TELECOM Digest     Wed, 23 Feb 94 10:13:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 99

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Program For Microwave Radio Links (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: Cheap Long Distance! (Jay Hennigan)
    Re: Intelligent Network Services (Al Varney)
    Re: Caller-ID Question (Al Varney)
    Re: Multimedia Keynote Speech by AT&T Executive (William M. Eldridge)
    Where NPA Came From (Tim Donahue)
    Re: Why Caller-ID Instead of ANI? (Scott Baer)
    Re: Horrid AT&T 2500 YMGK (K. M. Peterson)
    Re: Percentage of DTMF Circuits (John R. Levine)
    Re: Area Code Closeness (David C. Tuttle)
    Re: Digital Cellular Phones (Steven King)
    Re: RBOC Names (Daryl R. Gibson)
    Re: Area Code Closeness (Fritz Whittington)
    ATM Comes to Long Island (Dave Niebuhr)
    CID Box, Voicemail With Caller ID? (Daniel Wynalda)
    NT1 With Analog Port (Ken Mandelberg)
    Air Cell (Stu Jeffery)
    Seeking Info on GTE Interactive Multimedia Systems Devlopment (M. LaBiche)
    C&W is Rude (was Re: Experiences with C&W (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    COMPSAC 94 -- Call for Papers (Bing Gao)

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 GEnie.
Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu *

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of
Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and
long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers.
To reach us:  Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone 
at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com.

    ** 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 gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated
Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech
Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience
of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. 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: wtm@uhura.neoucom.EDU (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Program For Microwave Radio Links
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 12:04:46 GMT


I'd try a book on Satellite Communications.  I have Pratt and
Bostian's book, but I'm not in the office with the book, so I don't
know if there is a formula there.  Magazines like Business TV probably
publish solar outage charts, but those would be for times when the sun
is crossing the plane of the ecliptic for satellites in goestationary
orbit.  OnSat magazine, before it became a TV guide, published some
articles on predicting solar outage: it would have been in 1985 or
1986.

I'd try the local National Weather Service office.  They certainly
have local sunrise/sunset times and may well have corresponding
azimuth angles.  Depending on your beam anlge, I'd think that solar
outage would only be a problem two days a year (spring and fall) and
for only a few minutes.


Bill Mayhew        NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-0095  USA      phone: 216-325-2511
wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu       amateur radio 146.58: N8WED

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

From: jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: Cheap Long Distance!
Date: 23 Feb 1994 10:24:01 -0800
Organization: Disgruntled postal workers against gun control


In article <telecom14.92.8@eecs.nwu.edu> Allen Walker <allen0@delphi.com> 
blatantly advertises:

> GTI telecom introduces the lowest long distance telephone rates
> imaginable!  Here is some information about the CALL AMERICA TRAVEL
> PLAN from GTI. Calls may be placed TO and FROM any of the 50 states at
> ANYTIME of the DAY at the incredible rate of $2.60 per hour. This
> means you can call 24hrs/7 days a week at this rate!

[snip]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've got an idea there is *something* we
> are overlooking or not hearing about here. If anyone gets the brochure on
> this, perhaps they will kindly type it in or summarize it further.   PAT]

This type of offering has been around for a while, and this particlar
one is showing up on the net in much the same manner as MAKE.MONEY.FAST.

The way that it works is as follows: The customer pays in advance for
X number of one-hour calls each month.  Typically 15 calls at $2.60 =
$39.  He pays that $39 regardless if he makes 0 calls or 15, and
whether each call lasts 2 minutes or 59.  So, while the potential rate
is 4.33 cents per minute, the company is gambling that the customer's
calling patterns will be substantially different.  For most people,
the calling patterns are going to be much different.  There is a
perception of great value, (hey, I can talk as long as an hour!) but
who calls cross-country for an hour?  If all 15 calls are used (and
I'm guessing that the number in this particular pitch is 15, but that
is typical), at 15 minutes per call it winds up 17.3 cents per minute.
No great bargain for residential night/ weekend rates.  And what
businesses talk for 15 minutes, or make just 15 calls?

