TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:09:00 PST    Volume 15 : Issue 28

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (T 
Kennedy)
    Re: MANs in USA (David Goessling)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Jonathan Mosen)
    Re: Phone Rates From Israel (SM Communications And Marketing)
    Re: How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)? (Steve
Cogorno)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (David 
Moon)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (P.B. 
Emerton)
    Re: Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area (Javier Henderson)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Taavi Talvik)
    Re: First NNX Area Code Officially in Service is 630? (John 
Mayson)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Joe J. Harrison)
    Re: New Area Codes and PBX (Paul A. Lee)
    U.K. Cellular Band? (Jabulani Dhliwayo)
    GSM Mobile Telefone ERICSSON GH337 (Joachim Oschek)
    Arthur C. Clarke Gets Degree by Satellite (Matt Healy)

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: 708-329-0571
                        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.                                                 
*
**********************************************************************
***

Additionally, 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: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary?
Date: 12 Jan 1995 19:06:11 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn


In article <telecom15.26.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, jbaker@halcyon.com (James
Baker) says:

> Is there still a technical reason for the two second delay at the
> beginning of a phone call?

> ...  the FCC requirements for auto answer stuff is to wait two 
seconds after
> ringing before answering the phone (or at leaset before sending any
> signals into the phone wires).

I believe the actual requirement is that there be two seconds of
silence *after answering*.  The FCC doesn't care when you answer.  One
of the reasons for this is requirement is to prevent a device which
purposely answers the call, exchanges data for 1/2 second or so, then
hangs up right away, which would avoid toll charges in some 
situations.  
A device could be designed to do this repeatedly to transmit an
unlimited amount of data (albiet slowly) without charge.  I think that
any modern switch would be immune from this type of fraud.


Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com

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

From: adk@scri.fsu.edu (Tony Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers 
Randomly
Date: 12 Jan 95 14:04:46
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University


Concerning some problems associated with pay phones at Atlanta's
Hartsfield airport, Paul Beker <pbeker@netcom.com> noted that:

> One interesting trend I've noticed lately: While only a couple of
> months ago, all the COCOTs were pre-subscribed to some ripoff,
> switchless, IXC, it looks like most of them have suddenly been
> switched to AT&T.

> This is definately a good thing, for the many people that would be
> getting ripped off dialing 0+ otherwise ...

I have found several times that I cannot use a 950-xxxx or 10xxx
access number for MCI from AT&T phones at Atlanta Hartsfield airport,
despite the fact that this number worked from all the other phones I
used in the airport. The only way I could use MCI was to ask the AT&T
operator to connect me, which they did with much ill-grace.

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

From: David_Goessling@fcbbs.ss.kpmg.com
Organization: Strategic Services of KPMG Peat Marwick
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 12:13:34 EST
Subject: Re: MANs in USA


You might want to contact Faulkner Information Services, Pennsauken, 
NJ
(609-662-2070/800-843-0460 Fax: 609-662-0905).

They have a report on Alternative Access Carriers (like MFS
Communications AKA Metropolitan Fiber Systems, etc.) that gives a
technical profile of each company's MAN, often including a map of the
system. Could be a bit expensive though ...

Some of these companies (e.g. MFS) are public, so you should be able
to get shareholder/financing info from their SEC-filed documents
(AR/10K/10Q). MFS is a subsidiary of Kiewit Diversified Group, which
owned 84.5% of the stock issued in April 1993. The underwriters of
this public offering were Salomon Bros and Bear Stearns.

As far as bank's usage, I think you need to do a literature search in
the telecom and banking press for examples.

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

From: jmosen@actrix.gen.nz@actrix.gen.nz (Jonathan Mosen)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Reply-To: jmosen@actrix.gen.nz
Organization: Actrix Networks -- NZ Internet Service Providers.
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 01:24:01 GMT


In article <telecom15.18.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, etxlndh@eos99.ericsson.se
(Robert Lindh) wrote:

> Luxemburg    Telekom
> Norway       Tele-Mobil
>              Netcom
> Portugal     TMN

New Zealand also has a GSM network, run by Bell South.  

