TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 Jan 95 01:18:30 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 25

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Canada Direct Access Numbers (Dave Leibold)
    Ancient Party Lines (Scott Falke)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (A
Laurence)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly 
(Paul
Beker)
    Re: ISDN Over Wireless (John Leske)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Computer Caller-ID (Pete Kruckenberg)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation (John Leske)
    Re: Need Profile of Teleport Communications Group (Dave Levenson)
    Re: ETSI Standards - Where? (Boris Naydichev)
    Re: Calling 500 Numbers From Overseas (Eric Paulak)

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:28 EST
From: dleibold@gvc.com (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Canada Direct Access Numbers


(dleibold note: Canada Direct operates similarly to many other "home
direct" services in that special numbers in other countries allow
access to operators in a home country. The arrangement is generally
reciprocal in that there are also Canadian facilities (usually 800
service numbers) for reaching operators of other countries.

Information is an unofficial transcript and is courtesy of Teleglobe,
the Canadian-based international carrier, whose information is subject
to correction or change.)


Canada Direct

The international access numbers to Canadian operators, as of November
1994:

Canada Direct information within Canada - 1 800 561 8868

Legend:

w   - wait for 2nd dial tone
%   - country-to-country calling, where calls may also be placed
      to points within that country, and to most other countries
      (via the Canadian operator, charged according to two "legs":
      country-to-Canada, then Canada-to-other-country)
[D] - service on dedicated phones displaying Canada Direct symbol
[P] - only available at public payphones
[K] - public phones require coin deposit or use of card

Country                        Access Number
=======                        ====== ======
Andorra % [K]                  19 w 0016
Anguilla [P]                   1 800 744 2580
Antigua [P]                    1 800 744 2580
Australia %                    1 800 881 150  -or-  1 800 551 177
Austria [K]                    022 903 013
Bahamas                        1 800 463 0501
Bahrain                        80 01 00
Barbados [P]                   1 800 744 2580
Belgium % [K]                  0800 1 0019
Belize                         558 (Hotels)  -or-  *6 (payphones)
Bermuda [P]                    1 800 744 2580
Bolivia % [K]                  0 800 0101
Brazil %                       000 8014
Cayman Islands [P]             1 800 744 2580
Chile %                        123 00 318  (replaces 00 w 0318)
China (major cities) %         108 186
Colombia                       980 19 0057
Costa Rica [K]                 161
Croatia %                      99 380 001
Cyprus [K]                     080 900 12
Czech Republic %               00 42 000151
Denmark % [K]                  80 01 00 11
Dominica [P]                   1 800 744 2580
Dominican Republic             1 800 333 0111
Ecuador                        173
Egypt %                        365 3643
Fiji                           004 890 1005
Finland % [K]                  9800 1 0011
France % [K]                   19 w 0016
Germany % [K]                  01 3000 14
Greece % [K]                   00 800 1611
Grenada [P]                    1 800 744 2580
Guadeloupe                     19 w 0016
Guam %                         950 1604
Guatemala [K]                  198
Guyana                         0161 (in Georgetown, 161)
Haiti                          001 800 522 1055
Hong Kong %                    800 1100
Hungary % [K]                  00 800 01211
Iceland % [K]                  999 010
India                          000167
Indonesia [K]                  00 801 16
Iran                           [D]
Ireland %                      1 800 555001
Israel %                       177 105 2727
Italy % [K]                    172 1001
Jamaica                        800 222 0016
Japan [K]                      0039 w 161
Jordan                         18 800 962
Korea (south) [K]              009 0015
Liechtenstein % [K]            155 8330
Luxembourg %                   0 800 0119
Macau %                        0800 100
Malaysia % [K]                 800 0017
Malta                          0 800 890 150
Martinique                     19 w 0016
Mauritius                      73110
Mexico                         95 800 010 1990
Monaco % [K]                   19 w 0016
Montserrat [P]                 1 800 744 2580
Morocco                        00 211 0010
Netherlands % [K]              06 0229116
New Zealand                    000919
Nicaragua %                    168
Norway % [K]                   800 19 111
Paraguay                       008 13 800
Peru                           199
Philippines % [K]              105 10
Poland %                       00 104 800 118
Portugal %                     05 017 1 226
Puerto Rico %                  1 800 496 7123
Qatar %                        [D]
Romania %                      01 800 5000
Russia (Moscow only)           8 10 800 497 7233
Saint Kitts & Nevis [P]        1 800 744 2580
Saint Lucia [P]                1 800 744 2580
Saint Vincent [P]              1 800 744 2580
Saint-Barthelemy               19 w 0016
Saint-Martin                   19 w 0016
San Marino % [K]               172 1001
Singapore                      8000 100 100
Slovakia %                     00 42 000151
South Africa %                 0 800 99 0014
Spain % [K]                    900 99 00 15
Sri Lanka                      01 430077 (in Metro Colombo, 430077)
Sweden % [K]                   020 799015
Switzerland % [K]              155 8330
Taiwan % [K]                   00 801 20012
Thailand %                     001 999 15 1000
Trinidad & Tobago              [D]
Turkey %                       00 800 16677
Turks & Caicos [P]             01 800 744 2580
Ukraine %                      8 10 0 17
United Kingdom %               0800 89 0016 (British Telecom)
Uruguay                        000 419
Vatican City [K]               172 1001
Venezuela [K]                  800 11100
Virgin Islands (British) [P]   1 800 744 2580
Virgin Islands (US) %          1 800 496 0008
Zambia %                       00883
Zimbabwe                       (was 110897 - now deleted?)

