telecom@ucbvax.ARPA (02/12/85)
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
TELECOM Digest Mon, 11 Feb 85 22:02:30 EST Volume 4 : Issue 158
Today's Topics:
Equal access...
could it be?
TELECOM Digest V4 #157
"TalkLine" snafu, Pacific Telephone
Re: Providing Attack Warnings to the Public
re: Billing Weirdness
precise tone plan (the prompt after 0+ numbers, MCI, SPRINT)
Re: Residential PABX System
Phone Noise
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Feb 85 00:37:44 EST
From: *Hobbit* <AWalker@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Equal access...
To: telecom@RUTGERS.ARPA
These are apparently the first exchanges in the Baltimore area to be
upgraded to equal access. The choices are: (drum roll please)
Okay, how about hitting us with that once again, but put the dial codes
for each carrier in?? I assume these will be standard country-wide,
right? 'Twould be a handy reference for those of us slated for equal
access sometime in late '86 [sigh!!].
_H*
-------
------------------------------
To: telecom@bbncca
Subject: could it be?
Date: 09 Feb 85 22:15:51 PST (Sat)
From: Jerry Sweet <jsweet@uci-750a>
This is a good one. Every once in a while strange (i.e. never made)
long distance calls show up on my bill. Usually they are for very
small amounts, and usually it is not worth my trouble to take the time
to have them removed from my bill (after all, how much is my time
worth?). However, I heard an apocryphal rumor that it is the practice
of Phone Companies (mine is Pacific Bell) to bill calls that have been
removed from customers' bills to other random customers in the hopes
that someone will pay them. This sounds like an unlikely fraud, but I
suppose that their billing programs are capable of such a thing ("Oh,
this call's been removed from X now? Well, let's fire up the old
random number generator and give it to some unsuspecting Y."), and I
suppose that many people feel that the ten minutes or so (and N brain
cells) required to have a few cents removed from their bill aren't
worth it.
Could it be?
-jns
P.S. Next week, we'll explore what happens to phone calls placed in the
Bermuda Triangle... /j
------------------------------
Date: 10 February 1985 13:54-EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC>
Subject: TELECOM Digest V4 #157
To: TELECOM @ BBNCCA
The issue of whether an apartment or office PBX system is regulated or
not falls under the jurisdiction of the local Public Utility Commission,
and not the FCC. Basically, if it is a SHARED service, and run on a
non-profit basis, it certainly will not be regulated. If it is run on a
profit making basis by the building owners, there's a chance a PUC would
step in to regulate, but it is still unlikely. To be considered a
common carrier, you generally have to offer service to "anyone". An
apartment owner is serving a very restricted market, and therefore would
probably not fall under the common carrier definitions.
The issue is, as noted, currently under consideration by a number of
PUCs including Texas.
Marvin Sirbu
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 85 22:43:58 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@Brl-Vld.ARPA>
To: telecom@Brl-Vld.ARPA
Subject: "TalkLine" snafu, Pacific Telephone
I heard of someone getting a big phone bill from Pacific Telephone
as a result of "TalkLine" not being available in certain prefixes
(and associated promo material that should NOT have been sent but
was). Word of this reached me thru local TV news out of Philadelphia!
Anybody with more info about TalkLine?
------------------------------
Date: 10 Feb 85 16:49:04 PST (Sunday)
Subject: Re: Providing Attack Warnings to the Public
To: <telecom-request@BBNCCA.ARPA>
From: Michael Neary <MNeary.es@XEROX.ARPA>
Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #156
The EBS system has been a technically viable means of communicating
emergency warnings for more than a decade: that obnoxious two-tone is
designed to automatically activate special receivers. But the weekly
tests are a major obstacle in getting someone like me to set up an
automatic receiver in my home. No "alarm' system with a planned
false-alarm rate of once a week is tolerable. I worked at a radio
station that monitored our 'feed' with such a receiver - - the weekly
blasts drove us up the wall!
This, I suspect, is why nobody in Oklahoma wants an automatic EBS
receiver. They probably aren't even available any more.
There must be a viable technical solution to the present over-testing of
the 'EBS network'. The two-tone detector and automatic speaker
switching could be verified by an independent local oscillator. The
necessary added function can be in one (micropower) LSI, but in any case
is electronically trivial.
~ Mike
------------------------------
Date: 11 February 85 12:49-EST
From: Michael Grant <GRANT%UMDB.Bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>
To: Telecom Digest <TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA>
Subject: re: Billing Weirdness
I noticed too that I got billed for 2 Long Distance Directory Assistance
calls. I called AT&T and complained. They told me that I didn't make the
required minimum of calls over AT&T...I can't remember the minimun, it was
about $2 worth. Does SBS offer 2 free calls to LDDA?
-Mike
------------------------------
From: William R. Soley <WRS@C39.Tymnet>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 85 11:26:55 PST
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA
Subject: precise tone plan (the prompt after 0+ numbers, MCI, SPRINT)
Is the tone burst (bong) sent after dialing 0+ calling card calls in
some areas a standard tone? If so what is it and does anyone have any
experience detecting it? I want to build a feature to allow password
authenticated users of my ham radio repeater to place toll calls without
having to transmit their calling card numbers to anyone who cares to
listen.
I am also interested if anyone knows the prompt tones for MCI or SPRINT.
Thanks. -Bill
Please reply to:
ucbvax!hplabs!oliveb!tymix!wrs%c39.tymnet (UUCP)
or WRS@Office-2.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 85 15:02 EST
From: Axelrod.wbst@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Re: Residential PABX System
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA
What constitutes a Telephone Company, thus subject to regulation by
FCC/PUC?
My understanding is that anything that crosses a public road or railroad
is ipso facto within the jurisdiction of the tarrifed telco.
Conversely, if your wires /don't\ cross a public road or railroad, then
anything you do is your own business, (subject to laws of tresspass,
etc). The terms "public road" and "railroad" have precise legal
definitions, and all this is as per Federal Communications Act.
Hence, if my understanding is correct, yes, an office building or
apartment operator can install his own PBX, and yes, you can string a
wire to your neighbor's house, if he agrees, and if it doesn't cross the
road. But you can't string it across the road, or even through a tunnel
under the road. Even if you have an easement for a tunnel, and you
already have steam pipes, computer lines etc, you can't put a telephone
wire through without the telco doing it.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, anybody.
Art Axelrod
Xerox Webster Research Center
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 11 Feb 1985 14:25:56-PST
From: libman%grok.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Sandy Libman)
To: telecom@bbncca.ARPA
Subject: Phone Noise
Re: Phone Noise
I had a similar problem (radio station on my modem). My BELL 212A didn't
seem to care, but when I switched to a DEC DF03, the line was unusable.
I called TELCO (during the breakup) and they sent someone who installed a
"Radio Suppressor". It works. No more trouble with the modem. No charge
for the filter.
[The reason I mentioned the breakup is that at first, no-one would take
responsibility to fix the problem ("Call AT&T", "Not us, call NYNEX", ...),
and then several people showed up at the same time to install it. Lots of
"I'll do it.", "No, I'll do it.", etc. But that's another story.]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
******************************