Telecom-REQUEST@MIT-XX.ARPA (10/25/85)
From: Moderator <Telecom-REQUEST@MIT-XX.ARPA>
TELECOM Digest Thursday, October 24, 1985 4:26PM
Volume 5, Issue 55
Today's Topics:
More 1+
Rochester telephone service
Why the Vadic 3400 protocol died
Racal-Vadic 4224 info
DATA ACCESS LINE
RE: ACTIVE-LINE INDICATOR
High-speed modem query
Electronic Surveillance.
what is an AML and how does it work?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 20:24:00 EDT
From: "Peter G. Capek" <capek.yktvmv%ibm-sj.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: More 1+
What with all this discussion about 1+, I couldn't resist telling
about this:
I work in the 914 (Westchester, New York) area. Our PBX has automatic
route selection, and one of its possibilities is an FX line to 617.
One of my colleagues tried to call 617-460-xxxx and was told that he
had to dial a 1 when calling "beyond the local area". I assume he was
supposed to dial 9-617-1-460-xxxx.
We were able to make the call by asking the operator for assistance.
I was later able also make the call by busying out the (single) FX
line from another phone, and thereby forcing a long distance call.
Whose fault is this? Is our PBX expected to know when to insert a "1"
(and when not to, since the message clearly says I must include it
when it is required, and omit it when it is forbidden) at the
beginning of the number it dials? It seems to be smart enough to know
not to dial the 617 when it has chosen that FX line.
Peter Capek
IBM Research -- Yorktown Heights, NY
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 20:07 EDT
From: Tom Martin <TJMartin@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA>
Subject: Rochester telephone service
I have been traveling a lot to Rochester, NY lately, and the most
aggravating part of it (or even, the only aggravating part) is the
terrible service provided by Rochester Telephone. They have yet to
automate credit card service; it takes 5-6-7 attempts to get a
long-distance line; random information tones (sort of like busy signals)
are the result of a call in over half the attempts for a local
(intra-city) call.
How can the folks in Rochester take it? Whenever I complain about the
service, people will counter with the ONE time they got a circuit busy
message in Boston.
Is the New York State PUC powerless?
------------------------------
From: ima!johnl@bbncca
Date: Tue Oct 22 22:26:00 1985
Subject: Why the Vadic 3400 protocol died
There were several reasons. The most important is that Bell cheaply
licensed their protocol to everybody in sight, while Vadic had only one
licensee, Anderson-Jacobson (as far as I could ever tell.)
There are also technical reasons. It used to be important that you could
accoustically couple 3400 protocol and you can't couple 212 protocol. Since
the advent of modular phone plugs, buy your own phone, and inexpensive
modems that can pick up the phone and place calls by themselves, it's
practically not an issue any more except for people who call in from their
hotel rooms. Also, the 212 protocol was designed for easier LSI
implementation, which is why the frequencies are an octave apart.
Evidently, a 212 implementation, even before the Rockwell chip set, was
simpler and cheaper than a 3400.
Finally, I also gather that the 3400 protocol is not as much better than
the 212 protocol as people used to think. That impression was gained from
triple modems which had lousy 212 performance. Good 212 modems are about as
good as 3400 ones.
John Levine, ima!johnl, Levine@YALE
------------------------------
From: crash!scotto@sdcsvax.arpa
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 11:44:24 PDT
Subject: Racal-Vadic 4224 info
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 09:01:56 PDT
To: ihnp4!mcnc!ittral!malloy
Subject: Racal-Vadic 4224 info
Cc: sdcsvax!telecom@mit-xx
I have 5 of the Racal-Vadic 4224 modems in my office. I did
unfortunately get some of the first so there was the normal new
product troubleshooting. I am basically only using one of them
for dial-out right now. I have used them for auto-answer and put
them through a pretty lengthy test. They do speed search, and seem
very clean at 1200. 2400 has more line hits, but I heard through
my vendor that they will be using the MNP protocal in the later
versions.
I only problem that I was aware of with the "Rockwell chip set"
was the power consumption and availability. Racal includes in the
documentation that if you don't have the 1681 chassis (the one with
the huge power supply) that you can only have 8 4224's per rack, even
though it is a 16 slot rack. I have a 1680 chassis with redundant
power supplys, three 2440 (201C) two 1244 (202) and 5 4224's. I have
not had any problems due to power yet. (knock on wood)
Another thing I should mention is that Racal's has a regional service
center. The people there are *very* helpfull and if you have any
questions they are more than willing to help. They will also help you
if you are trying to install your modem in a strange application. I
have talked with, and can recommend Richard Perez for 4224 support and
questions. The number is 800/22V-ADIC or 800/228-2342. If you need
a manual I have a couple extras. Lemme know.
