kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) (03/13/90)
In article <4984@accuvax.nwu.edu> you write: >Is it illegal to have two modems tied up to each other so that a person could >call the one modem and bounce to another (3d) modem to avoid toll charges? I doubt that this lash-up is illegal anywhere in the U.S. It's probably not worth the trouble to really find out. If you think about it for a few minutes, there are a couple of other (better) ways to accomplish the same thing. Redialers or call diverters are available on the open market that will do what you want without the added cost of the modems. If the intermediate office in your example has call forwarding available, it will also accomplish the same thing using only one line instead of two. The drawback of the above two options is that you are locked into a single terminating number to call. Guess your modem option would allow you some flexibility. The cost of two lines and two modems seems a pretty high price to pay to avoid paying the short-haul toll charges. Ken Abrams uunet!pallas!kabra437 Illinois Bell kabra437@athenanet.com Springfield (voice) 217-753-7965
sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) (03/14/90)
In article <5047@accuvax.nwu.edu> sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) writes: }To summarize: A to B is free, B to C is free, A to C is long distance, }A to C via call forwarding in B is free. }Works fairly well. Saves everyone a bit of money. >[Moderator's Note: You mean it saves everyone a bit of money *except* >for the person who subscribes to service 'B'. Someone is paying >whatever the going rate for local service is for that line. Does the >corresponding 'savings' experienced by users of the BBS offset the >basic monthly charge? Have you any idea who uses it, and how >frequently? PT] I average 11 hours a week to deliver him his newsfeed. At $.10/minute that would work out to $320/month. It probably costs him on the order of $30/month for the line and call forwarding. I would imagine that there are a fair number of other users on it as well. In the near future BCTel is supposed to be looking at widening the free calling area. At that point in time this won't be too useful. Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca ubc-cs!van-bc!sl 604-937-7532 (voice) 604-939-4768 (fax)
Vance Shipley <vances@xenitec.on.ca> (03/17/90)
In article <4984@accuvax.nwu.edu> MHS108@psuvm.psu.edu (Mark Solsman) writes: >Is it illegal to have two modems tied up to each other so that a person could >call the one modem and bounce to another (3d) modem to avoid toll charges? >I'd have a relay station that would bounce the output of one modem to the >input of another, all signals. The advantages would be avoiding toll >charges since it would be local to the relay station, and local from >the relay station to the destination. I set one of these up once. Trying to dial into our office switch and out again over an FX line didn't work because of degradation of the signal, so I hooked two modems back to back and created a "digipeater"! In order to prevent unauthorized use I hotlined the output of the second modem so it would automatically connect me with the site I was interested in. I also disabled the escape sequences on both. The null modem cable connecting the two must be done correctly so you don't get hung up. vance@xenitec.on.ca
bob@uunet.uu.net> (03/18/90)
kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) writes: >In article <4984@accuvax.nwu.edu> you write: >>Is it illegal to have two modems tied up to each other so that a person could >>call the one modem and bounce to another (3d) modem to avoid toll charges? >I doubt that this lash-up is illegal anywhere in the U.S. It's >probably not worth the trouble to really find out. If you think about >it for a few minutes, there are a couple of other (better) ways to >accomplish the same thing. Redialers or call diverters are available >on the open market that will do what you want without the added cost >of the modems. >If the intermediate office in your example has call forwarding >available, it will also accomplish the same thing using only one line >instead of two. The drawback of the above two options is that you are >locked into a single terminating number to call. Guess your modem >option would allow you some flexibility. The cost of two lines and >two modems seems a pretty high price to pay to avoid paying the >short-haul toll charges. There's a better answer. I have used a device which allows you to reprogram the call forwarding number remotely to accomplish this same purpose. My home is a long distance call from my newsfeed in Orlando (and most of the commercial online service access numbers). My mother's house is roughly halfway between, and is a local phone call from either site. I had an extra phone line installed in her attic, billed to me at a rate of $17.02/month for unlimited local calls and call forwarding. Previous to this, I had a special calling plan which allowed me to call Orlando for the discounted rate of $ 0.13/minute. Forwarding my calls through the intermediate number saves me hundreds of dolllars a month in LD charges. The Remote Phone Forwarder (mfgd. by Cynex in N.J.) device is programmed by means of the following sequence: assuming that the phone line is already forwarded, you must first dial the intermediate site and let it ring once or more. Although the C.O. will, of course, forward your call as programmed, it also rings the intermediate site once to "remind" it that its phone has been forwarded. This alerts the Remote Phone Forwarder that you may wish to alter its programming. It then goes offhook and disables call forwarding. It waits thirty seconds or so for you to call back and reprogram it using touchtones and a two-digit security code. If no call is received, or if the reprogramming attempt fails, it redials the C.O. and reestablishes the previously programmed call forwarding. This process is cumbersome, and does not lend itself to frequent programming changes. It is also offensive if used for voice calls, as you must ring the forwarded number again to alter its programming. It has, however, served very well in my data application. I note