
From telecom-request@delta.eecs.nwu.edu  Thu Sep 14 18:33:41 1995
by
1995
18:33:41 -0400
telecomlist-outbound; Thu, 14 Sep 1995 14:05:09 -0500
1995
14:05:07 -0500
To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 14 Sep 95 14:05:00 CDT    Volume 15 : Issue 384

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Fonorola Network Plans (Dave Leibold)
    France Area Code Split - Any Details Yet? (Dave Leibold)
    Simulation of SDL-Diagrams? (Roland Welte)
    Re: Dialing 911 Instead of Police's 7D Number (Greg Abbott)
    Re: FCC Rules Against Carrier Kickbacks to ESPs (Andy Finkenstadt)
    Re: Bell Canada Calling Cards in the USA (Terry Flanagan)
    Analog Delay Line HW Needed (Matt Noah)
    Re: Cellular Telephone and Modems (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: Discouraging Small Users (Rob Schutte)
    Re: Need Advice on a Norstar PBX Upgrade (Karen Jensen)
    Cellular "Emergency" Use (Mark Earle)
    CLSI New Modems (Tyler Proctor)
    Modern Calling Cards All via 800 Numbers (Jeffrey Mattox)
    Re: Last Laugh! International Phone Ripoff Chain Letter Spam (Art 
Walker)

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.

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



[from Bell News, 4 Sept 95 - Bell Canada's version of events]

Fonorola to build tri-city network

Montreal-based Fonorola Inc., a long distance reseller, plans to get
into the carrier business.

It has just placed a $9 million order with Nortel for its OC-48 SONET
transmission equipment that will carry voice, video and data traffic
along the busy Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto loop.

Despite its ambitious growth plans, industry analysts look upon
Fonorola with a jaundiced eye. It has recorded multimillion dollars
losses since it set up shop in 1993, with the money-losing trend
still holding sway. Last year, its president left the company after
only eight months on the job.


Fidonet : Dave Leibold 1:250/730
Internet: Dave.Leibold@superctl.tor250.org

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



France is expected to modify its numbering plan to introduce a new
area code system (fall 1996 was the planned date, I recall).

The 1995 Paris phone books as available in Toronto libraries don't
seem to mention this yet. Is there a conversion table or area code
boundary map available to indicate which places will get what area
code (other than the existing Paris area, to become 01 area)?


Fidonet : Dave Leibold 1:250/730
Internet: Dave.Leibold@superctl.tor250.org

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



I am looking for PC-Software that would allow me to simulate a
protocol which has been described with SDL symbols. I am primarily
interrested in simulating SDL diagrams and not their code generation.

Any comments, pointers and help with this will be greatly appreciated.


Roland

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



wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) wrote:

> A week or two ago, an accident occured at a problem intersection near
> my parent's house in Oradell, NJ.  And a few months ago, we had 911
> installed in town.  So, I reach for the phone to report the accident.
> Times before, we'd dial 261-0200 a get our town's police quickly.
> But I dialed 911, and found that there was a delay in getting my
> report to the town police.  Appears the 911 operator has to identify
> what town I'm in, and then transfer me to my town's police.  Takes
> about 1/2 minute.  "911, what's your emergency?" me: "there's an
> accident at Oradell (ave) and Summit (ave)".  "Ah, hold on, I need to
> transfer you to the Oradell police".  Then I told the Oradell police
> "There's an accident at Oradell and Summit".  A couple minutes, the
> cops show up.

The main idea behind 9-1-1 as the nations emergency number is so
people don't have to know the local emergency numbers if they need to
call for assistance.  In this situation, had you not been from the
area and known the emergency number, you would have had to probably
call the operator who would have had to determine where you were
calling from and then transfer you to the appropriate agency.  Very
rarely will you get an operator located in the same community from
which you are calling (most often they are in another city or state)
so they normally will not have any idea what streets are where or what
have you.  This process of determining your location will add
considerable time to the response.

