
From telecom-request@delta.eecs.nwu.edu  Wed Oct 18 12:55:05 1995
by
1995
12:55:05 -0400
telecomlist-outbound; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 08:36:44 -0500
1995
08:36:42 -0500
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 18 Oct 95 08:30:00 CDT    Volume 15 : Issue 440

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What to Call the Three Parts of AT&T? (David Breneman)
    Re: Power And The Internet Domain (Tom Coradeschi)
    Re: Caller ID During Call Waiting? (Jeffrey Rhodes)
    Re: 28800 Works Fine on Second Line; But Not First (Wayne Huffman)
    Re: Legal Slamming (Jim Cantrell)
    Re: Legal Slamming (dharper521@aol.com)
    Re: How to Make Dial-Up Stay Up as Long as Possible (Thomas Lapp)
    Re: European Numbering Plans and Telecom Policy (Yves Blondeel)
    Re: European Numbering Plans and Telecom Policy (Juha Veijalainen)
    Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives (Jan Mandel)
    Re: Information Wanted For AIN on Cellular Phone (Ken Hester)
    Re: Information Wanted on Harris Dracon TS21 Butt Set (Chris Boone)
    Employment: Telecom Consultant in Denver, CO Area (wbcthree@aol.com)

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@eecs.nwu.edu *

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:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: 500-677-1616
                        Fax: 708-329-0572
  ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

************************************************************************
*
*   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, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft
     to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in 
     the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily
     represent the views of Microsoft. 
     ------------------------------------------------------------

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.

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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------



In article <telecom15.434.8@eecs.nwu.edu> Tony Harminc 
<EL406045@BROWNVM.
BROWN.EDU> writes:

> Ed Ellers <edellers@delphi.com> wrote:

>> I'm tempted to suggest "Western Telecom" or just "WEC," given that
>> Western's two offshoots -- Northern Electric and Nippon Electric --
>> are, of course, now called Northern Telecom and NEC.  (Actually,
>> Western was often referred to as "WECo" within the Bell System.)

> Northern Electric was hardly an "offshoot" of Western Electric.  Yes,
> for many years Northern built sets and CO equipment under licence from
> WE, but they also had a thriving business making the likes of radios,
> power cable, and even refrigerators!

Deletions...

NEC started life as Nippon Columbia, the Japanese division of the
Columbia Graphophone Company, later known in the US as Columbia
Records, now apparently known as Sony Records.  Since the Columbia
trademark is now owned by two competing companies in Japan, I'd
assume that NEC has the rights to it in their domestic market, but
that's only a guess.


David Breneman
Unix System Administrator     Mail: david.breneman@attws.com
IS - Operations                      (Formerly: ~@mccaw.com)
AT&T Wireless Services, Inc.          Phone: +1-206-803-7362

------------------------------



murphy@rtcent.com (Sean Murphy - RTC Enterprises) writes:

> Forwarded to the Digest FYI. 

> "Power and the Internet Domain"  by Jesse Hirsh

> This story is almost too easy to believe.

> Turns out (no surprise really) that the Internet domain registration
> monopoly (internic.net) is indeed owned by the military-industrial-
> biological complex. For once it's as if the double-speak vanishes and
> the truth is as open as a web page.

So what else is new? The "old" registry was at nic.ddn.mil. Or have you
forgotten that (assuming you ever knew it)?

> Now Internet domain registration will begin to be priced according to
> user-fees starting at $50 annually. One source, one collecter of fees.
> One databank with all Internet registration ...

Nyet. Internet != Internic registrations. Assuming that this is so is
incorrect. It's not even all US registrations (although it is the
majority of them).

> Scientific Applications International Corp.

> - Military Technology: "Our contribution to the U.S. Navy/Defense 
Nuclear
> Agency Electro-Thermal Chemical Gun illustrates this new focus."

> WAIT A MINUTE, READ THAT SENTENCE AGAIN...

> - Military Technology: "Our contribution to the U.S. Navy/Defense 
Nuclear
> Agency Electro-Thermal Chemical Gun illustrates this new focus."

> CAN SOMEONE PLEASE DECIPHER THIS?

It says that they're working on a US Navy/DNA ETC Gun program. What's so
difficult to understand about that?

> These guys are some bad dudes.

Then I must be too (see Org line in my header).

> SAIC with the purchase of NSI, which owns Internic.net, now controls
> all Internet domain registration. A monopoly that now wants to charge
> $50 annually for every domain name. Turn the funnels of money on.

Again. This is patently incorrect.