---Scott O'Connell crash!scotto@ucsd - or - crash!scotto@nosc
{ihnp4, cbosgd, sdcsvax, noscvax}!crash!scotto
Data Systems of San Diego
------------------------------
From: crash!scotto@SDCSVAX.ARPA
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 85 11:47:53 PDT
Subject: DATA ACCESS LINE
Pacific Bell has a new service, thought I would relay it to Telecom.
DATA ACCESS LINE
DATA ACCESS LINE:
Provides a needed customer service, a "cleaner line", for faster,
more reliable communication over the switched network.
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION/TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
Data Access Line is an analog local loop which is provisioned and
maintained to higher quality standards appropriate for data.
If necessary, electronic circuitry is added to the line which
improves frequency response and compensates for delay and loss.
Tests are performed to insure the assigned cable pair meets
tight limits for impulse and background noise. If available, an
ESS number will be assigned, to help prevent noise caused by
electomechanical switches. With an appropriate modem, a customer
could reasonably expect to attain 4800bps on most calls within
the Service Area.
PRICE:
The rates for establishing Data Access Line are -
MONTHLY RATE SERVICE CHARGE
$22.25 per line $175.00 per line
The FCC End User Common Line charges apply as well.
PRODUCT CONSIDERATIONS:
Customers may continue to transmit data over standard access
lines. However, we will no longer upgrade these lines when
customers experience data problems. A customer's modem will
determine what type of jack is required (rj45s, rj11 etc.).
A data jack does not improve line quality.
Data Access Line is available on a measured basis only, where
measuring capability exists.
------------------------------
Date: WED, 23 OCT 85 10:09:39 EDT
From: <WGREGGS%CLEMSON.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: RE: ACTIVE-LINE INDICATOR
The device described by the Hobbit will work fine but it will only
display the status of the instruments connected after the device.
Therefore, if one wanted to show the staus of all the instruments
connected to a particular line it would have to be wired in before
the distribution box. Unfortunately it can not be wired in at any
point and provide the status for all branches of the phone line.
W. Gregg Stefancik
Clemson University
(803)-656-7896
BITNET: wgreggs@clemson.BITNET
ARPA : wgreggs%clemson.BITNET@wiscvm.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 21 Oct 85 19:21:55 GMT
From: pjatter@sandia-cad.ARPA
Subject: High-speed modem query
We are currently evaluating high-speed (i.e., > 1200 baud) modems to
link our remote terminal users to our Vax.
There seem to be plenty of options in the 2400 baud arena, but now
we're getting greedy and are looking at some of the 9600 baud modems
which are beginning to become available. Does anyone have any
experience with 9600 baud modems (preferrably asynchronous)? The only
companies I've seen advertise so far are:
Electronic Vaults (Reston, VA): upta 96 (asynchronous)
Universal Data Systems (Huntsville, AL): UDS 9600 A/B (synchronous)
(We just obtained a UDS modem for evaluation (using their EC-100
synchronous -> asynchronous converter) and had no trouble getting it
to work here in the office. We haven't tried it over long distance
lines yet.)
It appears that there are some proposed standards for these modems
(CCITT V.29 & V.32). I've seen some proposed CCITT standards (V.29 &
V.32) mentioned in the literature for these modems. Does anyone know
just what these standards standardize?
Paul Attermeier
Sandia National Labs
Div 5324
Albuquerque, NM
UUCP: ...{ucbvax | ihnp4!lanl | gatech}!unmvax!sandia!pjatter
ARPANET: rowe@sandia-cad
------------------------------
Date: 24 Oct 1985 11:17-PDT
Subject: Electronic Surveillance.
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
Americans' Privacy Exposed by New Technology, Congress Told
By LEE BYRD - Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The explosion in communications technology has so
outpaced privacy laws that Americans have little or no protection
against a plethora of new ways for government or private adversaries
to pry into their lives, a congressional agency reported today.
The non-partisan Office of Technology Assessment found that 35 out
of 142 domestic federal agencies use or plan to use various
electronic surveillance methods, including modern devices not
governed by a landmark 1968 law that circumscribed the use of
wiretaps and bugs - concealed microphones.
The agency said 36 agencies, not counting those in foreign
intelligence, already use a total of 85 computerized record systems
for investigative or intelligence purposes, and maintain 288 million
files on 114 million people. The report raised the ''technically
feasible'' specter of these being linked into a single data base
network that could track untold numbers of citizens without due
cause.
The report, requested by House and Senate committees, noted that
many new and uncontrolled methods of surveillance are made possible
by the very technologies of which more and more Americans are
availing themselves - electronic mail, computer conferencing,
cellular and cordless telephones, beepers and electronic pagers.
Intercepting such devices is easy, and ''the law has not kept pace,''
the agency said.
But other devices, such as miniature television cameras and pen
registers - which monitor the numbers called on a given telephone
line - have enabled new ways to spy on people even if their own
communications habits are more old-fashioned, the agency noted.
