
From telecom-request@delta.eecs.nwu.edu  Wed Oct  4 14:00:45 1995
by
1995
14:00:45 -0400
telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 19:36:24 -0500
1995
19:36:21 -0500
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 Oct 95 19:36:00 CDT    Volume 15 : Issue 416

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Forbidden? Exchange Prefixes? (bkron@netcom.com)
    Re: Forbidden? Exchange Prefixes? (Stan Schwartz)
    Re: Forbidden? Exchange Prefixes? (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Forbidden? Exchange Prefixes? (Arthur L. Shapiro)
    Re: Forbidden? Exchange Prefixes? (Rich Osman)
    Re: Forbidden? Exchange Prefixes? (Robert Casey)
    Re: Forbidden? Exchange Prefixes? (David Breneman)
    Re: Cell One/NY Fraud Control Problems, More (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Cell One/NY Fraud Control Problems, More (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Variable Length Phone Numbers (Thomas Villinger)
    Re: Variable Length Phone Numbers (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Variable Length Phone Numbers (John David Galt)
    Re: Variable Length Phone Numbers (Boyce G. Williams, Jr.)
    Re: Eliminate Dialing Weirdnesses - We Can Save Lives (Al Varney)

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.

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



awluck@interramp.com (Andrew Luck) writes:

> Now I am back in the south (Atlanta GA area code 770) and really would
> like to get [my 666-XXX number] back.
> How about 777    (three's a charm?)
> Or 888   (Dead man's Hand ?)

666 and 777 are unassigned in the Atlanta area, but 888 is on a 1AESS.

> And is 666 available in area code 1-500 ?

Yes, and it is assigned to "Nationwide Wireless."

The following NPA's have an active 666 prefic within them:

201  217  405  516  617  817
202  218  406  540  703  818
203  302  410  603  713  900
207  303  415  605  714  903
208  305  419  606  800  904
210  312  500  608  803  913
212  318  501  610  804  914
213  334  503  614  810  916
214  360  505  615  813  918
216  402  513  616  816  941

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



awluck@interramp.com (Andrew Luck) wrote:

> Beyond conflicts with area coding, which appears to be on the way out,
> are there certain numbers that simply aren't going to be used either
> nationally or in certain localities?

> How about 777    (three's a charm?)
> Or 888   (Dead man's Hand ?)

In the 516 NPA in New York, 666, 777, and 888 are in the normal
exchange "pool".  In 516 as well as many other areas of the country,
a service called "MovieFone" (Phone?) uses 777-3456 (FILM).  888 has
TicketMaster in it (888-9000).

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wait until they set up area code 666 in
> some part of the country.  '666' is a number presumed by people of 
some
> religions to be 'very bad'.

A few years ago, New York radio show host Howard Stern discussed a
frustrating weekend going house hunting with his friend Andrew
(formerly Dice) Clay.  According to Stern, they had found the perfect
house on the water in Bay Shore (Long Island).  Dice was all set to
buy the house until he found out that the current phone number was in
the 666 exchange.  Go figure.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you that Howard Stern has
problems that go a lot deeper that whatever phone exchange he uses.
For the second time in as many years, his radio show was dropped here
in the Chicago market this past week. Citing the generally crude and
lewd broadcasts for which he is famous -- or infamous -- the station
bought off his contract and took him off the air at the end of last
week. Would you believe WJJD (another station here at 1160 AM) agreed 
to take him. I guess they hope someone will start listening to their
very low-ranked station now that they have Stern to insult and abuse
people over the air at their location.    PAT]

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



awluck@interramp.com (Andrew Luck) wrote:

> Beyond conflicts with area coding, which appears to be on the way out,
> are there certain numbers that simply aren't going to be used either
> nationally or in certain localities?