> For those who don't know internic.net is the "central" (catch that 
one),
> registration point for the Internet.

Incorrect.

> registration point for the Internet. Operated in conjunction with 
AT&T,
> internic.net is the biggest reference source on the net. Every time 
you
> send an email with an address like "lglobal.com", that name is 
referenced
> to internic.net and converted to an I.P. address such as 210.50.120.2
> which denotes network topography.

Incorrect. Don't understand how the DNS works, do you?

> So again the military controls the maps and the bureacracy.

Well, we did invent it. Or have you forgotten that?

> You've got to go see their board of directors page. It's incredible.

Who cares? The operation of the InterNIC is done, as are many US
Government activities, via a contract. NSI has that contract now. You
are free to form a company and bid it the next time it's up for
renewal (just keep checking the Commerce Business Daily for the RFP
announcement).

In summation, I'd like to offer the following: get a grip. The issue
of $50/domain as a registration fee is one thing (good or bad, I'm not
quite sure yet). This whole idea of "the military is taking over the
internet" is a crock.


   tom coradeschi <+> tcora@pica.army.mil
 http://k-whiner.pica.army.mil/tom/tom.html

------------------------------



IS-54 Rev B provides "Flash With Info" message on the voice channel
blank and burst, so TDMA cell phones can receive Calling Number ID at
the same time as the call waiting tone is heard.

While posting refers to landline Caller ID, isn't it nice to know that
every TDMA cellular phone in this country is all ready for call
waiting CNI and is only requiring the carrier to implement ISUP and
any CNI for this service?

Of course, each TDMA manufacturer enhances the CNI feature differently. 
My TDMA cell phone only shows the number, I can't redial it. TDMA cell
phones made within the last year or so have the ability to transfer
received CNI numbers to the 99 alpha memory for speed calling. When
you have the number in the internal alpha memory, the next call from
that number displays the alpha name!


Jeffrey Rhodes at jcr@creator.nwest.mccaw.com

------------------------------



I live in a high-rise apartment building - Bell Atlantic just installed 
a 
second line (No. VA - Wash. DC area) Runs at 28800 every time. I made 
sure 
I had a clean pair to the main distribution frame in the basement. The 
installer was very helpful (7 1/2hrs late though!) It helped that I am a 
retired AT&T Tech. At my old residence (a NEW condo), I had such bad 
crosstalk that both the voice and data lines were unusable 
sinultaneously. 
This turned out to be due to cheap non-twisted pair wire run by the 
builder. There was no way to run new wire from the NI to my unit, so I 
had 
the data line disconnected. _Use good wire_!! It is well worth the small 
additional cost (like the paint cost in a paint job, the wire is the 
cheap 
part of the job, but the most difficult to redo once the walls go up!) 
Those little twists make all the difference.


Wayne Huffman

------------------------------



The practice of sending checks, endorsement of which authorizes the 
payee to
be your long distance carrier, is a common practice these days.  
However, $3
seems a bit chintzy when you consider that changing carriers often 
incurs a
$5 fee from the local office.  Personally, I got $75 from The Big 
Carrier
and cashed it.

The long distance market is extremely competitive these days and may 
well
become more so since the FCC deregulated AT&T's rate making.  If anyone 
out
there has rates that are not in the teens or lower, you haven't been 
shopping.

There are three broad technical categories of long distance carrier 
today.
The top of the heap is occupied by those with an extensive network: 
AT&T,
MCI, Sprint, and, since their acquisition of Wil-Tel, LDDS.  These guys 
can
pretty much carry your traffic over their own hardware from local 
exchange
to local exchange in the US. Pricing depends on volume.  Big volume, big
discounts.  The home user gets modest discounts, business users get
discounts according to volume but also get the benefit of having a 
carrier
with name recognition.  Name recognition can be a critical factor when 
the
boss wants to know why the 800 number isn't working.

The next rung from the top is relatively new and belongs to those 
carriers
who have networks that are less extensive.  They may have local or 
regional
services and point to point between major cities, but rely on the major
networks to carry much of their traffic.  They have major investments in
facilities and hardware and are aggressively building a  business 
customer
base.  Many are poised to take advantage of local exchange competition 
and
grab market from the baby Bells.  Some may offer home service and  some
businesses, where the service purchaser feels secure enough to flirt 
with
the bleeding edge,  may be able to work out a very good deal from these
guys -- some are very hungry for market share.

