home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- TELECOM Digest Mon, 9 Jul 90 23:33:39 CDT Volume 10 : Issue 470
-
- Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
-
- Re: Using the "O" Operator to Defeat 800 ANI and Caller*ID [Dave Levenson]
- Re: Public*Phone [David Tamkin]
- Re: Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA [John Higdon]
- Re: Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA [Heath Roberts]
- Re: Touchtone History [John Slater]
- Re: PacBell to Eliminate Touch-Tone Charges [smb@ulysses.att.com]
- Re: Pentagon Moved to Area Code 703 [Carl Moore]
- Re: Finland Direct (Some Problems) [John R. Covert]
- Re: My Trip to Kansas [Doug Davis]
- Re: Good For a Laugh: Polish Payphones [John Higdon]
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- From: Dave Levenson <dave%westmark@uunet.uu.net>
- Subject: Re: Using the "O" Operator to Defeat 800 ANI and Caller*ID
- Date: 9 Jul 90 01:13:09 GMT
- Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA
-
-
- In article <9481@accuvax.nwu.edu>, riot!slr@csvax.caltech.edu writes:
-
- > On a related question: For those of you with Caller*ID, what happens
- > when you get a call routed through the "O" operator ? (the called
- > party being someone that you would normally get a calling number from
- > on your Caller*ID display).
-
- Here in New Jersey, local calls placed through the operator are
- displayed as "OUT OF AREA" on the Caller*ID display. This makes them
- indistinguishable from calls which originate out of the LATA or from
- CO's which are not equipped with SS7. This is also true of calls
- dialed as 0+ and charged to a calling card, without any communication
- with a human operator.
-
-
- Dave Levenson Voice: 201 647 0900 Fax: 201 647 6857
- Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
- Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave
- [The Man in the Mooney]
-
- ------------------------------
-
- From: David Tamkin <dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com>
- Subject: Re: Public*Phone
- Date: Sun, 8 Jul 90 21:04:33 CDT
-
-
- In TELECOM Digest, Volume 10, Issue 468, John Higdon wrote:
-
- | An amusing COCOT incident:
-
- | Needing to reach Pac*Bell over some matters with my residence phone, I
- | spotted what looked like a standard Pac*Bell pay phone. It turned out
- | to be a [Public*Phone] (tm) with colors and logos that are borderline
- | actionable in their resemblance to Pac*Bell. They have blue rectangles
- | in the upper left corner and an embossed logo on the coinbox cover
- | that from more than ten feet away looks exactly like the puckered
- | asshole logo of Pac*Bell.
-
- Around metropolitan Chicago, COCOTs originally looked like something
- untoward, but after a while all new ones installed were made to appear
- deceptively similar to Illinois Bell coin phones. One frequently has
- to get close enough to see that the logo in the white space in the
- upper left of the card is not IBT's before recognizing one of the
- buggers for sure.
-
- The guise backfires in Centel's satrapy, where telco pay stations have
- a distinctive boxy solid brown or gray housing and a prominent
- instruction card in a different position from the IBT payphones and
- the COCOTs. Since there don't seem to be any COCOTs manufactured to
- look like the pay phones of independent telqi, the COCOTs in Centel
- territory (usually outside gasoline stations or inside restaurants,
- but far sparser than in IBT country) stick out like sore thumbs.
-
-
- David Tamkin Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 708 518 6769 312 693 0591
- MCI Mail: 426-1818 GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN CIS: 73720,1570 dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Organization: Green Hills and Cows
- Reply-To: John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com>
- Subject: Re: Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA
- Date: 8 Jul 90 21:27:33 PDT (Sun)
- From: John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com>
-
-
- plouff@kali.enet.dec.com writes:
-
- > This is a relevant question for those of us who live with backwater
- > telephone service from NYNEX, as well as arteriosclerotic regulation
- > by the Mass. PUC.
-
- Moo, moo, moo! Come to California some time if you want backwater.
