rich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims) (07/24/90)
My wife just purchased a Motorola cellular phone (transportable) and I'd like to know if anyone has any info on it that might be of interest to me. (She makes phone calls, I play with things!) It's a model 8000L, and the literature that comes with it is amazingly sparse in terms of any "real" information. Since this is my (our) first foray into the field of cellular communications, I'm woefully uninformed on the subject. Any information that anyone would care to share with me would be gratefully accepted. I'd also like to know if anyone has anything to say about this particular model (good, or bad), and I'd like some answers to questions on one specific area, in particular. What are the issues, both legal and technical, in operating two cellular phones on the same account number? How are these widgets "identified" when a call is originated or received? Is it "field changeable"?? If this is possible at all, can it be done with two different models of phone? Rich Sims UUCP: crash!pro-exchange!rich ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!rich@nosc.mil INET: rich@pro-exchange.cts.com
Dave Levenson <dave%westmark@uunet.uu.net> (07/27/90)
In article <10083@accuvax.nwu.edu>, rich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims) writes: > What are the issues, both legal and technical, in operating two > cellular phones on the same account number? How are these widgets > "identified" when a call is originated or received? Is it "field > changeable"?? If this is possible at all, can it be done with two > different models of phone? Your cellular service provider may offer to include two telephone numbers on the same bill, if that's what you meant by 'account number' but for technical reasons, two units can't have the same telephone number. These 'widgets' are identified by an electronic serial number (ESN), a home system identifier, and a mobile telephone number. All but the ESN are field changeable -- on some models it requires burning a PROM, others allow keyboard-entry administration of the same data. Dave Levenson Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave
rich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims) (07/28/90)
In-Reply-To: message from dave%westmark@uunet.uu.net > Your cellular service provider may offer to include two telephone > numbers on the same bill, if that's what you meant by 'account number' No, I was referring to having two separate units using the same number, in the same way an "extension phone" works in your home. > These 'widgets' are identified by an electronic serial number > (ESN), a home system identifier, and a mobile telephone number. All > but the ESN are field changeable -- on some models it requires burning > a PROM, others allow keyboard-entry administration of the same data. Several conversations with people at both BellSouth Mobility and Cellular One have resulted in an interesting pattern. Although I am not getting any information from them, it's the *way* I'm not getting it that is odd. The stock answer to this question is "we do not offer this service", but at no time has anyone said "it can't be done" or "you can't do that". Although I'm unfamiliar with the exact process that is used when a cellular phone "connects", it seems to me that the only problem would be calls coming _TO_ the cellular, since both might (would?) attempt to receive the call. Why is the ESN not "field changeable"? Is it burned into a PROM, or what? Can anyone point me at a reference (or group of them) which would provide a good starting place for me to get up to speed on cellular technology and operation? That would be more helpful than trying to tap the vast levels of knowledge represented by the readers/contributors of this group, when what I am looking for appears to be very basic and trivial information. BTW - in my previous message, I note I used the word "transportable" ... sigh! Proof that my fingers are not necessarily connected to my mind at all times, since the particular phone in question is a "portable" Motorola model. [Moderator's Note: The ESN is really about the only protection the cellular telcos have against fraud. Yes, people tamper with the ESN on cellular phones for fraudulent reasons. Nothing is perfect, but the ESN is deliberatly made difficult to change for that reason. PT]
droid@uunet.uu.net (Marty Brenneis) (07/30/90)
rich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims) writes: >What are the issues, both legal and technical, in operating two >cellular phones on the same account number? How are these widgets >"identified" when a call is originated or received? Is it "field >changeable"?? If this is possible at all, can it be done with two >different models of phone? All cellular phones are identified with an Electronic Serial Number (or ESN). This number is burned into the phone in such a way that it cannot be altered. At Motorola they WILL NOT ship a replacement chip with the ESN in it before you return the defective one. This spec was designed to make stolen cellphones useless. What are the stats on stolen cellphones?? droid
Rich Sims <rich@pro-exchange.cts.com> (07/30/90)
In response to my question concerning changing the ESN of a callular phone, the Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: The ESN is really about the only protection the > cellular telcos have against fraud. Yes, people tamper with the ESN on > cellular phones for fraudulent reasons. Nothing is perfect, but the > ESN is deliberatly made difficult to change for that reason. PT] Unfortunately, what you say is quite true. I was discussing the subject with someone who is even less knowledgeable about this stuff than I am, and his immediate response was to outline a scheme whereby he would be able to defraud the cellular telco. It took him all of two seconds to figure out what would be needed to do that! ....sigh! My reason for wanting the information is not fraudulent, since I already have the account (number) with the cellular telco, and would be paying for all the air-time used, which is really the only thing the cellular telco is providing. I simply want to make it as convenient as my wire connected service, and am less than enthused over the prospect of paying $300 a year (or more) for what would essentially be an "extension phone" used only for an occasional outgoing call. The response from the individual I was talking to reminds me of a time when I logged onto a system via a long-distance call, and was asked by another user if I was really calling from where I said. When I answered "yes", the next question was "Are you actually PAYING for the call?", and my answer of "yes" to that question was received with astonishment! [Moderator's Note: Unfortunatly, for about the first half dozen years of BBS'ing -- 1979 through 1985 or so -- that medium had a preponderance of phreaks, crackers, hackers, phrackers and other sundry and assorted weird people on line to give it a bad name; a reputation it has not entirely lived down to this day. Add the computer illiteracy so prevalent in the general population and even among many telco or government employees and you really can't blame the telcos and the government from eyeing the whole thing with lots of suspicion: Millions of dollars in fraud calls were terminated on BBS lines over the years. PT]