The 9-1-1 system you reached transfers calls to the police department
in question either because the police department does not want the
9-1-1 center to direct dispatch them, or because the 9-1-1 system does
not provide any dispatch services.  A direct dispatch 9-1-1 system
(like the one where I work) is certainly the most efficient way to go.
We strive to have every call in and out of our center within 60
seconds.  This is from the time we answer the incoming 9-1-1 call till
an emergency unit is dispatched.  Obviously, there are times when this
can not occur (excessive work load (like during storms, etc.),
shortage of emergency responders, non-emergency calls, etc.) but we
strive to achieve the 60 second mark on every call.

We in the 9-1-1 community are really our own worst enemy.  We drill
the 9-1-1 number into the heads of citizens as the only number they
need to know to get help.  Then when someone calls (like in this case)
and the response is slow or an error occurs, the 9-1-1 system failed.
The 9-1-1 number is nothing more than a telephone number with some
fancy caller ID built in.  The basic emergency response system has not
changed substantially because of 9-1-1 telephone number.  An
additional problem occurs when people call the 9-1-1 number for every
kind of assistance they need.  We get hundreds of 9-1-1 calls per day
which are for things like stopped up toilets, barking dogs, loud
music, etc.  These calls clog up the 9-1-1 lines and tie up the 9-1-1
operators.  We are to blame for this though, in most cases we do not
take the time to educate the citizens that 9-1-1 is for life
threatening emergencies *ONLY*.

> I don't know if a half minute is that important in reporting an
> accident (someone was injured) or a fire or some other emergency.
> Think I'll dial up the 7D police number when another situation occurs.

In this situation, I don't know if the 30 seconds impacted the
response substantially, but it is certainly faster than an operator
could have located the correct 7-digit number and transfered you.  I
would still recommend calling 9-1-1 because in Enhanced 9-1-1 systems
the operator will know where you are calling from (except cellular....
for now) and this information alone can substantially speed up the
emergency response.

Just my .02 worth!


                           99999     11     11
          GREG ABBOTT      9   9      1      1     INTERNET: 
GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU
       9-1-1 COORDINATOR   99999 ==   1 ==   1     COMPUSERVE: 
76046,3107
                               9      1      1     VOICE: 217/333-9889
METCAD                         9      1      1     FAX:   217/384-7003
1905 E. MAIN ST.               9     111    111    PAGER: 800/222-6651
URBANA, IL  61801                                          PIN # 9541


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something I have never been able to under-
stand in Chicago is the apparent contradiction in instructions given on
the one hand by 911 supervisors (themselves police officers) and the 
instructions given at the local police station level. On the one hand we
are told that 911 is for *emergency use only* when immediate 
intervention
by police/fire/paramedic people is required; ie. my house in on fire now
or I am having a heart attack now or someone has invaded my home and is
standing here with a gun pointed at me now. We are not to use 911 for
trivial matters. That makes good sense!  But on the other hand, when we
attempt to discuss trivial (by comparison) matters with the police at
the local district police station on their direct phone, we are told we
must call 911 to get a police officer to come out. 

Now no matter how you look at it, if you come home from work and find 
your home was burglarized while you were gone, or your car stolen 
sometime
in the past day or so, that is *not* an emergency. It is certainly an
important matter, but it is *not* a life-or-death situation which 
requires
*immediate* police intervention. Our phone books tell us to use 911 only
for emergencies. The local police stations in Chicago on the other hand
tell us to use 911 for everything.  Who is correct on this?

It is probably just more of business as usual in Chicago, since here in
our village of Skokie on the other hand, both 911 and 708-982-2800 get
the village police. The same police officers will come out after a call
to either number, but they tend to come with sirens blaring and lights
flashing on 911 calls while driving more slowly and taking a bit longer
to arrive on calls to the other number. Do you think you people who are
in charge of 911 could clarify this once and for all?  Should people in
Chicago really be calling 911 when their cat gets stuck in a tree and
they want the Fire Department to send someone with a ladder?  Maybe part
of the reason 911 takes so long to answer at times -- although in any
dire emergency, a few seconds seems like an eternity -- is because of
all the foolishness they have to deal with.    PAT]

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



In <telecom15.377.1@eecs.nwu.edu> our Esteemed Moderator noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very interesting, indeed!  Does this 
mean
> that those services operating under what has been called 'The Nevada 
Plan'
> are now illegal?  