- Come to California if you want arteriosclerotic (or just plain silly)
- regulation.
-
- F'rinstance -- I just talked to one of my major upstairs Pac*Bell
- contacts. He says that CLASS will hopefully become available second
- quarter 1991. He says that hardware is in place, but that there is
- still nothing resembling a tariff.
-
- So much for regulation. Now for backwater. Pac*Bell is still saddled
- with major amounts of crossbar (mostly in northern CA). In order to
- continue to use this junk, they were forced several years ago to
- install the NAC CONTAC to the switches which mainly enables FGD.
- Wonderful, you say. However, there were side effects. Unadorned
- crossbar has no trouble counting pulse dialing at 20 pps. CONTAC must
- see 9-12 pps. Outside of this window is not permitted. Also, Pac*Bell
- has just decided that post-dial delay resulting from the CONTAC
- operation may be too long. What an understatement. For a DDD call to
- LA using AT&T it take three seconds to connect on my ESS and ten
- seconds on my crossbar line. That's more than 300% longer!
-
- BTW, there are eight prefixes of crossbar left in my CO alone!
- (Crossbar for all of you outside of tel-hell [CA] is that
- electro-mechanical stuff you read about in books that now have yellow
- pages.) Now what was that about backwater?
-
-
- John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
- john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
-
- ------------------------------
-
- From: Heath Roberts <heath@shumv1.ncsu.edu>
- Subject: Re: Touchtone Fee Abolished in CA
- Reply-To: Heath Roberts <heath@shumv1.ncsu.edu>
- Organization: NCSU Computing Center
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 90 20:14:42 GMT
-
-
- In article <9487@accuvax.nwu.edu> plouff@kali.enet.dec.com writes:
-
- >Historical questions: when was the last date that AT&T sold switching
- >equipment _without_ 100 percent tone dialing coverage? Competitors?
- >When was the last date AT&T sold switches without at least some
- >"custom calling" features as standard? Competitors? References such
- >as magazine articles would be most appreciated.
-
- >This is a relevant question for those of us who live with backwater
- >telephone service from NYNEX, as well as arteriosclerotic regulation
- >by the Mass. PUC.
-
- I can only speak directly of Northern Telecom, but I am assured by
- customers who work with AT&T equipment they ATT's systems are similar.
-
- To the first question: all switches come with tone receivers. But you
- need more than one tone receiver for a large switch: if you provide
- touch-tone service to 10,000 lines, you might need twenty of them. If
- your customers use the phone a lot, you might need thirty. The more
- lines you want to connect to tone receivers, the more tone receivers
- you need. Only one line can send tones to a given receiver at a time.
- The hardware to detect current loop (off-hook or pulse dialing, which
- is just a bunch of closely-spaced off-hook signals) is present on the
- line card itself: there's one per subscriber loop in the switch. So
- you can't really just ask about "100% coverage". It doesn't work that
- way. Trying to provide more touch-tone service without adding capacity
- is like trying to push a thousand cars an hour down a two lane road:
- things back up, everybody gets slowed down, etc. You have to add extra
- lanes in the long run.
-
- On the issue of software: switches are like cars. There's the basic
- model (switch o.s., no call processing) and then there are the
- features. Call processing is a popular one, so everybody orders it. ;-)
- In fact, a telephone switch would be useless without it. But
- beyond the basic POTS and switch O/S, everything's optional. Just like
- cars, there are attractively priced packages of common options, but
- they still cost extra.
-
- It always takes more hardware (and software) to provide these features
- -- you don't get something for nothing. The price of the hardware is
- coming down, but you need more and more of it (you can actually put
- four Gigabytes of RAM--memory, not disk space--on your DMS-100 now if
- you need it). Software's also getting to be more and more complex, so
- telcos are spending proportionally more on software than they used to.