The third technical category is occupied by those with little or no
hardware or network.  As a minimum, they must have at least one
employee who serves as general manager, sales, customer service, and
provisioning liaison.  The two subcategories within this group are
aggregators and resellers.  With an aggregator, you become a
subaccount of their account with one of the major carriers and get the
benefit of the larger discount available on their large volume and in
exchange, you send them a portion as payment.  In general, you have
been solicited by an aggregator when someone calls and tells you that
you are now eligible for additional discounts from AT&T.  Some of
these people have sleazy marketing practices -- identifying themselves
as a representative of AT&T is common, sending a request directly to
accounts payable for copies of the last AT&T invoice in order to
insure the company received all the discounts it was eligible for is
the sleaziest I've run across (possesion of the invoice will convince
the local telco to slam you).

Resellers do exactly that.  They profit on the price difference
between purchase and sale, much like the department store buying
wholesale and selling retail.  You can usually get your choice of
major carrier at a reasonable price.  The big difference between
aggregator and reseller is who cuts the invoice.  Resellers get call
detail tapes from the carriers, sort the charges, and invoice you
directly.  Depending on the talent and skills of the people employed,
this can cause big headaches (I know!), but the same problems arise
with the majors ( I Know!).  Small businesses can save some money
using third tier providers, but must shop carefully.  Some may do
household phones if you have a bit of volume.

DISCLAIMER:  Entire market subject to shift, change, and reconfigure at 
any
moment.

Jim's shopping tips:
 - Beware of salespersons bearing percentages.  Get base rates pinned 
down
first.
 - Pin down the method of application of multiple discounts.
 - Buy flat rates when possible, base rates are subject to fluctuation.
 - Bargain interstate rates are great, but always check the price of
intrastate and others.
 - Never provide copies of invoices for analysis (or any other reason), 
get
their best rates and do your own math for each type of call in each
jurisdiction.
 - Get it in writing and always, always check the math, both yours and 
theirs.

------------------------------



There is good news on this front from the FCC. They recently passed a
ruling that requires the LOA (Letter of Authorization) to be seperate
from any inducements, be them in the form of monies or trips. The
verbage must be clearer as to what you are signing when you endorse
these BIG checks.

What will happen when the RBOCs are allowed in this business?

It should be fun.

------------------------------



>     I wonder if anyone has any good advices/suggestions of making a
> dial-up link stays up as long as possible?

>     The reason I asked is that, like many others, I am connected to
> the net on a permanent SLIP link, and every now and then the line gets
> reset by the telco, sometimes it can go as frequent as few times a day
> (which I suspect may also be noise anyway). The cost of redialing is
> only a small price to pay, but the interruptions it costs is the
> worst.

The whole point of dial up circuits is for TEMPORARY use.  If you want
a PERMANENT connection, then you buy what is called a leased line
circuit.  You can get them at voice grades and run your modems over
them with no trouble.  Pat, I'm surprised that you didn't comment on
this message.  Why do people think that they can just have a dial-up
line running all the time and pay less than what a leased line costs?
The whole reason dial-up rates are cheaper is because the lines are
not used ALL the time by one user, and thus the cost is distributed
over many customers.  If people start knocking up dial-up circuits all
the time, then the cost of dial circuits will go up.


tom
internet     : thomas@menno.com or 
             : lapptl@wmvx.dnet.dupont.com
Location     : Newark, DE, USA

------------------------------



                                    



Hello Bill, you asked for sources of information.

Here are a few pointers:

> 1) A description of European market telephone numbering plans, both 
current
> and planned changes

ECTRA, the European Committe for Telecommunications Regulatory Affairs
(i.e. a multilateral body containing the national telecoms regulatory
authorities of Western and Central/Eastern European countries) has a
'Project Team' which deals with numbering and has been quite active in
recent months (several relevant documents have been produced,
including reviews of the situation at the national level and proposals
for Euro-level harmonisation).

If you wish to formally obtain information and documents directly from 
the 
ECTRA 'Project Team' on numbering, I suggest you contact Mr Jukka 
Kanervisto of the European Telecommunications Office (ETO - a sub-body 
of 
CEPT/ECTRA). He is a Finnish numbering specialist and the author/editor 
of 
several recent ECTRA documents (dated 1994 and 1995). The ETO address 
is:

European Telecommunications Office
Holsteinsgade 63, 2
DK-2100 Copenhagen
Denmark
Tel +45 35 43 80 05
Fax +45 35 43 60 05

If you do not wish to take these formal steps, I could probably let you 
have copies of certain important documents (but I must first verify 
whether 
it is permitted to forward them). In any case, I suggest you specify 
more 
precisely what exactly it is you wish to know.

