guestg@zariski.harvard.edu (John McKay) (12/04/89)
I understand that one can dial (at least transAtlantic calls) to ensure that the call is not carried by satellite. How do I do so?
pkh%computer-science.nottingham.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (Kevin Hopkins) (12/05/89)
I know it's in the wrong direction, but I believe you can use country code 89, instead of 1, to reach the US from the UK via the transatlantic cable. Using country code 1 just picks the next channel to the US whilst 89 avoids the satellite. I saw this on a UK newsgroup a few months back and cannot remember who mentioned it - I don't have first hand experience and I don't know if it still works. Can anyone shed more light on this? BTW, country code 89 has not been assigned by CCITT. +--------------------------------------------+--------------------------------+ | K.Hopkins%cs.nott.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk | Kevin Hopkins, | | or ..!mcsun!ukc!nott-cs!K.Hopkins | Department of Computer Science,| | or in the UK: K.Hopkins@uk.ac.nott.cs | University of Nottingham, | | CHAT-LINE: +44 602 484848 x 3815 | Nottingham, ENGLAND, NG7 2RD | +--------------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
John Pettitt <jpp@specialix.co.uk> (12/06/89)
pkh%computer-science.nottingham.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (Kevin Hopkins) writes: >I know it's in the wrong direction, but I believe you can use country code >89, instead of 1, to reach the US from the UK via the transatlantic cable. >Using country code 1 just picks the next channel to the US whilst 89 avoids >the satellite. I saw this on a UK newsgroup a few months back and cannot >remember who mentioned it - I don't have first hand experience and I don't >know if it still works. Can anyone shed more light on this? >BTW, country code 89 has not been assigned by CCITT. Almost right, it works like this: There are several providers of transatlantic service using both cable (copper & fiber) and satellite links. British Telecom International (BTI) routes calls by some algorythmn known only to themselves and you may get any one of the above and any one of 3 or 4 long distance providers on the US end of the link. There is a magic code that you can dial after the get out code (010) country code (1) and before the areacode-prefix-number. This code will force the call to use MCI for the US end which seems to force a fibre link across the pond most of the time (~95%). I am not going to post the code since I think it is a bug in the programming of the international switch in London and I don't want it to go away because of overuse. It's not 89. If anybody knows any more about this please post/let me know. I just spent 10 minutes on the phone to BTI trying to get some more info but it's like banging your head on the wall trying to get anybody technical. John Pettitt Specialix International jpp@specialix.co.uk
julian@bongo.uucp (julian macassey) (12/08/89)
In article <1900@accuvax.nwu.edu>, jpp@specialix.co.uk (John Pettitt) writes: > pkh%computer-science.nottingham.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (Kevin Hopkins) > writes: > >I know it's in the wrong direction, but I believe you can use country code > >89, instead of 1, to reach the US from the UK via the transatlantic cable. > >Using country code 1 just picks the next channel to the US whilst 89 avoids > >the satellite. I saw this on a UK newsgroup a few months back and cannot > >remember who mentioned it - I don't have first hand experience and I don't > >know if it still works. Can anyone shed more light on this? > Stuff deleted > There is a magic code that you can dial after the get out code (010) > country code (1) and before the areacode-prefix-number. This code > will force the call to use MCI for the US end which seems to force a > fibre link across the pond most of the time (~95%). > I am not going to post the code since I think it is a bug in the > programming of the international switch in London and I don't want it > to go away because of overuse. It's not 89. > If anybody knows any more about this please post/let me know. This is what I read in New Scientist Mag a few years ago. It was also published on P69 Dec 1988 Popular Communications Mag. RCA 0101 83 (213) 555-1234 ITT 0101 84 (213) 555-1234 Yes, I know these carriers don't really exist anymore. Any hacker can now spend some time trying carious 8X combinations seeing what they get. You may try: 0101 8X (700) 555-4141. For the brits, the (700) 555-4141 number will give you a recorded message telling you who your long distance carrier is. The 700 number works from any line in the US, except some slimeball COPT payphones where they block it. Please post results. Enquiring minds want to know. Yours, Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com {ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice (213) 653-4495
jpp@flopsy.specialix.co.uk (John Pettitt) (12/12/89)
One '>' = Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com Two '>>' = John Pettit, jpp@specialix.co.uk >> I am not going to post the code since I think it is a bug in the >> programming of the international switch in London and I don't want it >> to go away because of overuse. It's not 89. >> If anybody knows any more about this please post/let me know. >This is what I read in New Scientist Mag a few years ago. It was >also published on P69 Dec 1988 Popular Communications Mag. >RCA 0101 83 (213) 555-1234 >ITT 0101 84 (213) 555-1234 OK since the codes have been posted here is the current state: 0101 83 (213) 555 1212 will route via MCI I have not found any other codes that work. 700 555 4141 is blocked for UK callers but you can check that 83 is MCI by calling a 976 number and getting an intercept. John Pettitt UUCP: uunet!slxsys!jpp Internet: John.Pettitt@specialix.co.uk JANET: emxxjpp@uk.ac.brunel.me POTS: +44 1 941 2564 FAX: +44 1 941 4098 Disclaimer: Me, say that ? Never, it's a forged posting !