These plans are typically sold under a multi-level pyramid deal, and
you see a lot of people pushing them on college campuses.  Now, if any
smart datacomm managers out there have about 15 hours worth of traffic
to pass cross-country each month, this could be a good deal for you
(unless they tweak with the lines to trash modem connections).
Likewise BBS enthusiasts.  For everybody else, look at your phone
bills before you make the plunge.  Also, although I'm not familiar
with *this* particular company, in the past it's been typical that
providers of similar plans would take your money and then it would be
_months_ before the service was "connected".


Jay Hennigan    jay@rain.org   Santa Barbara CA

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 09:50:00 GMT
From: varney@ihlpe.att.com
Subject: Re: Intelligent Network Services
Organization: AT&T


In article <telecom14.94.3@eecs.nwu.edu> ac497@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
(Wayne King) writes:

> I am looking for detailed information on the features provided by
> Intelligent Network and Advanced Intelligent Network services.  I
> would like to know where I can get information on this topic.

   The IN/AIN "features" are really interfaces that support the
creation of customer features by the TELCo -- you'd have to talk to
them about what FEATURES they will provide.  Internationally, this a
topic of CCITT/ITU-T Study Group XI/WP4.  In the USA, Bellcore
TA-NWT-001123 provides the requirements for switch vendors, while
SR-NWT-002088 and SR-NWT-002192 discuss early deployment, initial
capabilities and SCP (database) requirements.  [Bellcore orders:
1-800-521-2673 or +1 908 699-5800.]

   A good introduction is in a series of articles in the Summer 1991
issue of the AT&T Technical Journal (Vol. 70, Nos. 3-4).  Back issues
are available from AT&T CIC, 1-800-432-6600 (USA), 800-225-1242
(Canada) or +1 317 352-8557.  Or you can get photocopies/microform
reprints from University Microfilms, 1-800-521-0600 (+1 313 761-4700)
[I don't know if Ann Arbor goes to NPA 810 from 313 or not, but the
313 number should be good for a few months.]


Al Varney - my opinion only

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 10:10:56 GMT
From: varney@ihlpe.att.com
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Question
Organization: AT&T


In article <telecom14.94.6@eecs.nwu.edu> David_Wolfe@stortek.stortek.
com writes:

> I am trying to locate info re: Caller-ID.  How does it work?  How much
> digital, how much analog, how much Ma Bell?  Where can I obtain the
> specification?  I have voicemail/mbox in my computer and I would like
> to integrate Caller-ID function for database storage.

   The easiest way is to ask your computer equipment vendor.

   If you are interested enough to pay money for the specs., get:

SR-TSV-002476, CPE compatibility ... Voiceband Data Transmission Interface
TR-TSY-000031, Calling Number Delivery

   The first discusses the CPE requirements for electrical and
messaging interfaces, using 1200-baud half-duplex FSK signaling (some
call this the Bell 202 modem protocol).  The second describes the
format of the actual message(s) used in CallerID.
      
   Bellcore will supply those documents for about $30 each.  Call
either 1-800-521-2673 or +1 908 699-5800 to order.

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

From: bill@LIFESCI.UCLA.EDU (William M. Eldridge)
Subject: Re: Multimedia Keynote Speech by AT&T Executive
Date: 23 Feb 1994 02:44:49 -0800
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program


Nice to think of AT&T as the open systems leader, but currently I find
I can't get ISDN because my local carrier is GTE.  Being able to
choose our local carriers just like we choose our long distance
companies will be a great breakthrough.


Bill Eldridge    bill@lifesci.ucla.edu  310-206-3960 (3987 fax)

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 09:13:46 EST
From: Tim Donahue <tdonahue@maelstrom.timeplex.com>
Subject: Where NPA Came From


Fred writes:

> Whoa -- since when did they come up with NPA = Numbering Plan
> Area?  And are they going to fabricate an equally ridiculous
> (actually, it's pretty clever) meaning for NXX?

PAT writes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well actually Fred, I've heard NPA used
> as an abbreviation for 'Numbering Plan Area' for many years. It is used
> that way in this Digest all the time; always has been.   PAT]

NPA is discussed in the CCITT Recommendation E.160, "Numbering Plan
for the International Telephone Service."