I wouldn't think so.  The carrier is not blocking the call by creating
an otherwise illegally formed number.  The subscriber who wishes to
use digital entrance facilities happens to also own the phone line
attached to the LEC onto which they've put either a recording or a
busy.

> Is it now the case that all those dial-porns operating
> out of Netherland Antilles, Guyana and elsewhere are going to have to
> make it on thier own without their kickbacks from AT&T and the other 
> carriers?

Most probably, yes.

> Are we now to assume that direct delivery of long distance
> traffic direct from a carrier to a subscriber via T-1 -- eliminating 
the
> possibility of non-subscribers (to that carrier) from reaching the 
called
> party -- are now illegal?

See first paragraph. :-) Also consider virtual private networks like
area code 710, access code 762 (aka SDN = Software Designed Network),
the FTS-2000 system, GE's Dialcomm system, and so on.  Only authorized
users of those networks can gain (or should gain) access in the first
place.

There are some systems in TX that arranged for delivery of calls over
the three major long distance networks (AT&T, MCI, Sprint) via
dedicated circuits (T-1 or faster) to avoid the LEC access charges,
and the oddball connections come in over LEC lines.


Andrew Finkenstadt | Engineer, Tailored Software Services | 
andy@tssi.com
Gaithersburg, MD   | GEnie Postmaster & Internet RT Sysop | 
andy@genie.com
301-340-4391 work  |              GEnie Internet Services | 
andyf9@is.ge.com
301-975-9890 home  |    <URL http://www.panix.com/~genie> | 
genie@panix.com

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



Terry Flanagan <tflanaga@on.bell.ca> wrote:

> A recent post to this newsgroup stated that Bell Canada Calling Cards
> will not be validated by AT&T for calls to Canada from the US.  This
> is not true.  From most locations in the United States customers can
> reach Canada by dialing 302 plus the number they want to reach.
                          !!!

Mark J. Cuccia wrote:

> BUT, what is this '302' code plus the (ten-digit?) Canadian
> telephone >number to access Canada from the US that Terry Flanagan
> refers to?

Sorry Mark, somehow "0" got changed to 302 when I posted to this
group.  The correct quotation should of course be "From most locations
in the United States, customers can reach Canada By dialing "0" plus
the number they want to reach.  Sorry for the confusion.


Cheers,

Terry 

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



I am looking to buy an analog delay line suitable for emulating echo
delay.  I would like to be able to reproduce with high fidelity an
input signal N milliseconds later at the output where N is an element
of the set [0, 1, 2, 3, ... 100 ] milliseconds.  Input/Output
connectors are preferrably RJ-11/45.  Please respond if you know where
I can obtain this piece of hardware.  If it is just a piece of a more
feature-rich piece of test equipment, that is acceptable.

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



jjg@pt.com (John Grana) asked about modem cables for connection to 
cellular 
phones (in his case, a Nokia model).

I don't believe John mentioned the make of his integrated modem -- or
whether it contains some form of cellular EDAC protocol (i.e., MNP or
ETC).  First, $100 for a cellular interface cable is a competitive
price.  Even if you could kludge one, it probably wouldn't be worth
the trouble.  Chances are, you couldn't do it since the connector on
the Nokia phone is proprietary.  The connection on the modem, may be
as well.

If your modem is an AT&T KIT modem, you can order the interface cable
from Nokia or AT&T.

If you would like further support, you may post to me directly and
I'll be glad to lend a hand.  I'm highly experienced at cellular data
communication and have used a range of modems and cellphones.