Rep. Robert W. Kastenmeier, D-Wis., chairman of the House Judiciary
subcommittee on courts and civil liberties, said the study ''shows
how the law in this area has broken down; it is up to Congress to fix
it. If we fail to act, the personal and business communications of
Americans will not have the privacy protection they deserve.''
Sen. Charles McC. Mathias, R-Md., said the report ''documents how
new and more intrusive forms of snooping have followed in the wake of
the exciting advances in communications technology,'' and agreed
Congress must ''bring federal privacy laws up to date.'
Rep. Don Edwards, D-Calif., chairman of the House Judiciary
subcommittee on civil and constitutional rights, said, ''While the
attorney general of the United States is claiming that the civil
liberties granted by the Constitution should be limited to the
'original intentions' of the framers, the technological possibilities
for government surveillance have exploded. The framers knew nothing
of closed-circuit television, wiretapping and computer data banks.''
The report noted that the Fourth Amendment, which protects ''the
right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,'' was written
''at a time when people conducted their affairs in a simple direct,
and personalized fashion.''
Neither, said the report, has Title III of the Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968, which was designed to protect the privacy
of wire and oral communications, kept pace.
''At the time Congress passed this act,'' the report said,
''electronic surveillance was limited primarily to simple telephone
taps and concealed microphones. Since then, the basic communications
infrastructure in the United States has been in rapid technological
change.''
The congressional agency said it could not estimate the extent of
electronic surveillance in the private sector, saying only ''it is
probable that many forms ... go undetected, and if detected, go
unreported.''
But in its survey of the federal bureaucracy, OTA found 35 agencies,
mostly in the Justice, Treasury and Defense departments, used or
planned to use:
-Closed circuit television, 29 agencies.
-Night vision systems, 22.
-Miniature transmitters, 21.
-Electronic beepers and sensors, 15.
-Telephone taps, recorders, and pen registers, 14.
-Computer usage monitoring, 6.
-Electronic mail monitoring, 6.
-Cellular radio interception, 5.
-Satellite interception, 4.
As for the 85 computerized record systems that could be used for
surveillance purposes, none of the operators provided statistics
requested by the OTA on record completeness and accuracy.
Under the 1968 law, wiretaps and bugs are prohibited without a court
order based on the affirmation of a high-ranking prosecutor that a
crime has occurred, that the target of the surveillance is involved,
and that other means of investigation would be ineffective.
According to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, federal
and state judges approved 801 out of 802 requests last year for
electronic surveillance, primarily wiretaps and hidden microphones,
at an average cost of $45,000.
The agency said that while there is some promise in emerging
techniques for low-cost data encryption or other means to protect
communication systems from eavesdropping, ''there is no immediate
technological answer ... against electronic surveillance.''
Foreign intelligence cases are governed by a separate law, so the
CIA, National Security Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency were
not included in the survey.
------------------------------
Subject: what is an AML and how does it work?
Date: 24 Oct 85 15:25:00 EDT (Thu)
From: Richard Kane <rkane@BBNCC5.ARPA>
I moved into a new apartment last month and had quite a bad experience
getting phone service. Several weeks before I actually moved, I ordered my
new phone service with New England Telephone and was told that there would
be no problem in setting up my new service on time. Since I was only
moving across the street from where I had been living, I wanted to keep my
existing phone number, but I also wanted to have a second line installed
with a new number for my home terminal (I didn't tell NET that that was
what it was for).
To make a very long story a bit shorter, when the installer came down on
the day that I moved, he discovered that they couldn't give me any phone
service at all since there were no more "facilities" (spare trunks)
available in my neighborhood. (My apartment was wired up, but there were
no spare lines in the basement coming in from the street). After 2 weeks of
calling (from work) and badgering them almost every day, NET decided to
provide service to me by way of an AML. An AML is apparently some sort of
multiplexor which is able to provide service for 2 (or more) phone numbers
over a single pair of wires. The AML takes one number as input and gives
another number as output. (There is apparently another AML or similar
device at the central office end of the circuit). The configuration is
depicted below.
line in (main number) |---|
__________________________________|AML|______________ second
| |---| phone
| number
|------|
|filter|
|------|
|
|
|
main phone
number
Since I wanted two lines (numbers) coming into my apartment, and since it
was not convenient to run another set of wires up to my apartment from the
basement, the phone company came down and installed two AMLs in the
building.
One AML was installed in the basement. This AML was used to provide
service to two residents of my building who had previously had dedicated
lines of their own. These residents were not informed of this change, but
it all should have been transparent to them anyway. This thus freed up a
dedicated pair of wires to connect to the wire going up to my apartment.
The second AML was installed in my apartment. This AML now provides me
with the two lines which I had originally requested and everything works
fine.
One more interesting thing to report about this whole affair is its effect
on my telephone answering machine. For some reason unknown to both me and
the phone company, my answering machine will not answer calls when it is
hooked up to the line which is output from the AML, but works fine on the
primary incoming line. Anyone have any ideas?
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
*********************
-------