Certain NXXs are never going to be assigned for use with AMPS cellular
phone service.  This is because the truly bizarre design of AMPS
allows the routine transmission of certain prefixes (as would be
common in a metro area) to be confused with the framing bits in the
paging channel data stream.  Strange but true!  I have a list of these
'forbidden' prefixes at home and can post them if there's any interest.  
Many of them are ineligible on other grounds (e.g. starting with 1 or
0).


Tony Harminc

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



I didn't spot this one in the various replies; apologies if it's a
dup.  My sister's residence, in the little village of Manhattan NYC,
is (212) 666-xxxx.  I'd say it's a source of pride with her.


Arthur L. Shapiro        Arthur@mpa15c.mv-oc.unisys.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As Howard Stern would say, is your sister
a devil worshipper? <grin> ...  PAT]

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



> that in this part of the country there are "rules" against using
> certain numbers, such as 666.

Umm, is this the "Central Office of the Beast?"

Sorry, I couldn't resist.  I'm going to my room now sir.


Oz@SwRI.edu    (Rich Osman)  SwRI didn't say it, I did.
(210) 522-5050 (w)      (210) 699-1302 (h;v/msg/fax)

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

guest)


In article <telecom15.408.3@eecs.nwu.edu> jfh@acm.org (Jack Hamilton) 
writes:

> The TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: 

>> In the past here in the Digest, we have had articles about places in 
the
>> USA and Canada where 666 is used, as in AC-666-xxxx. In a few cases, 
which
>> should make everyone feel good, it turned out to be some federal 
government
>> agency. I think in one case it was the Internal Revenue Service. Here 
in
>> Chicago, 312-MONroe has been around simply forever. It is one of the 
oldest
>> exchanges in the city, and a phone district is named for it.   PAT]

> In San Francisco, the 666 prefix belongs to the University of San
> Francisco, a Catholic college (Jesuit, I think).  No doubt some
> heathen at Pacific Bell assigned it to them; I'd be surprised if they
> requested it, but who knows?  Maybe they wanted to prove some point.

Here in Northern New Jersey (201), there's a 666 exchange.  It's just
a random assignment, mostly in Westwood, NJ.  It feeds the usual mix
of homes and small businesses, nothing special about it here.

I would like to see area code 666 be assigned somewhere in the 
Bible Belt.   :-)  :-) 


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Either that, or possibly in Hell, 
Michigan.
Hell, a small village of a couple thousand people is located about 20
miles northeast of Ann Arbor. Coming down from Luddington to Ann Arbor
several years ago, we went through Hell on the way to the University of
Michigan campus. At that time, the major highway there was undergoing
repairs and was down to one lane in each direction with cars diverted
over onto the shoulder of the road in a sort of make-shift lane they
had setup for the southbound traffic. Far from having a nice paved road
with an easy ride to Hell, the traffic jam was horrendous that day.

The little village used to be famous for its branch of the US Weather
Bureau located there, and its reports each winter when the bitterness
of January in Michigan would cause a report to be issued saying that
"Hell Froze Over". A lot of people who had promised to only do one
thing or another when that condition occurred suddenly found themselves
obliged to honor their commitment. Otherwise, the sole industry in 
this farm community with a large state forest at its southern end
seems to be a tourist shop and restaurant. The tourist shop has such
novel items as T-shirts on sale with the inscription "I've Been Through
Hell"; coffee mugs with the same inscription; and maps of the State of
Michigan with the highways outlined which point to their town and
the notation "When you tell someone to go to Hell it would be a good 
idea
to have a map showing them how to get there."

