they also were tightly regulated and they > didn't get any benefits. > My feeling is, that if the newcomers think the local business is so > profitable, let them build their own exchanges and lay their own > cable. Indeed, the newcomers argue Bell is costly, inefficient, and > technologically obsolete (using copper instead of fibre). Well, given > that, they should be glad for the opportunity to build their own > modern and efficient systems. If they want free enterprise, they have > to take the drawbacks, too. Back in the first two decades of this century, a number of other companies did exactly that. I recall a good article in this Digest (but I don't think it reached the archives somehow) about how Theodore Vail was able, through targeted regional price-cutting, to take over and shut down these operations for a few cents on the dollar, just as Standard Oil was alleged to have done (and which quite rightly led to its breakup). That, and not the legal monopoly protection the Bell companies got later, is what in my view obligates the ILECs to help their competitors get started. It's not restitution, but it's the best approximation to it that can be done now. John David Galt [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are referring to the article in the history section of the archives called: if using the web: http://telecom-digest.org/history/standard.oil.and.bell.sys if using anonymous FTP: massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/history/standard.oil.and.bell.sys if using Telecom Archives Email Information Service (tel-archives@telecom-digest.org): REPLY yourname@site GET standard.oil.and.bell.sys END It is a great article, written about three years ago by Mark Cuccia. Everyone should read it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Brett Gallant Subject: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types? Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:24:55 -0300 Organization: NBTel Internet My office is rebuilding after a recent fire. We are using a digital hybrid system for our phones (Panasonic). We'll have 30-40 telephone lines and upwards to 40 data cat five data lines. I'd like to have the building prepared for DSL service before it arrives. I plan on using the DSL connection with a proxy server such as wingate to feed internet access to a few people in the building. The host computer will be in our server room which will be approx 150-200 feet from the wiring closet. Since we are using a hybrid system I was wondering if we have to go with the expense of adding another line to bring us up to a total of 11 lines instead of 10 to service our building. Would it be possible for the telco company to use one of the 10 lines to feed my ADSL connection to the ADSL host computer? The reason I'm asking is so far I've noticed that with our existing system I only manage speeds of 28Bps with my usr 56k modem. If I take the same system out of the building or switch to a line that is not hooked up to the hybrid system I get decent connect speeds of 45-49bps. Could the Cat 3 voice cable affect this or is it an issue with the electrical current that powers the phones hooked up to this system? Thanks again for your help, Brett ------------------------------ From: Jeff Marrow Subject: IVR and Q&A Database Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:01:59 GMT Does anyone know if the Q&A database is either ODBC compatible or has an IVR plugin? Thanks, Jeff ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Summer Short Course on Turbo Codes Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 16:52:58 -0700 This summer, UCLA Extension will present the following short course on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. July 26-30, 1999, "Turbo Codes: Analysis, Design, Performance, and Implementation". The instructors are Sergio Benedetto, PhD, Professor, Polytecnico di Torino; Dariush Divsalar, PhD, Senior Member of the Technical Staff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Guido Montorsi, PhD, Postdoctoral Fellow, Polytecnico di Torino; and Fabrizio Pollara, PhD, Technical Group Supervisor, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, $1695. For additional information and a complete course description, please visit our web page, http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/, or contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: mtr001deja@my-dejanews.com Subject: Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible? Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 13:33:38 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. We have a SX-200 Superswitch which was probably installed around 1982. Is this switch T1 compatible? Mike ------------------------------ From: support@sellcom.com Subject: Re: Siemens 2420 Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 17:37:22 GMT Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com the_spectre@my-dejanews.com spake thusly and wrote: > Siemens will begin shipment of the Gigaset 2402 sometime in the near > future (probably by June). It lacks some of the features of the > Gigaset 2420 (for example, the wired handset, answering machine, > auxiliary port, speakerphone), but still supports 8 cordless handsets. > It also enables users to "bridge" calls (pick up an extension). The > Gigaset 2420 continues to be a better solution for small office or home > office users, but the 2402 is ideal for residential users. It also > will cost less. We plan to offer that unit at www.sellcom.com when it becomes available and we will try to "beat any advertised price" yada yada ... But, the price difference (in my opinion) is not that much when one considers what one is giving up. For someone thinking of buying several handsets the few dollars saved is a small percentage of the overall cost. The 2402 is very nice, but a giant step backwards from the 2420. For those who already have a sophisticated voice mail system it could be real handy and I suppose it could be located in a more ideal position for extra range since it would not need to be so accessible. I dunno, time will tell. Everything I have seen Siemens make has been excellent. Siemens is offering a rebate on the 2420 with one extra handset combo of a free headset. If you get a 2420 and two combos (handset and charger) then you get the headset and a $50 rebate. See http://www.sellcom.com Steve http://www.sellcom.com (Opinions expressed, though generally wise and accurate are not officially positions of SELLCOM) Telecom and internet networking hardware / Security products Cyclades / Siemens (May REBATE) / Y2K ODIU support / Zoom / Palmer Safes (Tech assistance provided without warranty express or implied) ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: Public Utility or Free Market? Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 23:05:14 -0400 Organization: Posted via RemarQ Communities, Inc. Well, if you don't want the infrastructre in the town to support your wireless stuff, then you won't have the wireless stuff. On the other hand, to insure you don't have to make these decisions, everyone should give up the radio-based telephones and no one will want to build an antenna support at the cost-effective point to cover the town. We live in a technological age. artifacts of same are inevitable. Trying to be a reactionary utopian where you have all the benefit (radio telephones) without any of the costs (infrastructure to provide repeater and phone line tie-ins for all the flea powered radio telephones) is not rational. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 16:58:10 -0700 From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged Organization: LincMad Consulting In article , lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson) wrote: > The question is who will pay to modify all the existing switchgear, > tamden routers, and billing centers to accomodate more flexibility > in number assignments? The newcomers obviously want the baby Bells > to do it, and the baby Bells obviously don't. I don't think they should. > Some people argue the Bells, having enjoyed monopoly protection, are > morally obligated to do so. I don't see it that way at all. While > the Bells had a monopoly, they also were tightly regulated and they > didn't get any benefits. First of all, to say that the Bells got no benefits under the old monopoly regime is ludicrous. Secondly, don't forget that the Bells have been at the vanguard of pushing for local service competition, since that's the only way they can get into the long-distance market. More particularly, the Bells have been pushing for the cosmetic appearance of local competition, while dragging their feet on the reality of it. I agree that the new entrants in the field are pushing to get more of a free ride than they deserve. However, the Bells have to accept a large share of the costs in moving to a non-monopoly business, and that certainly includes a large share of the costs in revamping the system of allocating numbers. The Bells stand to benefit dramatically from true local competition. They also stand to benefit from slowing the pace of area code splits and overlays, since it is the ILECs that take the brunt of consumer anger over those changes. > Another problem I have with so-called "local competition" is that a > lot of companies aren't really "companies" but resellers. They want > to come in and act as a middleman and resell Bell's services. I can't > see how the customer would benefit from that -- to me it's like sleight > of hand card tricks. I agree. I think that we need to tilt the playing field much more sharply towards facilities-based competition instead of resellers. However, that doesn't change the fact that the Bells have to be a part of changing the system of allocating numbers. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... > When cable companies began getting the go-ahead to wire towns all > over the USA several years ago, look how fast they did it, and > in a usually very inconspicuous way. Within a year or two they > had even large cities like Chicago virtually wired, with cable > service available to everyone once the city council approved the > franchise. PAT] Not always true. I lived for about two years in San Jose, California, which has the distinction of being the first city in a metropolitan area to have cable television. The franchise was awarded in the late 1960's, IIRC. However, the neighborhood in which I lived, which had been around since the 1920's, was still not wired when I moved out in 1987. The cable company in Dallas, Texas, took many years to get out to the northern part of town, even though that area was much more affluent than the area of San Jose where I lived. ** 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 delete the "NOSPAM" << ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 17:34:25 -0700 From: Valda Fernald Subject: Historical Date Needed I am artifacs chairman of the Sarah A Mooney Museum in Lemoore, Ca. We have an old, maybe turn of century wall telephone. I am looking for the date telephones arrived in this community. Val Fernald [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps someone with knowlege of early telephone history in that part of California can assist Val. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 21:37:36 -0400 From: Matthew S. Russell Subject: New Archive CD Rom? Hi Pat, Around three years ago I purchased a CD of archived postings of the Digest, and I can't remember whether I got it through the distributor Walnut Creek or if I sent the money directly to you. I checked the web page but I couldn't find any info there. I'd like to get an updated CD, can you point me to the right place? Thanks, --MSR [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think I took that information out of the archives once the distributor (Walnut Creek) said that sales per pretty well over with. There were several thousand copies sold of that CD ROM. You would have ordered it directly fron Walnut Creek. I believe our good friend Mike Sandman may still have some copies of it since it was listed in his last catalog. Contact mailto:mike@sandman.com for details, or better still, look at his catalog on line in our archives: http://telecom-digest.org/sponsorlinks.html I would hate to undercut him and say 'do not buy the Telecom Archives CD' however the fact remains it is now about three plus years out of date, :( Visit him anyway and get his catalog; it is rather incredible, and if anyone wants the CD from 1995-96 feel free to get it from him. I would *love* to issue a new, updated version of the CD, probably sometime next year under the name 'Twenty Years of TELECOM Digest' The problem is, Walnut Creek will not do it. They say they did not make any profit on the first one, and furthermore, 'everyone now expects everything on the net to be free'. While I agree that things on the net should generally be free -- I have benefitted greatly from freeware and free information -- I believe it is okay to charge for the cost of reproduction, the media, etc. Walnut Creek understandably is not a charity operation; they told me they have virtually quit making 'archived collections' of things on the net available because so many people will sit for hours downloading it for free rather than spend a few dollars for a professionally prepared archive. I on the other hand would probably be inclined to make it available free to persons who otherwise donated some minimum amount to the Digest. Furthermore, I do not have a recording device to make CDs. I would have to buy one (unless someone wants to loan one for an indefinite period of time) and if it gets to that point, I will hand-produce them on a demand basis. I would obviously prefer that some person or company professionally equipped to do this be the ones to handle it. So right now the answer to your question is there is no updated version. What few copies of the 1995-96 edition remain are probably available through Mike Sandman. Anyone with a better idea is welcome to speak up. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol Date: 11 May 1999 00:00:26 -0400 Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp. Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com In article , wrote: > Can anybody help me? Where in I-net I can find specification of wink > robbed-bit T1 signalling protocol? Go to the bookstore. Buy _Telecommunication System Engineering_ by Freeman. What you need is in there. And so is damned near everything else ... Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?" ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #80 *****************************