I have detailed regulatory numbering information on several European 
countries in Europe, with a focus on those countries which have made the 
most substantial progress in numbering reform in the context of the 
introduction of competition in the telecommunications services and 
infrastructure sectors (i.e. Finland, Sweden, UK).

Concerning the United Kingdom, I suggest you check out the Annual Report 
by 
the Numbering Scheme Manager which can be found on:
http://www.open.gov.uk/oftel/oftelwww/annrep95.htm

> 2) Any general information on European Telecom policy, status of
> deregulation etc.

Hmm. That's a *very* broad question. General advice: don't rely on 
magazine 
articles. 

Probably the best thing to do is to refer to the proceedings of the 
conference 'Implementing European Telecommunications Law' of 21-22 
November 
1994. This particular conference was organised by the European 
Commission 
(DGXIII A2). I co-authored one of the papers (somewhat outdated 
already).

Contact address:

European Commission
DGXIII A2 - secretariat of Mr Piero Ravaioli
Avenue de Beaulieu 9
B-1160 Brussels
General telephone number of the European Commission +32 2 299 11 11


Best of luck!

Yves Blondeel  <yblondee@vnet3.vub.ac.be> ..dissent is (of) the 
essence..
Keen observer of telecommunications regulation throughout Europe
Research Park, Kranenberg 6, B-1731 Zellik, Belgium 
Tel +32 2 463 18 89  Fax +32 2 463 17 06

------------------------------



wciminelli@aol.com (WCiminelli) wrote:

> 1) A description of Europen market telephone numbering plans, both 
current
> and planned changes

> 2) Any general information on European Telecom policy, status of
> deregulation etc.

You could try

    http://www.thk.fi/

the Telecommunications Administration Centre in Finland.  It has
information on the Finnish telecommunications (telephone and radio).
It is convieniently in the English language (Finnish and Swedish are 
available, too).

THK page does not give information on the European Telecom policy, 
but it does have some useful links to other pages.

In Finland long distance, international and mobile networks are open
for competition.  There are three long distance companies, four inter-
national operators and two mobile network operators.

------------------------------



Peter Corlett (corlepnd@aston.ac.uk) wrote:

> Seems that the US phone system is rather odder than I thought ...  My
> number is +44 121 373 xxxx, and a favourite BBS is +44 121 449 xxxx.
> As the BBS is local, I can dial 449 xxxx as this is a local code, or
> 0121 449 xxxx -- which is what is actually dialed. 0044 121 449
> xxxx is also a possibility, although it is a bit silly for my
> purposes.

To add to the confusion, US phone books to not list instructions how
to dial long distance or international, saying "contact your long
distance carrier", but do not say how to do THAT. What a mess.


Jan Mandel, Center for Computational Math, 
University of Colorado at Denver  jmandel@colorado.edu

------------------------------



In article <telecom15.436.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, jpaik@mobile.kmt.re.kr 
(Jeehyun
Paik) wrote:

> jpaik@mobile.kmt.re.kr wrote:

> I'm looking for AIN platforms for cellular phone.  Before starting
> project, I need some information about SSP.  I need to get some
> information about basic call model which can be adapted to cellular
> phone. Can anybody give me this information?

Check out Bellcore's home page.  There are many AIN related materials
available for order.  http://www.bellcore.com/

Also EBS in Trumbull, Conn. USA will be happy to sell you a SS7 
development 
platform for cellular.  You can reach EBS at +1 203 373 0048.

------------------------------



I'll look at my TS21 and get back to ya by Monday or call me at 
409-525-2001 and I'll pass it to ya over the phone live ...

We use a lot of those models.


Entergy telecom
Chris Boone WB5ITT          Compuserve 72732,2610
PO Box 3102                 FIDO 1:106/4267
Conroe, Texas 77305-3102    Sysop WBBS @ 409-447-4267

------------------------------



BVI Interactive, an interactive voice response marketing company, is
seeking the services of a telecom consultant in the Denver area for
site installation commencing in early 1996.

The job will entail helping BVI install PC-Based IVR systems behind
PBX's and ensuring that the two systems interface.  The consultant
will be expected to train BVI personel in the installation process,
effectively eliminating the consultant position over time.

This is part time work and will not lead to a full time opportunity.

Interested parties should respond via e-mail to WBCTHREE@aol.com.

If one has had experience in this sort of installation in the past,
please provide an estimate as to the amount of time and corresponding
cost associated with such a job.


Thank you.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #440
******************************

                                                                  