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 21:14:36 -0800
From: scott@csustan.csustan.edu (Scott Falke)
Subject: Ancient Party Lines


In re your story about party-line entertainment:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 15, Issue 11, Message 2 of 14

> When I was twelve years old, I had a friend who was the same age. We
> had a private line but his parents had a four-party line.         ^^
  ^^^ ^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^

Should I even ask?

My party-line story at age ~13 was --

At the time out community of ~1000 had its own little system (the
'switch' was a mechanical equivalent of a SLC96, I guess (a couple of
bigger than b-box-sized aluminum cases at the North end of town hung
on some poles and crossarms) and shared a PacBell office about 8 miles
away in a town of ~10,000.  There was one old repair/install guy who
handled an area of probably 300 square miles, called 'Farmers Union
Telephone' and I don't think you could get less than a 4-party line at
any price.  You'd have to wait a while for dial tone sometimes.  

I have a distinct vision of what seemed like 200 pairs of steel on a
coupla-dozen crossarms per pole in front of Klint's market.  Eight-
and ten- party lines were the norm, and we shared an 8 with the school
superindent's home.  We rigged up a 600-ohm transformer with a
bathtubp capcitor for DC blocking, (via military surplus from the town
ham operator; I learned a lot from some ancient ARRL handbooks) and
fed it into an old (5-watt?) PA amplifier with speaker in a home-made
wood box.  The superintendent (this was farming in Nor Calif) would
spend hours interviewing new teachers for their first job away from
Montana.  Of course, once we figured out what was going on, we'd have
the skinny on what was to come in the fall.

My point in all this is that the party-line ringing was different from
what you descibed as a multi-frequency mode.  To the best of my
memory, each set (WE 302s, maybe?) had a gas-filled tube and polarized
pulsed-DC ring voltage.  Then half the ringers were connected tip-gnd
and ring-gnd.  On 8- party your heard one ring or two; so:

  2-polarties X 2-tip-ring X 2-ring-combos = 8.

The ten-party groups had all kinds of odd long-long, long-short and
short-short ring combinations.

Thanks for sparking some childhood memories!