Jonathan Mosen, Manager Government Relations, 
Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind, 
jmosen@actrix.gen.nz

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

From: sm@infinet.com (SM Communications And Marketing)
Subject: Re: Phone Rates From Israel
Date: 11 Jan 1995 19:17:29 -0500
Organization: InfiNet - Internet Access (614/224-3410)


In article <telecom15.21.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, JayK372 <jayk372@aol.com> 
wrote:

> I believe that you can call from Israel for about 80 cents per 
minute
> from midnight Israel time to 8 a.m.  My recollection is that the
> highest rate, during the day, is about $1.50 per minute.  This is 
via
> Bezeq, the PTT.

Or you can use a callback service and pay only $0.99 per minute, 
billed
in six second increments with no service fees. (Flat rate, all the
time).



Metin         e-mail: sm@infinet.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And when you use a callback service, 
you can
also learn to tolerate a huge amount of wrong number calls by dumbos 
in the
USA who dial your stateside callback number; let it ring a couple of 
times
and hang up after deciding maybe they dialed a wrong number. Of course 
the
equipment does not know that, so it proceeds to 'call you back' at 
your
number in Europe or wherever and wake you up at four in the morning 
local
time. I sold Telepassport for a few months, and they were absolutely
plagued with telemarketers dialing their DID callback numbers and/or 
just
plain wrong numbers. Here and there a phreak would appear also, trying 
to
mouse around with the Telepassport switch. Several of the people I 
signed
up for the service complained about getting 'callbacks' they did not 
make
at all hours of the night because someone stateside dialed their 
number.

Another concern would be if averaging out the cost was truly a benefit
or not. You have to decide if most of your calls are during the 
primetime
hours at the highest cost (in which case, having them averaged out to
99 cents per minute is a good deal) or if you can actually get them a 
lot
lower than that. It used to be the telcos charged a great deal for an
international call; then came the callback services and all of a 
sudden
AT&T, Sprint and MCI suddenly lowered their rates to match in many 
cases.
My experience with arbitrage was that there was too much work for the
agent (me!) with too little profit in return.    PAT]

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

From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)?
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 20:02:51 -0800 (PST)


Pete Kruckenberg said:

> The first one is easy, but might not be feasible. If I could get
> caller ID's on a busy line, I'd just add caller ID to the last line 
in

Can't be done (unless you have ISDN). You could have Caller ID on Call
waiting though, BUT the caller ID transmission would interrupt the
carriers, and callers would lose theior connection. I don't believe
that ANY phone company in the US currently offers Caller ID on Call
Waiting.

> (again, last in hunt group), which would always be busy (I don't 
want
> it to ring and confuse the users), but would have call waiting and
> caller ID on call waiting, then just pipe the caller ID into the

But how would you keep it busy? You would have to get ANOTHER line to
hold that line busy (in other words have line A call line B which
holds it busy).  Otherwise, the phone company will think that the
phone is off the hook, and wouldn't transmit Caller ID on Call Waiting
(off-hook phones always report busy).

> If there are other, better ways of doing this, I'd appreciate your
> input.

Ask your phone company for an analysis.  They will do it, but maybe
not for for a residential customer, and it may not be free. The report
generally has the number of calls placed, answered, and returned busy
for each 30 minute period.  We had one for a month, but I think a week
would suffice for your needs.


Steve   cogorno@netcom.com

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

From: moon@gdc.com (David Moon)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 12 Jan 1995 16:41:58 GMT
Organization: General DataComm, Inc.


Bill Sohl contributed a FAQ about scanners, and part of Pat's response
was:

> Illegal modification (i.e. modification by an unlicensed person) 
voids
> your FCC authority to operate the radio. Furthermore, no *licensed* 
> person is going to make illegal modifications to a radio and risk 
having
> such handiwork be traced back to his bench, at the possible risk of 
his
> loss of his license. 

I'm sure this is true for radio transmitters, but for receivers? Are
you saying I need FCC authority to operate a receiver?

What kind of license are you talking about?