Cheers,

Timothy P. Donahue    
ascom Timeplex  289 Great Road  Acton MA USA  01720
Microsoft Mail: donahue_t@timeplex.com  
UNIX Mail:      tdonahue@maelstrom.timeplex.com
E.164 Voice:     001-508-266-4545
E.164 Facsimile: 001-508-264-4999

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 01:01:24 MST
From: baers@agcs.com (Scott Baer)
Subject: Re: Why Caller-ID Instead of ANI?


Michael D. Sullivan < mds@access.digex.net> writes:

> According to "Emmanuel Goldstein", the editor of {2600 Magazine}, Cable
> & Wireless passes true CPN on coast-to-coast calls.  He detailed a
> series of calls on a conference on the WELL a couple months ago.
> Email to emmanuel@well.com for further information.

And TELECOM Digest Editor notes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And this same point has been made here
> in a recent issue: C&W passes the identity of the caller to the called
> party's Caller-ID display box. I assume they somehow give it to the
> local telco which makes the required conversion, etc.   PAT]

Now, directly to my question, what is the (10XXX) PIC code for Cable &
Wireless?  I would like to test this claim that C&W passes the
identity of the caller to the called party's Caller-ID display box.

I found, quite by accident, that a local call within the Phoenix area
will successfully complete using the MCI PIC code prior to the seven
digits: 10222-XXX-XXXX.  After having accidently sent out such a
number sequence from my modem, I became curious as to whether this
call will incure a toll charge.  And so, at the expense of incurring
yet another toll charge, I called up one of my coworkers who also has
Caller-ID, using the 10222-XXX-XXXX format.  The result was
"out-of-area."  Thus it appears that a call local within the Phoenix
area can be forced from the US West C.O. to an IXC such as MCI and
then back to the terminating switch and reported as "out-of-area."  As
to the toll charge, I'll find out with the next bill.  This apparently
provides a ($$) alternative to *67 for those wanting to conceal their
numbers to called parties in the Phoenix metro area, the benefit being
"out-of-area" being perceived as less ominous than "private."

When furnished the PIC for Cable & Wireless, I'll repeat the above
experiment and report on the result.  I would be quite pleased to find
an IXC who provides Caller-ID transmission.


Scott J. Baer   baers@agcs.com   7153.2630@compuserve.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you misunderstood the results of
your prepending 10222 to a local seven digit number. In all probability,
your local telephone exchange probably *ignored* the 10222 and handled
the call themselves. They have the right to do that. Regards C&W passing
the identity of the caller, I don't think anyone has said or claimed 
that they do it on regular long distance calls; only that they do it
for their 800 customers who also have Caller-ID. That is, if you have
800 service from C&W which terminates on some regular POTS line at your
home and that line has Caller-ID as well, then C&W will pipe it along.
I am not sure if you have to specifically request 'real time ANI' or
if it comes by default. I doubt that dialing a regular call via their
PIC will get you any identification.  PAT]

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

From: peterson@tiac.net (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Re: Horrid AT&T 2500 YMGK
Date: 23 Feb 1994 11:13:21 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


In article <telecom14.96.3@eecs.nwu.edu> Randall C Gellens <0005000102@
mcimail.com> writes:

>> In preparation for our move from a Dimension PBX to a G3, we are
>> replacing our 7101 'voice terminals' with new ersatz 2500 sets. 

Does anyone know where the 7101s go?  I really like mine, and I'd be
interested in perhaps picking up a few ...

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 06:11 EST
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Percentage of DTMF Circuits
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


Seems to me the question isn't how many phones are DTMF, it's how many
fax machines are.  While there are zillions of pulse phones, including
a growing number in the U.S., I'd be surprised if there were many
pulse-only fax machines.  Many of them dial with pulses, but if you
push enough buttons and flip enough switches, you can generally switch
it to tone mode.

Even so, if you're doing your fax routing in the U.S., I'd strongly
encourage you to use Direct Inward Dial trunks, like PBXes use, and
compatible fax cards so that you can get a block of phone numbers from
the phone company and give each fax user a separate real phone number.
I believe that except for the tiniest setups, the cost is about the
same and the functionality is a lot better.

Reasons not to use extra digits:

* Inconvenient for users who pulse dial
* Can't use autodial buttons on sending fax
* Can't use features that send at night when it's cheaper
* Can't receive faxes from users who have computers with fax modems
* Can't receive faxes from fax forwarding systems like MCI Mail's
* Can't receive from fax-back systems

Incidentally, I've heard that the proportion of users who use tone
dialing in the U.S. is currently decreasing, because most telcos
charge extra for it and nearly all modems, faxes, and pushbutton
phones can send dial pulses as well as tones.