Scott Falke    Turlock CA 


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way you describe it was one way
of doing the ringing; there were various methods.  What happened on
your system if you wanted to call someone on your party line?  In
the manual service era, if you inadvertently (or as a child, 
deliberatly
sometimes, for the fun of it) asked the operator for your own number
her answer would be without looking at where the call was coming from,
'the line is busy'. If you asked for someone on your party line, the
response would be the same unless you told the operator in advance and
tipped her off (the operators did not know who belonged to what party
line, only that the line tested busy when they went to insert the 
plug).
If you told her it was your party line, she would tell you to hang up
so she could ring the line, and after one or two rings to pick up the
phone again. She'd stay on the line and when the party answered tell
them to hold on a few seconds until you lifted your receiver again.  
PAT]

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

From: laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers 
Randomly
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 
guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 04:17:25 GMT


wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) writes:

> Today, I was in the airport that serves Atlanta, GA.  I tried to 
place a
> few 1-800 toll free calls, and had a lot of trouble.  Numbers I know
> to be good got responses of "invalid number".  I'd reach for another 
pay
> phone, and got thru to the number. I tried the same numbers later 
that
> day (while getting hung up with the dead Newark airport mess) in the
> Atlanta airport and got more "invalid number"; another attempt got 
me
> thru, then I got cut off.  Pay phones were labeled "PTC" (or 
something
> like that) and also said that the local exchange didn't "own" these
> phones.  Some phones didnt work at all (bad keypads, or just dead).  
I
> don't know who "PTC" is, but they really SUCK!

Could it be that the numbers you were calling were not reachable from
that area? Some 800 numbers specifically include or exclude certain
states or regions.

But then, you probably already thought of that. :-)


Andrew Laurence                                   laurence@netcom.com
Certified NetWare Administrator (CNA)        Oakland, California, USA
CD-ROM Networking Consultant            Pacific Standard Time (GMT-8)
Phone: (510) 547-6647    Pager: (510) 308-1903    Fax: (510) 547-8002

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

From: pbeker@netcom.com (Paul Beker)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers 
Randomly
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 
guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 06:45:33 GMT


wa2ise@netcom.com (Robert Casey) writes:

> [ . . . ] Pay phones were labeled "PTC" (or something
> like that) and also said that the local exchange didn't "own" these
> phones.  Some phones didnt work at all (bad keypads, or just dead).  
I
> don't know who "PTC" is, but they really SUCK!

Yep ... several years ago every single pay phone in that airport was a
*real* Southern Bell phone.  Since then, the politicians and others
(ever heard of the Atlanta Airport scandals / fiascos?) have gotten
involved and now you will find a wide variety of worthless COCOTs
scattered throughout the airport.

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 don't know why this 
happened;  perhaps someone in Atlanta government actually decided
to "clean things up". Also, I wonder what AT&T did to get this.

And in a related note, all of the pay phones in the new 
(International) 
Concourse "E" are AT&T COCOTs!  (In other words, the phones themselves
are manufactured by AT&T and have "AT&T" stamped on them.  They seem
to be much better quality than your typical COCOT.)  All of them are
pre-subscribed to AT&T, of course ...


Paul Beker - Atlanta, GA    pbeker@netcom.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You wonder what AT&T had to do to get 
the
account?  Well I can tell you what Illinois Bell had to do to get the
O'Hare Airport account a few years ago: when the newspapers exposed 
the
city council members and Aviation Department employees who got the 
bribes
and the IBT employees who paid the bribes, there was quite a stink for
a short while, then everyone sort of forgot about it.  PAT]

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

From: johnl@ctin.adelaide.edu.au (John Leske)
Subject: Re: ISDN Over Wireless
Date: 11 Jan 1995 03:40:28 GMT
Organization: Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
Reply-To: johnl@ctin.adelaide.edu.au


In article 17@eecs.nwu.edu, jenzler@olympus.net (Jared Enzler) writes:

> I live in an area where the telephone co. shows no interest in
> offering ISDN.  But the area is well covered by cellular phone
> systems.

