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

From: Andrew@micksquadra.its.utas.edu.au (Andrew Stevenson)
Subject: Re: Emergency Numbers in Various Countries
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 16:47:31 +0600
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.


In article <telecom14.466.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, diessel@informatik.unibw-
muenchen.de (Thomas Diessel) wrote:

> In article <telecom14.460.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, 
johnper@bigbird.rosemount.com
> (John Perkins) wrote:

>> The number '999' is a simple and easy to remember number that, as 
you
>> say, has been used in Great Britain for about 50 years.  I haven't
>> heard of any other country that has had a nationwide emergency 
number
>> that long, a number that is familiar to the entire population over 
the
>> age of 18 months.

The number is 000 from anywhere in Australia. You get an operator who 
will 
connect you to fire, ambulance or police. I seem to dimly recall all 
calls 
are monitored by the police as well (even if you are speaking to, say 
the 
ambulance.)

> The disadvantage of 999 is that it requires 27 pulses to dial. 112
> requires only 4.

So how many pulses is 000? As 0 would be unlikely I guess it's
probably 30 :-) 


Andrew Stevenson

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

From: d92-sam@black27.nada.kth.se (Sam Spens Clason)
Subject: Re: Emergency Numbers in Various Countries
Date: 29 Dec 1994 19:45:12 GMT


In <telecom14.460.3@eecs.nwu.edu> goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob 
Goudreau) 
writes:

> erling@wm.estec.esa.nl (Erling Kristiansen) write:

>> As a side remark, I wonder how they came up with 112, which has a 
very
>> high rate of conflict with existing numbers. Most EU countries have
>> "0" as first digit to escape from local call to long distance or
>> special service.

> Yes, but many EU countries have long used numbers beginning with "1"
> for other special services, have they not?  What other European
> countries besides the Netherlands have (or had) local exchanges that
> start with "11" (or even just "1")?  Not many, I believe.

When assigning telephone numbers the most logical thing to do is to
simply number the connections.  So you start at 1 and increment, now
that doesn't work 'coz they should be of the same length.  So you
start at 10* and increment to 99*.  Saving the initial zero for
special numbers such as area codes and international prefixes.

This is the way it's been done in for example Sweden.  So the most
common number series over here is 1*.


Regards,

Sam

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

From: Joe Portman <baron@aa.net>
Subject: Re: IXC Invoice over the Internet?
Organization: Alternate Access Inc.
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 1994 20:55:06 GMT


Scott Kennedy (skennedy@ix.netcom.com) wrote:

> Does any long distance carrier provide billing via the Internet?  Is
> this available for small businesses (like mine?)?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Exactly how would they go about 
billing
> 'via the Internet'?   There are none that I know of.    PAT]

I would assume you could do it in the same manner that THOUSANDS of
businesses exchange business information every day. There exist
standards and networks in place for EDI (E)lectronic (D)ocument
(I)interchange.

The transport medium (Internet in this case) is irrelevent, except
perhaps for security, which could be addressed via encryption.

EDI documents could easily be sent via the Internet, or any other
medium, they could be mailed, as they are ASCII text files.

Whether anyone is doing it is another question altogether.


Later,

Joe Portman - Alternate Access Inc.    Affordable, Reliable Internet
baron@aa.net                      206-230-8732 (data) Login as "new" 

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

From: jcr@creator.nwest.mccaw.com (Jeffrey Rhodes)
Subject: Re: Nationwide Roaming
Date: 29 Dec 1994 17:56:56 GMT
Organization: McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc.
Reply-To: jcr@creator.nwest.mccaw.com


In article 5@eecs.nwu.edu, Alex Cena <acena@wfcsmtp.ie3.lehman.com>
writes:

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

>>> Can someone help me with the differences between IS-41 protocol 
used
>>> by cellular networks in the U.S. and MAP used by GSM?  Are they
>>> compatible so an existing cellular carrier who purchases a PCS 
license
>>> and builds a DCS1900 offer nationwide roaming between cellular and
>>> PCS?  i.e. I have a cellular license in Chicago and a PCS license
in
>>> New York -- can my subscriber in New York roam on my network in 
Chicago.

>> The short answer is no.

> Many existing cellular carriers are bidding on PCS spectrum as a
> fill-in or expansion strategy.  Thus, I'm interested in learning how
> they plan to offer nationwide roaming to customers in markets where
> they have spectrum in the PCS band.  So let's say I'm PCS Primeco
> (NYNEX, Bell Atlantic, AirTouch and US West) and I win the PCS 
license
> in Chicago, can my Chicago PCS subscriber roam in my cellular 
markets?

> Are the air interface standard under consideration for PCS namely
> Upbanded versions of IS-54C, IS-95 and GSM compatible with IS-41?  
Do
> they have to be inorder to offer nationwide roaming?  How widely
> deployed is IS-41 in the U.S.?  Since AMPS is the most widely 
deployed
> technology in the U.S., I'm assuming that initially the most 
practical
> solution is a dual-mode PCS/AMPS handset just like some carriers are
> offering dual-mode TDMA/AMPS today and others plan dual mode 
CDMA/AMPS
> soon.

It's hard to imagine that people are bidding millions of dollars for
PCS licenses and haven't decided on the air interface to be used. The
license is for frequency use only: What is transmitted on these freqs
is up to the provider.

It would be a big mistake to offer AMPS PCS and invite all the
associated fraud. AMPS may be the most mature product, but it is
inefficient, too.

In my opinion, a new PCS service would do well to concentrate on 
networking and a single air interface. Initially, the biggest problem
is coverage and retuning constantly to add new cell sites. National
networking tends to lose priority, unless you are a visionary and
decide to build a North American Cellular Network (NACN) like McCaw 
has.
The NACN serves six million subscribers and I think the whole industry
is less than 20 million (half of which is GTE and Baby Bells on the
"B-side" which has convoluted national networking at best.) Unless you
have some clout with the terminal manufacturers, crossover to cellular 
networks operating at 800 MHz is going to be a rough road.

Stick with TDMA/CDMA IS-41 with authentication for use in the US. 
There has to be an inexpensive way to use the same radio at 800 and
1800 MHz, but "what is transmitted" needs to be the same. 

If you are goading me to spill McCaw's PCS plans, it won't work. Top
management stategy is deliberately guarded and will only be shared
with employees after the bidding. If you want advice, be aware that RF
issues predominate the Business Plan and networking/architecture is
relegated to vendors and standards. My advise is to reverse the
emphasis, assume the RF is provided by vendors/contractors and
concentrate on networking to provide enhanced features that the
standards promise.


Copyright December 1994 by Jeffrey Rhodes.
jcr@creator.nwest.mccaw.com

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #472
******************************

                                                                                