This is not a recent creation; the village has been there for over a
century. Drive north on interstate 75 out of Ann Arbor to the junction
of State Highway 36, then go west about ten miles and there it is. Phone
service is either from the Pinckney or Dexter, Michigan phone exchanges,
depending on where in Hell you are calling from. I say let's assign them
666-666 as their own area code and prefix.   PAT]

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



In article <telecom15.408.3@eecs.nwu.edu> jfh@acm.org (Jack Hamilton) 
writes:

> The TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: 

>> In the past here in the Digest, we have had articles about places in 
the
>> USA and Canada where 666 is used, as in AC-666-xxxx. In a few cases, 
which
>> should make everyone feel good, it turned out to be some federal 
government
>> agency. I think in one case it was the Internal Revenue Service. Here 
in
>> Chicago, 312-MONroe has been around simply forever. It is one of the 
oldest
>> exchanges in the city, and a phone district is named for it.   PAT]

> In San Francisco, the 666 prefix belongs to the University of San
> Francisco, a Catholic college (Jesuit, I think).  No doubt some
> heathen at Pacific Bell assigned it to them; I'd be surprised if they
> requested it, but who knows?  Maybe they wanted to prove some point.

I know this is probably taking this conversation way far afield, but
are there really many mainstream Christians who believe in this 666
stuff?  My impression was that it fell some place between the Shroud
of Turin and "Moses was a Space Alien" in the big list of Dubious
Western Religion Legends.  It originated with a mistranslation from a
bible four or five generations back from the King James version (which
is a translation of a translation of a translation, etc.).

Typical disclaimers (I am not my employer's Biblical Scholar)...


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You mean AT&T did *not* hire you to
read and interpret the scriptures?  <grin> ... yes, there are some
religions who have strong feelings about 666 and who accept without
reservation the Book of Revelations.  

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



Jeffrey Rhodes (jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com) writes:

> In article 1@eecs.nwu.edu, dreuben@interpage.net (Doug Reuben) writes:

>> 2. Cell One/NY recently, and quite foolishly, commenced mandatory 1+ 
>> dialing for most calls, even in many cases for calls within their own 
>> service area.

I have subscribed to MetroOne, CellularOne, AT&T Wireless of New York
since 1986.  I have always programmed my speed-dials as 1+ ten digits,
even when the area code is my own.  This has always worked in the NYC
area, and it has always worked when roaming with no need to change
anything in the phone.  I have roamed into all of the neighboring A
systems without experiencing any difficulties with dial plan.  I have
also roamed to Washington, Baltimore, Chicago, Boston, San Francisco,
Dallas, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh without having to change any of
my 11-digit speed-dials.

Landline phones in New Jersey allow 1+ ten digits even for local
calls, and even when not required.  It made perfect sense to me to
allow the same flexibility for cellular users in this area.

Where is there a problem?


Dave Levenson  Internet: dave@westmark.com
Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: 908 647 6857

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



In comp.dcom.telecom, jcr@creator.nwest.attws.com writes:

>> 2. Cell One/NY recently, and quite foolishly, commenced mandatory 1+ 
>> dialing for most calls, even in many cases for calls within their own 
>> service area. This has been explained to me as a "requirement" since 
AT&T 
>> now owns them, but unless this "requirement" is specific to AT&T-
owned 
>> properties under the MFJ, I am not aware of any such MFJ, DOJ or 
other 
>> requirement on the Bell-owned carriers. Indeed, most of them do NOT 
>> require 1+ dialing in their markets, ever for roamers. 

> The 1+ requirement is a result of McCaw's conversion to Equal Access
> which is required by the 1994 Consent Decree between the DoJ and AT&T.
> Now that Cell One/NY has been converted to Equal Access, 60% of all
> McCaw/Cellular One markets are converted, which means the company has 
the
> right to call itself AT&T Wireless (which has greater brand name 
recognition

> than McCaw Cellular).

An operational detail that CellOne had forgotten to mention, though,
is that quite a few cellphones have to be reprogrammed to dial
properly in the NY market.  For example, we always have used 1+
dialing on our A phones at work, but NONE of our A phones will store
the "1" in speed dial locations.  Any customers from other markets may


                                                                                       

also find they can't use their speed dial because their equipment may
not store the leading "1," either.  In the former case, CellOne will
pick up the tab for reprogramming.  However, in the latter case, the
roaming customers will be unable to use their built-in speed dial.
That's not a trivial matter in the event you're using an employer's
phone with restricted dial features (i.e. speed dial only), of if you
just need to dial a dozen or so numbers that you only have in memory
but don't have on paper anywhere handy.