> Questions: There appear to be several varieties of digital cellular 
on
> the way.  Do any of these have the potential to offer ISDN?  Which
> ones?  What sort of technical or other barriers are there to 
wireless
> ISDN?

The aim of digital cellular phones is to efficiently use the bandwidth
available. Thus they have compression schemes to minimise the the data
rate required to still reproduce acceptable quality voice at the other
end.  Next generation speech codecs are aiming for ~5kbit/s data rates
 -- a lot slower than ISDN.

If your question relates to ISDN-like protocols, then yes it will be
possible. For example the GSM design philosophy was based on ISDN.
However the first data modems available present themselves as
Hayes-compatible modems, because that is what all the software wants
to see.




John

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

From: laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 
guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 04:04:14 GMT


mjsutter@aol.com (Mjsutter) writes:

> Jim Conran writes:

>> In addition, the FCC should require all cellular phones to be
>> equipped to access the strongest cellular base station signal when 
911
>> is called.  Finally, the FCC should make the 911 provision an issue 
as
>> it currently reconsiders cellular license renewal applications.

> This is a good idea. However, it could be at odds with another good
> idea which is that the cell ID that the caller is using be passed
> through the cell switch to the tandem so tha the 911 database can 
use
> the cell ID as an approximate location of the caller. In metro areas
> the size of the cell would be very small indeed. Less that a year 
ago
> a life would have most likely been saved in Rochester N.Y. if this
> capability had been available.  

Recently I saw someone who appeared to be trying to steal a car, so,
being a good citizen, I ducked around the corner out of sight and
dialed 911 on my handheld cellular phone. Though I was standing on a
street three blocks from San Francisco City Hall, I was connected to
the California Highway Patrol. I waited several minutes for an 
operator 
to come on the line, and finally gave up.

Good thing no one's life or safety was in danger.


Andrew Laurence                                   laurence@netcom.com
Certified NetWare Administrator (CNA)        Oakland, California, USA
CD-ROM Networking Consultant            Pacific Standard Time (GMT-8)
Phone: (510) 547-6647    Pager: (510) 308-1903    Fax: (510) 547-8002

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

From: pete@dswi.com (Pete Kruckenberg)
Subject: Re: Computer Caller-ID
Date: 10 Jan 1995 21:12:10 -0700
Organization: DahlinSmithWhite, Inc.


Seymour Dupa (grumpy@en.com) wrote:

> Thomas Fitzurka (LCRS73A@prodigy.com) wrote:

>> Does anyone know of a software program that enables you to have 
your
>> computer identify caller's phone numbers? I saw a movie called
>> Brainscan that had a computer, using caller id, identify the caller
>> and tell the person in an "igor" voice, which I perticularly liked,
>> that "Bobby is calling master". The idea was really interesting to 
me
>> and I would like to get something like it.

>   Rochell Communications has caller ID unit with a serial port that
> feeds the caller id info to a serial port on a computer.  They also
> have a program that reads the computer's serial port, look if the
> number has called before, and if so, diaplays the info.  They are at
> 800-542-8808 or 512-794-0088.

I'd like to use something like this to detect calls when my phone is
busy. Does anyone know if US West offers that service (Caller ID on
attempts when the line is busy), and if so, what I'd need to get the
number and put it into a serial port?


Pete Kruckenberg   pete@dswi.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Coincidentally! ... I just remembered
this:  a few days ago I got a call from someone in San Fransisco and
guess what?  His *entire number* showed up on my Caller-ID display.
It looks like they are now starting to give it out, at least on an
interstate basis. I initially missed his call, but when I came in a
few minutes later and saw it on the display screen I called back right
away. He was quite surprised that I got his number, and come to think
of it now, so am I.    PAT]

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

From: johnl@ctin.adelaide.edu.au (John Leske)
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: 11 Jan 1995 03:28:51 GMT
Organization: Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
Reply-To: johnl@ctin.adelaide.edu.au


In article 6@eecs.nwu.edu, Robohn Scott <robohns@bah.com> writes:

> Does anyone know how the SIM is implemented (i.e., PCMCIA card, 
SIMM, some 
> other standards-based approach, or proprietary?)  How much 
information is 
> actually stored on it?  Have there been any problems with it in 
practice?