Regards,

John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com

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

From: dct@odin.mda.uth.tmc.edu (David C. Tuttle)
Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness
Date: 23 Feb 1994 12:06:33 GMT
Organization: University of Texas Health Science Center


Paul Robinson <PAUL@TDR.COM> writes:

> The two areas were Dallas/Fort Worth and Los Angeles/Southern
> California (back then).  Los Angeles is 213, Dallas is 214; Fort Worth
> is 713, Orange County and the rest of Southern California (was then)
> 714...

Actually, 713 is Houston.  And the Texas/California connection is even
more extensive: 213-214, 408-409, 805-806, 817-818, 915-916.  But why?


David C. Tuttle, Biomathematics   ----> dct@odin.mda.uth.tmc.edu <----
University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center        +1 713 792 2606
Mail Stop 237, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX  77030-4096    USA

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

From: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Digital Cellular Phones
Date: 22 Feb 1994 22:14:56 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group
Reply-To: king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com


jrg@rahul.net (John Galloway) publicly declared:

> In article <telecom14.89.19@eecs.nwu.edu>, David Boettger <boettger@bnr.
> ca> wrote:

>> The "Cave" algorithm specified in IS-54 (the TDMA standard) is used to
>> encrypt data (ESN and possibly voice). The algorithm is keyed with
>> data that are never transmitted and are only known by the switch and
>> the mobile.

> But if this key is fixed (since it is not transmited I assume it is)
> then all the cellular blue box builder need to is disect a phone to
> get it.  This might not be a tirvial opeation, but these crooks are
> pretty smart fellows.

I don't know how it works (Ignore my organization!  I don't work much
with call processing!), but here's how *I'D* design a secure key
system:

There are two halves to the session key.  The fixed half is constant
and known to both the phone and the switch -- my mother's maiden name,
f'rinstance.  The variable half is generated on the fly and transmitted 
 from the base site to my phone when I want to make a call -- maybe
time-of-day would work well.  My phone combines the fixed part and the
variable part to make a unique session key and encrypts the mobile ID
and serial number before transmitting to the base site.

Using this scheme the key is different for every transaction.  The
whole key is never transmitted over the airwaves and the encrypted
MID/ESN is different for every call, thwarting bandits with scanners.

Can anyone find fault with with scheme?  Can anyone tell me if anything 
like this is really being used in the next generation cellular systems?


Steven King -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 12:28:40 GMT
From: Daryl R. Gibson <DRG@du1.byu.edu>
Subject: Re: RBOC Names


US West made the "name switch" to US West on all its operating
companies shortly after the demise of Ma Bell. My local company was
"Mountain Bell." As someone who routinely looks at the endorsements on
the back of the returned checks, I note that my checks to "US West
Communciations" come back stamped "Pay to the order of Mountain States
Telephone and Telegraph Co., DBA US West Communications". It would
appear that this name confusion is more deeply set than we realize ...

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

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 16:48:40 CST
From: fritz@mirage.hc.ti.com (Fritz Whittington)
Subject: Re: Area Code Closeness


In comp.dcom.telecom Paul Robinson <PAUL@TDR.COM> writes:

> The two areas were Dallas/Fort Worth and Los Angeles/Southern
> California (back then).  Los Angeles is 213, Dallas is 214; Fort Worth
> is 713, Orange County and the rest of Southern California (was then)
> 714.  Had they switched these, the Southern California area could have

Sorry... It's Houston that is 713.  Ft. Worth is 817.


Fritz Whittington Texas Instruments, P.O. Box 655474, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75265
    Shipping address: 13510 North Central Expressway, MS 446 Dallas, TX 75243  
fritz@ti.com                 Office: +1 214 995 0397     FAX: +1 214 995 6194

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

Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 10:23:36 EST
From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: ATM Comes to Long Island


Last week (Feb. 10, 1994, actually) my division, in conjunction with
the State University of New York at Stony Brook, Cablevision of Long
Island, the New York Telephone Company and the Grumman Corporation
presented a demonstration of Asyncronous Transfer Mode.