Regards,

Lynne    lynne.gregg@attws.com

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



                                   



In <telecom15.380.11@eecs.nwu.edu> wes.leatherock@hotelcal.com (Wes
Leatherock) writes: 

> Recently I got a notice in my AT&T Universal Card (Visa card)
> bill that "any current AT&T Universal Card calling card discount will
> no longer be available."  (My account provides -- or provided -- for a
> 10 per cent discount [from what?] on credit card calls made with the 
AT&T
> Visa card.)

> Now "you'll be guaranteed competitive AT&T calling card rates
> on your first $10 of qualifying calling card calls each month, and
> enjoy up to 25 per cent savings when you make over $10 in qualifying
> credit card calls."

> Note the "UP TO"; it doesn't say what "savings" is actually
> applicable.  It probably depends on volume, but doesn't say so, or
> what the lowest tier "savings" is and how much you have to use to get
> 25 per cent.

It seems that with all the stuff going back and forth between 
ATT/MCI/Sprint 
and who knows who else, discount rate plans change constantly.  The
Universal Card is in my experience a charge card first and a calling
card second and I've continued to use the ATT Calling card for
simplicity.  This of course does not mean that the discounts plans
stay the same.  Recently the "savings" plan I was on was discontinued 
and
automatically changed to another "new" one.  I was actually surprised
that the discont rate did affect my monthy bill in a positive manner.

Check out the AT&T WEB page, http://www/att.com. I think they list all 
that 
stuff there.

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



In <telecom15.378.4@eecs.nwu.edu> rlm@netcom.com (Robert McMillin)
writes: 

> My question to the audience: has anyone done this recently?  Do I have
> to replace the whole shebang to make it work?  Is there some add-on I
> can use without throwing away the existing hardware?  We OWN this PBX,
> so leasing equipment also entails selling off what we have.  Are there
> more cost-effective systems than the Option 11 switch, the next step
> up from Northern Telecom?

Robert:

My company just installed an opt 11 about one year ago.  1/2 my bill
is international. My total bill was running 6k/mo. Before we got our
new system, we had a TIE CX with a Newbridge channel bank hooked to
Sprint.  The channel bank goes from T1 to 24 COTs. I got a great quote
from LDDS(World Com) that blew Sprint, MCI and ATT away. I was able to
drop my T-Span and go to switched service with LDDS and cut my monthly
bills by almost 1/2. I have not had one problem with LDDS international 
service. The switched service allowed me to lower the trunk count
going into my switch because I could receive local calls in and place
calls out on the same trunk.  The dedicated T1 service required me to
have dedicated outbound trunks.

One problem I did have when I stopped dedicated service was that the
line quality was poor and the CO copper lines.  I did end up buying a
T1 card for my opt 11 and ordering a Digital Entrance Fac. service
from Pac Bell.  Pac Bell provided this service at no cost.

If you are interested I have a used Newbridge channel bank for sale.


Danny@magtek.com

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



A while back (but sometime this year, I think) someone posted about a
cellular carrier that would take registrations via fax/mail with
credit card payment. The idea was that this carrier would activiate
your phone, and then you could roam legitimately in any market.

The per minute rate was quite high, but there were minimal monthly
fees. This service was intended primarily for 2nd or 3rd phones 
used only in true times of need and not for casual use.

I've searched the archives (mine and the "official" ones) and cannot
locate this reference. Would some kind soul either point me to the
original article, or maybe remember the name of this company?


Thanks!

mwe     mwearle@mcimail.com  

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



Current Logic Systems will display it's line of 14.4 and 28.8 host and
remote solutions at Cellucomm 95.  The line utilizes MNP10 EC and
features bundles targeted to the cellular circuit switched access
market.

Host end platforms will include internal and external 14.4 and 28.8
MNP10 EC units as well as small footprint four port 28.8 devices.
Also on the host end, CLSI will show the VOMAX line of stand alone
voice and fax messaging systems.  This line is targeted at the small
and home office customer requiring remote access to voice and fax
messages.