> How long has the SIM been available commercially?

A very short reply to your questions:

It is a Smartcard (ISO-7816). That is, a single chip micro with its
own ROM, RAM and non-volatial storage. The specific implementation for
GSM is defined in the GSM specs. There are multiple manufacturers of
this card. The specific characterisitics vary from manufacturer to
manufacturer. I believe some companies are looking at up to 16k or
32kbit on the chip. The GSM-related data lies in a sub-directory on
the chip.

There is an interesting article in the Telecom Archives
ftp.funet.fi/pub/doc/telecom/phonecard/chips/How_chips_work (though
this does mainly deal with Phonecards, it gives an intro)

I have not read of any practical problems with the SIM cards in GSM.

They have been in service since GSM began (1991 exhibition systems, 
1992
commercial networks)

My colleague who is working on new applications for GSM SIM cards is
currently away on business, and has much of the information with him.
If you are interested in more details I can chase him up when he
returns later this week.

John Leske   Research Engineer
Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
University of Adelaide


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I don't know *whose* 'Telecom
Archives' that would be; its not the one I maintain which is located
at lcs.mit.edu; and I don't have the file mentioned.     PAT]

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

From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Need Profile of Teleport Communications Group
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 22:20:32 GMT


Linli Zhao #8277 (lzhao@wellfleet.com) writes:

> I need any information known about Teleport Communications Group 
(TCG).

TCG is a local exchange carrier who competes with the regional Bell
operating companies in certain metropolitan markets.  You'll find
their coin-operated public telephones in NYC subway stations, bus
terminals, and airports.  Unlike traditional COCOT units, these coin
sets charge the same rate as the Bell-provided units, look just like
the Bell-provided units, and, apparently, operate exactly the same
way.

They also offer local access services to businesses and large
residential customers (entire appartment buildings) in New York.


Dave Levenson  Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc.  UUCP: uunet!westmark!dave
Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: 908 647 6857

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:57:39 +0800
From: boris@trillium.com (Boris Naydichev)
Subject: Re: ETSI Standards - Where?


ethgls@duna.ericsson.se (Gabor Lajos) wrote:

> I am looking for ANY information about how to get ETSI (also pre-
ETSI)
> standards in any form (eg. hardcopy, CD-Rom, postcript file).

> It can be an office from where I have to order, or an 'FTP site' or
> anything.

> I wrote 'FTP site' since I can't do real FTP to the outside world, 
only 
> that E-mail operated fake FTP is available for me. Thanks in 
advance.

You can order ETSI documents from ETSI Publication:

tel: +33 92 94 42 40
fax: +33 93 95 81 33

If you do not know ETS numbers, you should be able to order by names,
they also have a catalog of ETSI publications available for 
distribution 
and their prices.

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:23:14 -0500
From: ericp@ucg.com (Eric Paulak)
Subject: Re: Calling 500 Numbers From Overseas


> Who pays for the call?  Is it the caller or the owner of the number?
> If it is the caller, would I be charged for an international call if 
I
> call someone who happens to be overseas at the time?

It depends. If you haven't given a caller a pin number so that you
will pay for it, the call will foot the bill.  To prevent them from
getting hit without knowing it, however, an AT&T message tells them
that they are being connected to an international location and that
international rates will apply.


Eric Paulak
The Center for Communications Management Information
(301) 816-8950, ext. 327
11300 Rockville Pike, Suite 1100, Rockville, MD 20852

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #25
*****************************

                            