This was probably the first demonstration of the Clinton Administration's
Information Superhighway to be held on Long Island, but it won't be the 
last.

Real-time images of brain scans were part of the agenda along with how
ATM can be used in modelling ground water pollution and contamination
of the soil.

Another demonstration of ATM was the viewing of transvenous angiography 
images taken at the Lab's National Synchrotron Light Source (NSLS) simul-
taneously with to scientists from the NSLS and a cardiologist from SUNY-SB.

Even though the demonstration was of the fledgling project it is hoped
that scientists and others will be able to hold desk-top conferences
with their colleagues around the world.

The overall project is funded by the Department of Energy through the
Partnership in Computational Science, a consortium of six institutions
nationwide, including BNL.  The super computer to be used will be the
2,000 processor Intel Paragon at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in
Tennessee.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred)
                            niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

Subject: CID Box, Voicemail With Caller ID?
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 08:47:24 EST
From: Daniel Wynalda <danielw@wyn386.mi.org>


I'm sorry -- I'm sure this is a FAQ as I know I've seen it before.  I
have just received notice we have Caller ID available in this area and
would like to add it.  However, I would like my computer to be able to
receive the information.  Is there such a thing as a CID box with
RS232 output?

Better yet, is there a voice card with caller ID that could go in a PC
and I could program software to interface with it?  Any help is
appreciated.

The platform my PC runs on is SCO ODT 3.0 (UNIX) with DOS Merge etc.
I'd prefer a card I can write programs to with docs rather than
something I have to dedicate and keep running under windows.

Email to me would be great -- I can summarize to the Digest.


Daniel Wynalda       (616) 866-1561 X22 Ham:N8KUD Net:danielw@wyn386.mi.org
Wynalda Litho Inc.   8221 Graphic Industrial Pk. | Rockford, MI  49341 

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

From: km@mathcs.emory.edu (Ken Mandelberg)
Subject: NT1 with Analog Port
Date: 23 Feb 1994 02:54:07 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Dept of Math and CS
Reply-To: km@mathcs.emory.edu


I understand that Northern Telecom makes an NT1 which has an analog
port on it. Does anyone have any details on this or competing products?


Ken Mandelberg      | km@mathcs.emory.edu          PREFERRED
Emory University    | {rutgers,gatech}!emory!km    UUCP 
Dept of Math and CS | km@emory.bitnet              NON-DOMAIN BITNET  
Atlanta, GA 30322   | Phone: Voice (404) 727-7963, FAX 727-5611

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

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 20:13:58 -0800
From: stu@shell.portal.com (Stu Jeffery)
Subject: Air Cell


I have heard a rumor about a company called Air Cell. The rumor has
them providing telephony service from airplanes via the standard
cellular system. Has anyone heard of them?

I have trouble figuring out how it could work, given the extended line
of sight from airplanes, etc. It seems to me that an airplane base
mobile would play havoc with the cellular operators frequency reuse
plan.


Stu Jeffery       Internet: stu@shell.portal.com
1072 Seena Ave.            voice:   415-966-8199
Los Altos, CA. 94024       fax:     415-966-8199

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

Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 23:36:23 -0600
From: Maurice LaBiche <labiche@metronet.com>
Subject: Seeking Info on GTE Interactive Multimedia Systems Devlopment


I'm seeking any information on GTEs Interactive Multi-Media systems
development in the Seattle area.  Any info on planned trials and
co-operative development of such systems would be greatly appreciated.


Regards,

Maurice 

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

Date: 23 Feb 1994 06:09:47 GMT
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <DREUBEN@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU>
Subject: C&W is Rude (was Re: Experiences with C&W)


On Sun Feb 20 07:17:08 1994, Dave Levenson wrote:

> We have used Cable & Wireless 800 service for several years.  They
> are the only (or perhaps, at this point, the first) inter-exchange
> carrier to deliver calling number (probably ANI, maybe CID) to us in
> real time using the NJ Bell Caller*ID service.

Hmmm ... odd. One of the ONLY places we still get the ANI -> CID from
is New Jersey, specifically area codes 201 and 908. 609 always shows
"Out of area".

Those who have been reading for a while will recall that this started
working sometime in April 1993. In July, it started to show "Private"
a lot, so I posted here and called Cable & Wireless to ask them about
it.