David Moon              moon@gdc.com
General Datacomm, Inc.  ATTMail:  !dmoon
Middlebury, CT 06762


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You don't need a printed license. Your
'authority' is granted by the FCC by default. The FCC claims absolute
control over all radio devices and the airwaves, etc.  As discussed
in an earlier message today, they claim in section 15.21 of their
code that they can revoke your (default) authority.  Transmitter,
receiver, cordless phone, baby monitor, whatever.   PAT]

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

From: pb-emert@uwe-bristol.ac.uk (PB Emerton)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Organization: University of the West of England, Bristol
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 12:55:43 GMT


Tony Pelliccio (Tony_Pelliccio@brown.edu) wrote:

> Actually the AOR-2500 comes through with the cell band intact. Or at
> least it did until the FCC attempted to clamp down on it. The nice
> thing is the AOR-2500 is considered a communications receiver and 
not
> a scanner and last I heard the whole thing was still tied up in
> hearings.

> Of course if you really want to follow a cell call just get a DDI 
and
> hook it up to your PC. The interesting thing is that the company 
that
> sells the DDI will only release software with ESN capability to law
> enforcement people. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

What company is it?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please see the referenced remarks of 
Tony
Pelliccio above: 'FCC tried to clamp down ... still tied up in court'. 
A word to the wise: you don't want to mess with those people *too 
much*.
A little maybe, but not too much. 

Like some people here who have disagreed with me over the past couple
days on this, I seriously doubt the FCC is going to stage any massive
actions to get cellular phone equipped scanners out of circulation, 
etc.
But what I can tell you is they can be a nasty bunch of buggers when 
they want to be. In the past they have gone into pirate radio stations
and started pulling wires and fuses out of the control board while the
station was on the air ... kicked the door down and walked in. They
have spent hours driving around in a van through some neighborhood to
triangulate or get a fix on some signal when they wanted the guy. Like
all government agencies, they have loads of money and an infinite 
amount
of time and resources to spend when they decide they will get their 
way. As
Tony points out, they are still fighting in court over the AOR-2500. 
When the FCC gets a vendetta of some kind started, for whatever 
reason,
they will do a number on all concerned.  Bureaucrats will be 
bureaucrats,
and there is nothing worse than a bureaucrat scorned.  :)  

Selective enforcement of their own code (the Communications Act) at 
times?
Sure ... all government agencies selectively enforce the law ... so 
sue
them.  But if a time comes for whatever reason that you are a big 
target
the FCC would like to get under control and instead of just raiding 
your
premises with a United States Marshall in tow costing you all kinds of
grief and money -- the way another government agency did to Steve 
Jackson; 
remember him? -- if instead they contact your attorney and tell him to 
get 
you on the straight and narrow 'so we do not have to take this 
further' then
you know what you do?  First you Praise Jesus ... then you think over 
very
carefully how far you want to push it.      PAT] 

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

Subject: Re: Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area
From: henderson@mln.com (Javier Henderson)
Date: 11 Jan 95 10:36:20 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


In article <telecom15.20.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, ac554@lafn.org (Al Cohan) 
writes:

> In a previous article, henderson@mln.com (Javier Henderson) says:

>> I just got off the phone with Sprint's customer service. Their 
special
>> offer of one cent per minute for calls within your service area 
applies
>> to all of Sprint customers, regarldess of what calling plan you're 
on.

>> You need to dial 10333, but considering the savings, I don't mind. 
The
>> charge is the same regardless of mileage.

>> The offer will expire on Feb 28, 1995.

>> I'm not associated with Sprint, other than as a mostly satisfied 
customer. 
>> The above applies to residential lines in Southern California. 
Other areas 
>> within California may have the same deal, you'd better check.

> Most of what you say is *not* true. In response to several of my 
telecom 
> clients, I called Sprint (800 877-4040) on several occasions.  I was
> misinformed 8 out of 10 calls.

What, exactly, is not true?

Read the first paragraph of my posting, please: "to all of Sprint 
customers".

> I suggest you call Sprint three times and see if you get three
> telemarkets are *not* located in California.

I did, and I got the same answer the five times I called.


Javier Henderson (JH21)    henderson@mln.com



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

From: taavi@vs.ee (Taavi Talvik)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Date: 12 Jan 1995 11:50:52 GMT
Organization: Department of Communications


Robert Lindh (etxlndh@eos99.ericsson.se) writes:

> Estonia      EMT

Yesterday, 10.01 was formal opening of second GSM network in Estonia.
Network is operated by Radiolinja Estonia, a subsidiary of Radiolinja
Finland.