- These costs are the reason I think I'm justified in saying that CLASS
- features, although not "advanced" in concept, and even though they're
- pretty common, cost operating companies more to provide than POTS.
-
-
- Heath Roberts
- NCSU Computer and Technologies Theme Program
- heath@shumv1.ncsu.edu
-
- ------------------------------
-
- From: John Slater <johns@scroff.uk.sun.com>
- Subject: Re: Touchtone History
- Date: 9 Jul 90 08:44:35 GMT
- Reply-To: John Slater <johns@scroff.uk.sun.com>
-
-
- In article <9482@accuvax.nwu.edu>, roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy
- Smith) writes:
-
- >Sitting on the table behind his chair were
- >about 3 or 4 single line desk sets, one touch-tone, the rest rotary.
-
- Er, shouldn't that be "one push-button, the rest rotary"? Unless you
- heard the tones when JFK made a call, it could just be a
- pulse-dialler. In the UK, push-button pulse-dialling phones have been
- around for years, long before touch-tone came along.
-
-
- John Slater
- Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office
-
- ------------------------------
-
- From: smb@ulysses.att.com
- Subject: Re: PacBell to Eliminate Touch-Tone Charges
- Date: Mon, 09 Jul 90 09:31:05 EDT
-
-
- John Hammond writes of Touch-Tone service suddenly working on his
- line, and speculates about a switch upgrade. More likely, the switch
- hasn't been upgraded.
-
- My understanding is that with crossbar switches, Touch-Tone has to be
- enabled for groups of 100 lines at a time. Thus, if a ``neighbor''
- has the service, you can have it, too. This is in contrast to modern
- digital exchanges, where all lines physically can have it, but a
- configuration bit tells the switch whether or not to honor the tones.
- A year or two ago, NY Telephone announced that they were going to
- start looking for people who used Touch-Tone without paying for it,
- and send them a bill. I haven't heard of this actually happening yet.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 90 16:31:08 EDT
- From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@brl.mil>
- Subject: Re: Pentagon Moved to Area Code 703
-
-
- A recent message in telecom from Greg Monti said that the Pentagon
- picked up offices which used to be in Washington, thus (sometime way
- back) it was given DC instead of Virginia prefixes. What place name
- will be used for the Pentagon prefixes which have now been put in area
- 703?
-
- Switching from Washington to Arlington/Alexandria would cause some
- changes in the fringes of the calling area. From the prefixes (other
- than DC & Baltimore metro) in the Maryland fringes such as
- Gaithersburg and Laurel, DC is local but Virginia is long distance.
-
- And a previous message from me in telecom notes that, despite the
- (soon to go away?) ability to make long distance calls to all-but-
- outermost Va. & Md. suburbs using area code 202, the already-working
- NPA+7D scheme for local DC-area calls will permit area 202 to be used
- only for DC prefixes. I noticed that this NPA+7D can be used even in
- one's own NPA in DC-area local calls.
-
- Please correct me if any of this is wrong:
-
- The Pentagon was already reachable as 7D in those extended-area calls
- from "Prince William" area. (Stuart is way down near the North
- Carolina border, so there is no danger of prefix duplication involving
- 694.) The extended-area calls the other way around now are dialed as
- 1+703+7D from the Pentagon (they are long distance from DC proper),
- and could LATER be reduced to 7, not 10, digits, given that the
- Pentagon prefixes are now in 703 area.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 90 14:22:57 PDT
- From: "John R. Covert 09-Jul-1990 1658" <covert@covert.enet.dec.com>
- Subject: Re: Finland Direct (Some Problems)
-
-
- >My brother is as an exchange student in Lawton, Michigan. He has tried
- >to call our family here at Finland via the Finland Direct service.