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



martin@kurahaupo.gen.nz (Martin Kealey) wrote:

> Tony Harminc <EL406045@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU> wrote on 20 Sep 1995 in
> article <telecom15.398.1@eecs.nwu.edu>:


>>> Okay, you dial +49 or within Germany 0.
>>> Now you're on the long distance level of the German Telekom network.
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> This is the clue that he isn't necessarily refering to the physical
> transport network.  Each step represents a "level" for decoding the
> number, rather than necessarily an actual switch, although it may have
> done originally.

As example, if you call from Ulm to Neu-Ulm which are some hundred
meters apart but are located in differen states who dont get routed
via Munich and Stuttgart which would be the "normal" hierarchical
routing scheme, you do get a direct link because the exchange in Ulm
checks its database and knows to take the direct route.

>>> You dial          selects
>>> - <6>             South western Germany.
>>> - 6<2>            The Ludwigshafen/Mannheim area.
>>> - 62<1>           The cities of Ludwigshafen and Mannheim 
themselves.
>>> - 621 <5>         Ludwigshafen.
>>> - 621 5<8>        The particular part of Ludwigshafen I live in.
>>> - 621 58<70460>   That's my line. My phone is ringing!
>>>                   (Actually, the final 0 helps selecting a 
particular
>>>                   device on my ISDN line.)

>>> Easy, isn't it?

>> Easy yes -- but a disaster for planning and orderly growth.  This 
sort
>> of design ensures that Germany will not have portable numbers for a
>> long time.

> Whilst this may make portable numbers a little more difficult, they
> are by no means impossible.

Why should it be impossible to get portable numbers? I don't see any
difference to the problems as they occur in a fixed numbering scheme.
We already do have "portable" numbers (think of all the mobile phones
which are in fact portable numbers) and guess what i works :). Note
that we do have a hierarchical numbering system but still work with
databases, so it might be possible that a certain group of numbers get
collected in an exchange aand are routed after the last digit which
contains the necessary information is collected.


Thom

Dive Safely!
Thomas Villinger, Munich, Germany
root@remora.muc.de or villing@muc.de

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



Martin Kealey said:

> Quite true; the point I'm trying to get at is that compelled
> signalling doesn't necessarily mean opening a voice-grade path all the
> way to the far end, so while it's not entirely without cost, that cost
> is pretty insignificant; for example, far less than the voice-grade
> path used to signal ring-back in a lot of networks.  (It is
> conceivable that there may even be a net benefit from cost reductions
> elsewhere.)

I can assure you that those cost reductions would be very slow to
realize because changing the entire network would cost huge amounts of
money.

This thread has gone on for quite some time, but I'd like to add two
points and then that's it for me:

1) The whole point of variable length numbers is moot (or at least
academic) because there are at least 660 new area codes that are
unassigned. That's more than 600 million new numbers that can be put
into service.

2) If it HAD been cheaper, faster, easier, etc. to convert to variable
length phone numbers instead of introducing the new numbering plan,
don't you think Bellcore would have done that?


Steve    cogorno@netcom.com

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



>> ... If there hadn't been the rigidity that
>> prefixes and area codes be exactly three digits, maybe this would 
have
>> been alleviated.

> They'd have had to design things quite differently in the first place;
> by the time they started to run out, there weren't 10 contiguous area
> codes to allocate any more. ...

They could not have avoided going to NXX area codes, but there are
groups of ten contiguous codes NOW that are free and could be assigned
this way.  27x and 32x for example.  That would seem to me a much
friendlier setup than an overlay.

Of course, in the place that needs it the most, Los Angeles, it is
already too late.  Greater LA already has five whole area codes to
itself and uses parts of two more -- and two of the five are now about
to split!  If they went to 2+8 numbering, their two digit code would
be full before 2000.  Maybe we should just keep the existing codes and
go to 3+8 ...