Taavi Talvik   Department of Communications
tel. +372 6 39 9000  State Chancellery
fax  +372 6 39 9001 dala 4D, Tallinn EE0006, Estonia
Internet:  taavi@vs.ee
X.400:   G=taavi;S=talvik;P=itu;A=arcom;C=ch

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

From: jmayson@nyx10.cs.du.edu (John Mayson)
Subject: Re: First NNX Area Code Officially in Service is 630?
Date: 11 Jan 1995 14:41:49 -0500
Organization: West Melbourne, Florida, USA


In article <telecom15.18.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.MIL>
wrote:

> Mail to the digest indicates that area 630 (an overlay on 312 and 
708,
> at least for now) is the first NNX area code to go into service.  
334
> in Alabama and 360 in Washington state are to kick in Jan. 15.

I was able to call a friend in Montgomery, AL using 334-288-xxxx on 
Jan 1.


John Mayson | West Melbourne, Florida | jmayson@nyx10.cs.du.edu

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 11:56:41 +0000
From: Joe.J.Harrison@bra0119.wins.icl.co.uk
Subject:  Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


I too had noticed that I can call US 800 numbers from the UK via BT
(but not via Mercury, the other major carrier). The BT international
operator has been the best source of information so far, according to
her this is now week two of a six-month trial to see how it goes down
with their customers, which explains the lack of publicity about it.
         
I suppose that from BT's point of view they are expecting potential
problems with billing -- like people who "didn't hear" the warning
that their call would not be free and complaining about all these
international call charges on their bill ;-)
         
Unlike the other people posting here I got a US-originated recording
when I tried 1-800-MY-ANI-IS telling me that the number was not
available. When I tried calling my credit-card access tollfree number
I was told that "sorry, this subscriber has asked for no international
access to this 800 number" or some such message, so it looks like when
you order 800 service you may in future have to check the box to say
if you want overseas callers to get into it, or not.
         

Joe Harrison
ICL Ltd. Bracknell Berkshire RG12 8SN  UK (+44-1344-473424)            
J.Harrison@bra0119.wins.icl.co.uk
S=Harrison/I=J/OU1=bra0112/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 16:05:06 -0500
Subject: Re: New Area Codes and PBX
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In a recent {TELECOM Digest}, Jan Mandel <jmandel@carbon.cudenver.edu>
wrote (in part):
 
> Why cannot they get new area codes from whoever creates the codes 
and
> add them as they come into being?

> Is there one single place somewhere that assigns the area codes?
 
Bellcore (Bell Communications Research in Livingston, NJ) is the North
American Numbering Plan Administrator (NANPA), although they have been
seeking to turn the responsibility over to some other organization.
 
Bellcore receives information and requests from LECs (local exchange
companies) that serve as regional numbering plan coordinators
concerning need for additional numbers in the respective regions.
Bellcore works with the regional coordinators to define NPAs
(Numbering Plan Areas), which are geographic divisions that are
assigned area codes.
 
Bellcore, as the NANPA, then promulgates the area code information to 
the
various carriers and other interested parties in the form of 
Information
Letters (ILs).
 
Here are some ways to get this information delivered to you:
 
   - Try calling Bellcore at 201 740-4661 or 201 740-4592 and asking
     to be put on their mailing list for North American Numbering Plan
     information. 
 
   - If you are an AT&T Mail or EasyLink user, subscribe to the shared
     folder "!eichelk:npasplits", which is maintained by David 
Eichelkraut
     of AT&T. David passes along the Bellcore ILs and other 
information
     concerning the NANP.
 
   - Ask your PBX vendor or interexchange carrier (IXC) to provide you
     with NPA updates through a program they may offer.
 
 
 
Paul A. Lee                           Voice  414 357-1409
Telecommunications Analyst              FAX  414 357-1450
Woolworth Corporation            CompuServe  70353,566
INTERNET  </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>  <=PREFERRED 
ADDRESS*

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

From: jd13@ukc.ac.uk
Subject: U.K. Cellular Band?
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 09:58:27 GMT
Organization: University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.