No one seemed to know anything about this, and moreover, they
indicated that since I wasn't "paying" for the service, I shouldn't
even care about it, ie "who cares if your calls show up as private?".
I made a number of inquiries, and finally someone at customer service
(800-486-8686) just passed a trouble ticket to the tech people, and
about two hours later it worked again.

Shortly thereafter, I got some e-mail indicating that the C&W marketing 
director (at the time?), Deborah Stone, wanted to talk to me regarding
the ANI -> CID delivery. The mail indicated that C&W wanted to make it
into a "marketable product". Thinking this would be a good idea, I
gave her a call, talked to her for a while, and explained to her what
the ANI -> CID was all about, why I liked it, etc. She seemed surprised 
that C&W could do this.

About a week or so after the call, I noticed that CID from a few areas
(New England for one) was not working in the New York area (NY Tel) or
SNET territory in CT. I called Deborah Stone *16* times about this on
her voicemail, over a period of three weeks, and she NEVER returned a
single call. During this time, fewer and fewer areas displayed the
ANI. (Today almost none do).

I then decided to call smeone else at C&W to find out what's going on,
and spoke with Marlene Miller, the manager of 800 svcs. She was very
polite, and concerned that Deborah didn't return my calls (although
Marlene said Deborah was indeed "in" during those three weeks). She
took down all the relevant info on the ANI -> CID problems, and said
she would get back to me, or better yet, an engineer who knew about
this would call me. Two weeks later, no one called, and after five or
six calls to Marlene (which were never returned), I more or less gave
up.

I did indeed receive e-mail from someone at C&W kind enough to try to
answer my questions, but I *deeply* resent the fact that both Marlene
and Deborah never called back, and moreover, that five months later,
all I get in BOTH CT and NY is "Out of Area" on most C&W 800 calls.

(Does the C&W ANI->CID work anywhere else besides NJ? I assume it is
still working for NJ Bell customers, but does it still work for other
C&W customers in CT and/or NY? I'd be VERY interested in hearing from
you ...!)

While I'm finding fault with C&W (altough it's hard to think of
anything as rude as not returning calls :( ), the Programmable 800
service can get a bit "slow". Thus, if you reprogram your 800 number
from Los Angeles to route to a new number, people who call from the LA
area may get routed to the new number quickly enough, but if someone
were to call you from Boston for example, it may be a an hour or more
until they get sent to the new routing number.  This happens only
sporadically, but it can be a pain to have calls from some area of the
US and Canada going to one number, while calls from other areas go to
another, without your having ANY control over this.

There are other problems as well: I've asked them maybe ten times to
fix my bill so I see all calls to our 800 numbers organized chronolog-
ically, not by where they were routed. I keep getting told by the New
York office that this will be taken care of, and it never is.  (And it
IS possbile to do this -- we have three programmable 800 numbers: two come
billed by routing number, and one of them is organized by the chronological 
order of calls. I told them as much, and STILL the NY office can't get
it right.) They also have the tendency to call you ON your 800 number,
or at least the NY office does. When I inquired about this, they said
"Oh no, we only call you at your reach number!", but when the bills came, 
the ANI was the NY sales office. (They quickly put a stop to this when I 
called their main office in Virginia and complained).

I can get into more detail about specific problems I have found with
C&W's service; e-mail me if you are interested.

I must add, however, that overall the service is quite acceptable, and
if you have a simple problem they are very responsive to you.

I still can't get over the fact that after *I* called Deborah Stone at
*her* request that neither she nor anyone else would return my calls.
I am very upset and frustrated with them about the whole ANI -> CID
incident. Many other carriers deliver real time ANI (albeit at a
cost), why can't C&W just continue to deliver it over CID? Or if there
is some legal prohibition against this (which I doubt), at the VERY
LEAST they could call me back and discuss it with me, instead of
ignoring my requests to be kept informed.


Doug  dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu  //  dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet

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

From: gaob@cis.ufl.edu (Bing Gao)
Subject: COMPSAC 94 -- Call for Papers
Date: 23 Feb 1994 15:08:07 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.