For the remote end, CLSI will show 14.4 and 28.8 PC Cards with
embedded phone specific drivers.  Embedded drivers removes requirement
for users to manually load a driver prior to cellular operation.

For additional information on Current Logic Systems' products contact
Kevin Asay 510-252-5206 or point your web browser to 
http://www.modems.com/.

Cellucomm 95 is the place to see the latest that the cellular data
industry has to offer.  For more information on this exciting
conference, e-mail 75260.710@compuserve.com or call 517-337-3995.
Hurry!  Cellucomm 95 starts Sept. 21!!!

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



My local phone company is changing their system so that I must dial an
800 number to use my calling card.  I can no longer dial 10-xxx to get
the carrier of my choice.  I called AT&T and US Sprint and they have
already converted to this method.  My phone company told me it was to
"improve my service" and was "a benefit me," but one compnay revealed
the real reason is to make it harder for AOS-slime to get calls.  Many
people forget to enter 10-xxx and the call will go through on the AOS,
but the 800 number MUST be dialed to use the new cards.

I'm for avoiding AOS-slime, but I do not consider this a service to me
 -- I always used 10-xxx and now I have to remember and dial a much
longer number to make calls.  This is not progress.  Is there any LD
company around that still allows 10-xxx access?


Jeff
jeff@heurikon.com  CIS: 71044,2356 (71044.2356@compuserve.com)
Cartoon of the day: http://www.heurikon.com

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



> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I love it!  This has got to be one of 
the
> best ones yet ... the nineties version of an old chain letter that's 
been
> making the rounds for at least fifty years: send me money and add your 
> name to the bottom of the list so people can send you money also. But
> John, you should not tamper with important news articles like that 
which
> are sent to Noisenet. You should do like I do: carefully remove your 
own
> name from the newsgroups line (and as a courtesy, any other moderated
> groups you see there which may cause the distribution process to 
stall)
> then feed it all back into the news stream again so that others can 
share 
> in the wisdom presented. My sincere belief is that if the spams become
> massive enough in their distribution, and ridiculous enough in their
premise,
> it will bring a halt to this form of communication once and for all.  
PAT]  

Spamming, or Usenet?


Art Walker, Somewhere In Iowa           |              
Art.Walker@mnscorp.com
alt.sex/alt.binaries.pictures.erotica/alt.sex.bestiality, etc.
At best, the regulars of these groups are failed phone sex customers...
                                                   - SPY, Jul/Aug 94, 
Page 85

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good question, Art! I'm *glad* you 
brought
it up ... I really am. Except that since we are just about out of time 
for
this issue, I'll have to put off answering your question until another 
day
when we have more time. I notice the infamous 'Dave Rhodes letter' is 
making
the rounds again. It appears to have been posted in one of the Noisenet
telecom groups yesterday or today by some fellow from South America. I 
hope by now the sysadmin at his site has slapped him silly and smashed
his PC or workstation into thousands of tiny pieces. Now we also seem to
have in our midst a Ms. Janet Dove of the Association of International
Students who is posting everywhere on the way one can buy magazines at
a discount through some association with which she is affiliated. I must
have killed her message at least a dozen times in the past two weeks
with its massive (screen after screen after screen) list of noisegroups
intended for cross posting. Perhaps it is the International Association
of Students, I forget which. "... Don't bother writing back to me, I am
a busy person as a student ..." and of course when you do write to her
your mail bounces as 'no such user' at the site. 

Do you recall the article many years ago about the teenage CB radio user
who was wreaking havoc on the airwaves with his games?  Finally, some
CB vigilantes locate him, go into his house and use a hammer to smash
his radio into a million pieces while the kid, horrified, watches. The
kid goes running into the other room crying and screaming "oh mother,
these bad guys smashed up my radio!"  The mother goes over to the
vigilantes, extends her hand and says "thank you very much", and they
respond, "you are quite welcome, madame ....".     PAT] 

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #384
******************************

                                                