I recently bought a PRO-46 scanner from Tandy hoping to listen to the
air band. I have always assumed that in the U.K. the cellular band is
also about 870 - 890 Mhz, because this is what I always see where ever
I read about scanners. As I expected, this band was not available on
the scanner. To my surprise, when I searched the entire range of
available frequencies, I found that there were mobile phones scattered
between about 806-9XX Mhz.  What I fail to understand is why on earth
should scanners sold in the UK have a restriction on the US cellular
band when their own band exceeds far beyond these bounds. I have since
returned the scanner because besides two police frequencies and a few
hams, the frequencies I could get were mostly mobile.  


Cheers,

Jabulani Dhliwayo      Applied Optics Group  
Physics Lab.       U. of Kent at Canterbury


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll answer your question by asking a 
couple of my own. Why does the loaf of bread in my refrigerator have
a notation on the wrapper that it is registered with the Pennsylvania
Department of Agriculture?  What do I care what the people in 
Pennsylvania eat?  Why does my modem limit me to ten redial attempts
and document this by saying it is due to some regulations in Canada?
What do I care who the people in Canada talk to on the phone?  Why do
all the school textbooks used all over the USA have to meet the 
approval
of a bunch of people who live in Texas?  What do I care what they 
choose
to teach their children (or not teach them)?  

The answer in all three of the above is the factory specs are designed
by where the money is.  Pennsylvania says to sell food there it must 
be
approved by the Department of Agriculture and plainly noted as such on
the container. The baker does not want to spend the money having two
sets of containers printed.  Whatever factory in the far east makes
all the modems (probably the same factory which makes all the 
scanners) 
makes circuit boards to suit the clear majority of its customers: big 
shots 
like Motorola, Tandy and such. Tandy sells 90 percent of its scanners
in the USA and 10 percent in the rest of the world; whose specs will
the factory follow?  Don't say 'both, in two separate runs' because
that would cost money. Ditto the publishers of school textbooks in the
USA -- one opinion will suit all, and since the State of Texas is the
single largest buyer of school textbooks (and there are a couple other
large states whose specifications are quite similar to that of Texas
school book buyers) then their opinion is as good as any say the
publishers. :)

Now oddly enough, in Australia there is a bunch of retail electronic
stores called 'Tandy', owned by a parent company 'Radio Shack' -- just
the opposite of the USA -- and I think they do get things built the
way they want them; someone correct me if I am wrong. But they have
absolutely no connection with the Tandy in the USA other than the one
here owns quite a bit of the one in Australia.    PAT]

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

From: oschek@cip.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de (Joachim Oschek)
Subject: GSM Mobile Telefone ERICSSON GH337
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 13:09:31 GMT
Organization: EE Students Computer Pool, University of Erlangen, 
Germany


Hello out there!

I am looking for hidden software-modes of the MOBILE GSM TELEFONE
ERICSSON GH337 (like the IMEI-number with the code *#06#)

Does anyone know how I can see which channel or which cluster I am
using?

I would also need desperatly the signal strength in dB!

Is there a possibility to gain access to these functions or do I need
a special software of Ericsson? If so, where can i get it ?

Does anyone know email-addresses or WWW-pages of Ericsson (Sweden)?
I already sent a fax to them but I got no reply!

It would be great if you could help me with the GH337. (If you know
someone who could help me please ask!)

Please send your mail to oschek@cip.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de


Greetings from Germany,

Joachim
(http://cip2.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de:8080/hyplan/oschek.html)

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

From: healy@seviche.med.yale.edu (Matt Healy)
Subject: Arthur C. Clarke to Get Degree by Satellite
Date: 12 Jan 1995 18:04:20 GMT
Organization: Yale School of Medicine


According to a story I found on the "Nando Times" web site
(URL:http://www.nando.net/newsroom/nt/nando.html), run by the {Raleigh
News and Observer}, Arthur C. Clarke will accept an honorary degree
from Liverpool University via satellite link to Sri Lanka, where he
now lives, on January 26th.  A spokesperson for the university said
they believe this will be the first degree to be conferred via
satellite by a UK institution.

TELECOM Digest readers will recognize how appropriate it is for
Clarke, the inventor of the communications satellite, to get the first
degree to be conferred via satellite!


Matthew D. Healy               matthew.healy@yale.edu
Postdoc,Yale School of Medicine, Genetics & Medical Informatics,
SHM I-148, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, CT 06510

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #28
*****************************

           
