daemon@ucbvax.UUCP (08/27/84)
From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Mon Aug 20 21:19:42 1984
TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 21 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 69
Today's Topics:
Phone line woes
Re: Phone line woes
2400 baud modems
Re: 2400+ baud modems and protocols
1+ is not always not free
DA Charging
Variable length numbers; the German example
Unordered phones
1+
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 17 Aug 84 17:36:57-EDT
From: Jon Solomon <M.JSOL@MIT-EECS>
Subject: Phone line woes
I spent most of today talking to New England Telephone's various
offices to straighten out one of my phone line's records.
It all started when I got this months set of phone bills. I was being
billed for a line I had disconnected a month and a half ago (at
least).
Then there was static on my line. I called repair service ON THAT LINE
so they could hear the static. They looked up my records, but couldn't
find anything listed for that number. I knew there was something wrong
at this point.
I called the RSC (Residence Service Center) and told them what had
happened at Repair office. They also could not find any record of my
new number. They asked me if I would mind them changing it yet again,
so they could clear up the confusion with a minimal of fuss. The
number, 542-JSOL, was clearly unique and I wasn't going to give it up
without a fight. They eventually told me that I would start receiving
bills under the new number. I can only assume that they will stop
billing me for the old number, 338-4033, at the same time. Probably
that is a poor assumption in this day and age.
I got two calls from various departments of NE Telephone asking me for
information. One of them was obviously a repair person who told me
that 542-JSOL was "REMOTE CALL FORWARDED" to my main number. I told
them that I had call forwarding, and that I had manually forwarded it
to that number. They insisted that I prove it. I did. I disconnected
the call forwarding, and lo', he called me on 542-JSOL and sure enough
it was working, and had the static I reported earlier!
They also informed me that they had no cable and pair listing for my
number, and that they would probably have to send someone out here to
find that information firsthand. I almost offered to do it for them,
but decided that it would probably be too confusing for them if I did.
All in all, I would say that NE Telephone's service quality has gone
down considerably due to divestiture, And if this is the sort of
problem that goes on all the time, I think I liked it the other way
better (with AT&T controlling everything).
Oh well,
--JSol
------------------------------
Date: 17 Aug 1984 19:32-PDT
Sender: GEOFF@SRI-CSL
Subject: Re: Phone line woes
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow <Geoff @ SRI-CSL>
As the saying goes: When AT&T merged with Department of Justice,
Everyone got screwed.
------------------------------
From: deutsch.pa@XEROX.ARPA
Date: 17 Aug 84 22:26:31 PDT
Subject: 2400 baud modems
We recently bought some model 224 modems from Codex . They are
1200(Bell 212A)/2400 only, full duplex. I think they use a
(proposed?) CCITT standard protocol. They come in a stand-alone
version and a somewhat more expensive "smart" version with an
auto-dialler and a little command language. Our communications folks
evaluated them and like them.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 84 13:55:40 PDT
From: Matthew J Weinstein <matt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: Re: 2400+ baud modems and protocols
Gamma Technology has a modem that plugs into the IBM PC/XT or a
stand-alone chassis, and runs synchronous communications at 9.6kbps
over dial-up lines. It is claimed to be CCITT V.29 and V.27
compatible. (The modem supposedly uses the same chip set as FAX
machines.)
Model: FAXT-96 Price: $1995 (qty 1-9) Protocols: V.29 @
9.6,7.2,4.8kbps
V.27 ter @ 4.8,2.4kbps
V.21 chan 2 FSK @ 300bps Features: Automatic adaptive
equalization/selectable link amp.
echo suppression and squelch options. Compatible
with group 3 fax machines. Optional support for SDLC
adapter card.
Gamma Technology, Inc.
2452 Embarcadero Way
Palo Alto, CA 94303
415-856-7421
(insert standard disclaimer here)
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 20 Aug 1984 09:12:47-PDT
From: libman%grok.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (Sandy Libman)
Subject: 1+ is not always not free
>Date: Wed 8 Aug 84 09:45:54-PDT >From: Richard Furuta
<Furuta@WASHINGTON.ARPA> >Subject: 1+ dialing
>I don't know why there's the resistance to dialing 1+ for long
>distance calls. It can be a very useful device from the standpoint
of >the telephone user. In this area, 1+ dialing is required for all
toll >calls. I find it very useful to be reminded that a call is toll
when >returning a call from within this area code. It's a real easy
rule to >remembe---if you have to dial 1+ you have to expect a toll
charge.
Life's never that easy! I live 25 miles north of Boston and pay $20
per month extra on my phone bill so that I can make unlimited calls to
the Central Exchange [Greater Boston Area]. In order to call numbers
in the Central Exchange I have to dial 1+ [unless these numbers are
ALSO in my contiguous area, in which case I am forbidden to dial 1+
[Intercept -> recording -> "you lose" tone.]] Because of this, my "1+
is a toll call" clue is taken away. I am frequently bitten by calling
numbers which I thought were in the Central Exchange, but turn out to
be a couple of miles outside of it, thus being actual toll calls. The
only way for me to tell if the call is covered by my flat rate service
is to look at the charts on 4 separate pages of the Boston phone book.