- >Our PTT has advertised these two numbers:
-
- >1-800-232-0358 via ATT
- >1-800-283-4652 via MCI
-
- When I call either of these numbers, I reach a tone _in_Finland_ that
- I am not familiar with, but it may simply be a "please wait" tone. I
- suspect the problem is with the grade of service provided by the
- operators in Finland. The tone is roughly 500ms of 950 Hz, 250ms of
- 950 Hz, 1.5 sec of 1400 Hz. After a long time of no revenue due to no
- answer, AT&T gives up and says "Your call cannot be completed at this
- time in the country you are calling." On MCI it eventually times out
- to a reorder (120 interruptions per minute).
-
- >1) Is it true that there can bee 1-800 numbers NOT ACCESSIBLE via
- >either ATT/MCI
-
- Any carrier can provide 800 service, but I can verify that 232 is the
- AT&T prefix and 283 is the MCI prefix.
-
- >2) If 1) is true, can my brother access another carrier to make the
- >1-800 call and does he get any additional charges on that?
-
- No. But that wouldn't help, since the problem is obviously in
- Finland, and not here.
-
- >3) Do these numbers work at all? (PLEASE, I don't want to get such
- >news that 4000 telecom readers blocked the Finland Direct service just
- >to test if it works..)
-
- It may just be a matter of being patient enough to wait for the
- Finland Direct number to answer, though if you're put at the end of
- the queue of all the people in Finland calling the international
- operator each time you call, you may never get through.
-
- One of the main reasons for USA Direct (the first Home Country Direct
- service ever implemented) being established was that it often took a
- very long time for operators in many European countries to answer;
- Americans are used to operators answering in something between two and
- ten seconds.
-
- Your brother should probably simply call the AT&T operator and place
- a collect call.
-
-
- /john
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 90 13:37 CDT
- From: Doug Davis <doug@letni.lonestar.org>
- Subject: Re: My Trip to Kansas
- Organization: Logic Process, Dallas Tx
-
-
- In article <9507@accuvax.nwu.edu> TELECOM Moderator writes:
-
- >On the way back everything worked fine, except
- >that on a few occasions when between carrier areas, the roaming light
- >(as opposed to 'no service' light) would come on, leading me to
- >believe there was service at that point when there was not.
-
- This is usually due to a phone being programmed to scan the b and a
- carriers, sometimes they mistakenly lock on a (insert opposing
- carrier)'s signal and roam to it. The solution is to program your
- phone to only scan the correct ( b [wireline] or a [non-wireline] )
- carrier for whomever you have a roaming agreement with.
-
- Also sometimes on the CT-301 (and all the other phones made by Mobira)
- a close proximity tower of the other carrier will cause your phone to
- roam on it, if that tower overpowers the correct carrier for your
- phone.
-
- On most phones this is a user option and can be changed "on the fly"
- without going into program mode.
-
-
- Doug Davis/4409 Sarazen/Mesquite Texas, 75150/214-270-9226
- {texsun|lawnet|texbell}!letni!doug or doug@letni.lonestar.org
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Organization: Green Hills and Cows
- Reply-To: John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com>
- Subject: Re: Good For a Laugh: Polish Payphones
- Date: 8 Jul 90 21:35:53 PDT (Sun)
- From: John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com>
-
-
- "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> writes:
-
- > "`Don't have a 20-zloty coin? Not to worry. With some
- > shrewd dealing you can buy one for as low as 200 zlotys.'"
- > (I make that out to be about 2 cents U.S. !)
-
- On a trip to La Paz (Mexico) last year, a local teenager demonstrated
- how to make a call if one didn't have the correct change (or didn't
- want to actually expend the funds). One takes the coin, (US coins seem
- to work for this purpose as well) and insert it partially. When the
- telephone appears to have recognized the coin, simply remove it. Many
- of the payphones there didn't even require that much effort--they just
- provided free calls. Obviously, the Mexican telephone company doesn't
- consider public phones to be the gold mine that they are in the US!
-
-
- John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
- john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
-
- ------------------------------
-
- End of TELECOM Digest V10 #470
- ******************************
-
- -----