It sure sounds like the equipment is capable of any of these things.
That makes the whole question a matter of taste and/or politics, not
engineering.


John David Galt

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



Changing the subject a little, can anyone tell me where I can find a
list of the display images used with the variable-length phone numbers
used internationally?  That is: for any country code, the typical
length of the number and where the dashes go.

I have a database of country codes and the name of the country that
goes with it, but not much more.  My only "source" giving a clue about
the display is an "Airman's Guide" I found in a bookstore where a
German phone number is displayed as eleven digit "WW-XXXX-YY-ZZZ",
English as eleven digit "WW-XXX-YY-ZZZZ" and Japan as ten digit
"XX-YYYY-ZZZZ".  The first three digits is the country code, so how
does the remainding numbers appears locally in that country?  

The reason for this request is I must format the numbers on a locally
produced telephone bill I send to other departments.  It's a matter of
pride that I want to get the images right instead printing all
thirteen digits, making the image look junky, or truncate the trailing
zeros, not knowing the first+ zero is actually part of the number I
should be printing.


Thanking y'all in advance,

Boyce Williams

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



In article <telecom15.411.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, Toby Nixon <tnixon@microsoft.
com> wrote:

> In Telecom Digest V15 #405, rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin) wrote:

>>> Our telephone systems should be straightforward enough that any 
child
>>> capable of remembering their phone number can be taught how to pick 
up
>>> any phone and dial their home phone number or 911.

>> Mr. Yost goes on to suggest that "We should work toward a standard
>> that would allow a child to dial simply 1 + area code + number from
>> any phone ... and get connected to their home."

> So, why SHOULDN'T the phone network be designed so that computers can 
> be connected to the network ANYWHERE and be permitted to input a 
> fully-qualified international number (including country code) and have 
> the NETWORK figure out how to route the call, instead of the computer 
> needing to be pre-programmed to know exactly which subset of the phone 
> number needs to be dialed, along with whatever prefixes are needed?  

   This capability is available in ISDN, since the "caller" can provide
unambiguously the TYPE of NUMBER and the full number of DIGITS, along 
with
a Transit Network selection (IXC) 

> All we need to do is define some sort of single, nationwide (even 
> worldwide!), standard prefix that says "what follows is a country code 
  ^^^^^^^^^
    You mean the ITU's "00" isn't a standard?

> So what if it takes a few more digits to dial *00,12068828080 when, if 
> it was local to me, it could have been dialed as just "8828080" -- 
> those "extra" six digits only took half a second to dial, and I didn't 
> have to make two or three failed call attempts to find the right digit 
> sequence! This ought to be implementable on PBXes just as easily as on 
COs.

   The main problem here is that you want a computer interface to the
phone network, but you're using (or emulating) a human interface.  And
you left out the Carrier selection string, the call waiting
suppression code, and potentially an authorization/calling-card code,
followed by an end-of-dialing indicator.

    "*00,*72,10288,12068828080#" .... Really begs for a digital (like
ISDN) interface, doesn't it.  Then you also get real call progress
information (not just tones) and real answer indications and real call
disconnect information.

> We need to get the state public utility commissions out of the 
business 
> of dictating dialing procedures, and overcome the fiction that dialing 
> a "1" before a number means "I have to pay extra for this call". We 
> need a national consensus among LECs and PBX vendors on what this 
> prefix should be that allows a fully-qualified international phone 
> number to follow.              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    That's known as an E.164 number.

Al Varney


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As a note of conclusion to this issue,
most of our readers will receive this issue of the Digest as Yom Kippur 
is underway; a time of much significance and importance. To all our
Jewish readers may I extend my kind thoughts and best wishes on this
occassion as well as renew the thoughts expressed here one week ago
for a most joyous and happy new year 5756.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #416
******************************

                                                                   