Speaking of gripes -- I pay $240 a year for this Central Exchange
service, but I cannot get The Phone Company to automatically send me
the (set of 5) phone books for the covered area.
------------------------------
Date: 20-Aug-1984 1239
From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert)
Subject: DA Charging
In the case of Rochester, we have a small, local telephone company
which has built a system for handling DA charging in which the
caller's number is transmitted to accounting equipment in the DA
center.
If a charge is to be made, the DA operator indicates that fact, and
the accounting equipment generates the charge.
For local DA, this is fairly easy to do. However, for the nationwide
network, a complete redesign would have been required. When you call
NPA 555-1212, a local call record is made. This call record indicates
the time you dialed the call, the time it was answered, and the time
it terminated.
You might say: AH, just have the distant DA operator only press the
charge button (which would mean that the call would appear unanswered)
after the valid charge is determined. Not acceptable for two reasons:
1. having conversations while the call appears to be on hook is not
good from two standpoints: transmission, if in-band signalling is
still in use, and network planning, i.e. keeping track of the actual
usage of the network.
2. the caller could hang up before the supervisory signal returns to
the source, thereby getting something for nothing.
------------------------------
Date: 20-Aug-1984 1246
From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert)
Subject: Variable length numbers; the German example
Werner provided an example of calling large company X with (as an
example) 607 as the main number and 607 123 as extension 123.
This is not the way this is actually done in Germany. Directory
listings indicate numbers which are in PBXs, and indicate which point
in the number is the break between the prefix and the extension (the
HYPHEN is used for this in Germany). The instructions in the
directory tell you that if you need to reach the switchboard, you
should leave off all of the number past the HYPHEN and replace it with
1 or 0. (It used to always be 1, but now it's no longer consistent.)
The instructions also tell you that if you know the extension, you can
dial a different extension.
Germany does not use timing to cause the call to end up at the
attendant; the attendant always has an assigned number.
In DID installations in the U.S., the same approach is taken. In
Germany, the attendant is almost always 1 or 0 (though not ALWAYS --
U.S. military PBXs in Germany usually use 92 or 93 for information
and/or attendant). In the U.S., the main number is not consistent at
all, but is usually listed in the directory.
There is no mechanism in Germany for hitting a special key to cause a
call already ringing at a station to revert to the attendant. The
station, after answering the call, can usually transfer the call to an
attendant, but normal German phones do not have any special keys.
------------------------------
Date: 20-Aug-1984 1254
From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert)
Subject: Unordered phones
The "unordered phones" in California pose an interesting legal
question. If the phones had been sent through the U.S. Mail, they
could definitely be considered to be gifts, and there would be no
reason to return them or pay for them.
I'm not sure that the same applies to unsolicited merchandise
delivered by something other than the U.S. Mail, but if it DOESN'T, it
is still AT&T's responsibility to retrieve the phone from the point of
delivery at their own expense. No one should have to pay a red cent
to return it, or to even leave their home to drop the phone off
somewhere.
AT&T is likely to imply that they have the right to begin billing for
the phones after the three month trial period is over. And AT&T is a
big, dangerous-looking company -- they probably figured most people
would be too lazy to return the phones and would simply start paying.
The other interesting aspect is that it was specifically General Tel
areas which were especially chosen as good target areas into which to
ship the phones. Many General Tel users will jump at the chance to
have an AT&T phone, even though it won't do a whole lot to improve
their service.
------------------------------
Date: 20-Aug-1984 1300
From: covert%castor.DEC@decwrl.ARPA (John Covert)
Subject: 1+
A submission (probably from New Jersey) voiced the often heard
complaint "If the system is smart enough to tell that I needed a 1,
why not just place the call."
That's not the point. The main reason for going to 1+ in New Jersey
was the same reason for the recent conversions in other major urban
areas; the 201 NPA is just about out of NNX codes, and will have to
start using NXX codes, where it is no longer to determine from the
first three digits dialed whether an area code was dialed or one of
the new exchanges.
Granted, for those NPAs which don't conflict with exchanges, the
system could handle the calls. But the 1+ is required on ALL NPAs
from the outset, so that everyone, as a result of all current dialing
stopping working, is forced to change their dialing habits NOW, before
the problem occurs.
Almost any other implementation would mean that if your autodialer
has, for example, 303 499-7111 stored, it would continue to work up
until the day that a 303 exchange is opened in New Jersey, at which
point it would stop working, and possibly raise havoc for the person
whose number is 303-4997. The one implementation which can prevent
this is the use of timing to do the translation, but not all exchanges
are capable of handling timing-related translation, and even those
which can would cause a four second delay in completion of calls to
exchanges corresponding to area codes.
Not requiring the 1 on 800 is a mistake, probably only in some
exchanges.
In a related question, someone asked why dialing one's own NPA isn't
permitted. It is, in some places, especially the Southeast. But it
has the side effect of causing the call, even if it is to a number in
the same exchange, to route through the toll machine. This could have
been avoided if the exchange had a six digit translator for the home
NPA which corresponds to the existing three digit translator, but this
requires additional memory (or circuitry in the case of XBar
exchanges). And it's essentially impossible in some exchanges.
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
*********************