            CALL FOR PAPERS and Panel Session Proposals

                           COMPSAC 94

               The Eighteenth Annual International 
          Computer Software and Applications Conference

                Conference:  November 9 - 11, 1994
             International Convention Center, Taipei

     Professional Development Seminars:  November 7 - 8, 1994
             Science and Technology Building, Taipei


The conference is a major international forum for researchers,
practioners, managers and policy makers interested in computer
software and applications as well as software industry.  Original
papers and panel session proposals on various research and practical
aspects as well as future trends are invited.  It is anticipated that
leaders and experts from industry, academia and governments will
participate in the program.  The following topics are examples of
sessions planned for the conference.  Special sessions facilitating
the presentation of timely results from the industry will be arranged
for those papers with presentation material only.

* Software Development and Maintenance Paradigms and Environments


(continued next message)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area # 700  EMAIL                   02-23-94 11:13      Message # -19967
From    : TELECOM Moderator
To      : ELIOT GELWAN                                  PVT  RCVD
Subj    : TELECOM Digest V14 #99

@FROM   :TELECOM@DELTA.EECS.NWU.EDU                                   
(Continued from last message)

* Software Quality Assurance, Process Improvement and Maturity Models

* Software Reliability, Security and Safety

* Risk Assessment and Management of Large-Scale Software Projects

* Re-engineering, Reverse Engineering, Reuse and Customization

* Software Metrics and Modeling

* Software Development for Distributed and Parallel Processing systems

* Co-design of Hardware and Software for Application Specific Systems

* Interoperability in Systems and Tools

* Large-Scale Software System Integration

* Formal Methods

* AI Tools and Techniques

* Data and Knowledge Bases 

* Computer-Aided Support for Document Preparation

* Advances in CASE

* Interactive Computing and Groupware

* Multimedia Systems and Virtual Reality

* Software Engineering Education

* Applications:  Government Services, Telecommunications, Banking
  Systems, Health Care, Entertainment, Consumer Electronics.  

* Industry Trends:  Downsizing, Outsourcing, Off-Shore Software Support. 

* Legal and Social Issues of Computer Software


Information for Authors for formal papers (included in the proceedings):

* Mail six copies of an original (not submitted or published
elsewhere) paper (double space) of 3000-5000 words.

* Include the title of the paper, the name and alliiation of each
author, a 150-word abstract and no more than 8 keywords.

* Include the name, position, address, telephone numbers, and if
possible, fax numbers and e-mail address of the author responsible for
correspondence of the paper


Information for Authors for providing presentation material only:
                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ 
* The presentation material of all accepted papers in this category
will appear in a bound conference record.

* Mail six copies of an original paper with the title and a 300-word
abstract to the Program Chair.

* Include the name, position, address, telephone number, and if
possible, fax number and e-mail address of the author responsible for
the correspondence of the presentation.


Information for Panel Organizers:

* Send six copies of panel proposals to the Program Chair.

* Include the title, a 150-word scope statement, proposed session chair
and panelists and their affiliations and locations, the organizer's
affiliation, address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address.


IMPORTANT DEADLINES:

* March 1, 1994 all papers and panel proposals due.

* April 1, 1994 panel organizers notified of acceptance.
  
* April 20, 1994 organizers of accepted panel proposals provide final
information on session chairs and panelists.

* May 16, 1994 au;thors notified of acceptance.

* July 12, 1994 camera-ready copies of accepted papers and panelists'
  position papers to be included in the conference proceedings due.

* September 20, 1994 camera-ready copies of presentation material of
  accepted paperd to be included in the conference record due.


Program Chair

C. V. Ramamoorthy
University of California at Berkeley
Department of Electrical Engineering
  and Computer Science
Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A.
Tel: 1-510-642-4751   Fax: 1-510-642-5775
e-mail: ram@cs.berkeley.edu


Conference Chair

Yun Kuo
Institute for Information Industry
11th Floor, 106 Hoping E. Road, Sec. 2
Taipei (10636), Taiwan


For further information, contact:

Stephen S. Yau
COMPSAC Standing Committee Chair
University of Florida
Department of Computer and Information
  Sciences
301 Computer Science and Engineering Building
Gainesville, FL 32611, U.S.A.
Tel: 1-904-392-1211  Fax: 1-904-392-1220
e-mail: yau@cis.ufl.edu


Sponsored by IEEE Computer Society, the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Inc., and hosted by the Institute for Information
Industry. 

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #99
*****************************


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