that Mr. Townson has repeatedly poo-poohed this idea on account of metered local phone service. I've lived in at least eight different service areas around the southern and midwestern U.S., and I've never encountered metered local service. I have seen a similar concept offered, where you are allowed a handful of free local calls monthly, after which you pay so much _per call,_ not per minute, for which you pay a reduced monthly rate. I'm not disputing the existence of metered local service; I merely question Mr. Townson's perception of its ubiquity. Bob Breum uunet!tarpit >---v--< petsd 1701 Missouri Avenue hoptoad >---| Sanford, FL 32771-9722 USA ucf-cs >---+-----------------> !peora!cmpfen!bob +1 407 322-2002 uiucuxc >---' [Moderator's Note: If unmetered, local talk-as-long-as-you-like service is available, then of course this method works well. But in many of the larger metro areas, unmetered calling is becoming very rare. Even in Chicago, where very limited free local calling is available to *residence lines*, stringing together a series of call-forwarded lines to defeat the meter is tenuous at best. If it works in your community, great! PT]
tell@oscar.cs.unc.edu (Stephen Tell) (03/20/90)
In article <5292@accuvax.nwu.edu> swbatl!uiucuxc!cmpfen!bob@uunet.uu.net (Bob Breum) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 181, Message 3 of 12 >kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) writes: >>In article <4984@accuvax.nwu.edu> you write: >>>Is it illegal to have two modems tied up to each other so that a person >>>could call the one modem and bounce to another (3d) modem to avoid toll >>>charges? .....lots deleted.... >There's a better answer. I have used a device which allows you to >reprogram the call forwarding number remotely to accomplish this same >purpose. >The Remote Phone Forwarder (mfgd. by Cynex in N.J.) device.... >Bob Breum (Could you pleas post/mail their address/phone number? - thanks) I've been wondering about the feasibility of a related setup. Here's the situation. I make quite a few long-distance calls while in my office at school, and right how have to use my calling card. The $0.70 or so per call adds up. My appartment is a local call from school. Is there a device available that would coexist with an answering machine, and if it heard the right DTMF security sequence kick the answering machine off the line and respond with its own prompt (a tone or somthing). Then I would enter the number I wanted to call and the device would use three-way calling to place the call. It would then sit back and hold the line open until the call was completed, at which time I could either hand up or send it another number. Does such a device exist? I haven't experimented with three-way to see if CPC is provided when the second connection is broken so the device would know to accept another number. (I think it has to flash in order to connect to me, the first connection, again). Steve Tell tell@wsmail.cs.unc.edu CS Grad Student, UNC Chapel Hill. Former chief engineer, Duke Union Community Television, Durham, NC.
macy@cwjcc.ins.cwru.edu (03/21/90)
In article <5268@accuvax.nwu.edu> >X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 179, Message 9 of 12 >In article <4984@accuvax.nwu.edu> MHS108@psuvm.psu.edu (Mark Solsman) writes: >>Is it illegal to have two modems tied up to each other so that a person could >>call the one modem and bounce to another (3d) modem to avoid toll charges? >I set one of these up once. Trying to dial into our office switch and >out again over an FX line didn't work because of degradation of the >signal, so I hooked two modems back to back and created a >"digipeater"! Well, I do this routinely in several different ways: First: Ncoast, my news feed and system I act as "fill in" sysop for, is located in Cleveland. I am in Medina 15 miles and an intra-lata toll call away. I call from home into our office system (fmsystm) in Medina and call out on another modem, using one of our Cleveland FX's at nite in order to access ncoast directly. Defintiely legal. Second: I can call our office PBX's Medina DISA line and use it to tandem thru the PBX to the Cleveland lines, too. We have a bit of transmission degradation this way, but since I am supposed to know about these things, I installed a two wire voice repeater on the DISA line to solve this. We also have an Akron line, and my wife uses this all the time to call her parents in Akron. (Saves me major bucks, too!) Third: We get a lot of calls from Akron. There is an exchange (Sharon Center) that overlaps local calling areas with Medina and Akron. We set up a Remote Call Forward line in Sharon Center targeting our Medina number and use it often. We even got the telco to set it up to allow more that one call at a time (not often done). Also quite legal. Result: we only need one FX for outbound calling to Akron, all our incoming call from Akron come in on our local Medina trunks via the Sharon RCF. I see no difference between two modems strapped back to back and the use of a PBX with DISA. Patrick, our moderator, commented that he thought the economics of such arrangments are marginal. I disagree, these arrangments work well for us, and by checking our SMDR records, we know they save us much money. It should be noted that all the lines involved are flat rate local lines...measured (per minute) local lines might impact the economics. We have set up similar arrangments for customers with metered Ohil Bell lines, with postive results. Note: in telephone terminology metered and measured lines are not the same. Measured: billed for usage by time. Metered: billed by call regardless of duration. In Ohio Bell its $0.09/call Flat: billed at a flat rate (per month) with no additional charge for usage. We have all three types in Ohio, depending on who the local telco is, and what type of line you get. Lots of fun! Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy F M Systems, Inc. {uunet!backbone}!cwjcc.cwru.edu!ncoast!fmsystm!macy 150 Highland Drive Voice: +1 216 723-3000 Ext 251 Fax: +1 216 723-3223 Medina, Ohio 44256 USA Cleveland:273-3000 Akron:239-4994 (Dial 251 at tone) (Please note that our system name is "fmsystm" with no "e", .NOT. "fmsystem")