Telecom-Request%usc-eclc@brl-bmd.UUCP (Telecom-Request@usc-eclc) (01/04/84)
TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 3 Jan 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 2
Today's Topics:
wiring charges
dial tone after hangup
phone stores after divestiture
some area codes in UK
SWB update: SWB made first base, ATT up to bat
Re: more on VA. pay phones // Pentagon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 83 12:57:07 pst
From: allegra!karn@Berkeley
To: ucbvax!Telecom-Request@usc-eclc Subject: digital trunks and 212
modem hits Regarding the problems a 212 user was having over a digital
trunk:
It makes sense that only a 212 would be affected when frames slip on a
digital trunk because of timing errors. The 212 uses DQPSK
(differential quadrature phase shift keying), in which -+90 or 180
degree changes of phase on an audio carrier are used to encode pairs
of bits. If the trunk adds or drops a "leap sample" every so often to
correct for clock skew, this will appear as a small, sudden change in
propagation delay.
If the sampling rate is 8khz, the shift in timing would be 125
microseconds. This is hardly enough to be noticeable in speech or
with a low speed, noncoherent FSK modem such as a 300 baud 103, since
125 microseconds is only about 1/27 of a bit interval.
However, the 212's high side carrier at 2400 hz has a period of 416.7
microseconds. A slip of 125 microseconds then corresponds to a phase
shift of 108 degrees, large enough to be interpreted as a data
transition. The descrambler will in turn propagate this error over
several more bits, resulting in garbage character(s).
It seems to me that there should be a big market for error correcting
modems, using some protocol such as HDLC to ensure a reliable link. In
fact, this could be done with a single board computer and 212 in
synchronous mode (8 bits/char instead of 10), compensating somewhat
for the additional protocol overhead. As modems with higher bandwidth
efficiencies are developed, it seems to me that the need for error
correction will be even greater. I hope that it becomes part of any
new high speed standard.
Phil
------------------------------
Date: 2 January 1984 00:19 EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU @ MIT-MC>
Subject: wiring charges
In the old days, whne you had your house wired up for phone service,
the installation charge was much less than the cost of doing the
wiring. These extra costs were "capitalized" and put in the rate base
just like the cost of outside wiring. Your monthly local bill paid
for the amortization of your phone, your inside wiring and the outside
wiring. Since only the phone company was allowed to wire up your
house, bundling all the charges into one local rate was a simple way
to handle things.
In the new scheme of things, much has changed. First, wiring can no
longer be capitalized and put in the rate base. If you want the local
phone company to do it for you that's OK, but you'll pay for it all up
front with an installation charge of $100 or so. Or you can hire an
electrician to do it, just as you would for your internal electrical
wiring; again you end up paying for the installation cost up front.
Finally, of course, you can do it yourself.
For houses that have already been wired by the phone company, they
still have the cost in their rate base, and they are trying to get it
back through these montly charges. But since some people will have
done the wiring themselves, and others won't, the local phone rate has
to be broken into pieces: part for the outside wiring and local
service, part for inside wiring, and part for the handset. If you
want, you can buy the inside wiring from your local phone company,
just the way you can buy the handset that you've been leasing; in that
case you won't see it anymore as a monthly charge.
The local phone companies of course are terrified that customers will
say "I don't want to lease your inside wiring any more, and I'm not
going to pay for it." Unlike handsets, the phone company can't afford
to take it out when the customer wants to stop leasing it. So you end
up with the wiring, but they can no longer charge you. The charge for
putting in a "connector block" for customers who no longer want to
lease their inside wiring from the phone company is set high enough to
discourage this practice.
Marvin Sirbu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 83 7:38:13 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@brl-bmd>
Subject: dial tone after hangup
If the other party hangs up before you do, do you normally have to
hang up before you get your dial tone back? (I normally do have to
hang up.) There are at least 2 radio spots where you hear an
immediate dial tone, and, from what I can guess now, it may be done
that way to emphasize that the other party has indeed hung up. (One
such radio spot was in an ad, another was on the CBS Radio Mystery
Theatre.)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 83 7:46:54 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@brl-bmd>
Subject: phone stores after divestiture
Yesterday, I saw that the phone store in Elkton, Md. had been closed
permanently as of noon Dec. 23. Sign refers customers to Bel Air,
Md., but I believe that Newark, Del. is closer. Currently, Del. comes
under Diamond State Telephone ( & Bell of Pa.) while Md. comes under
C&P, but don't these operating companies come under the new Bell
Atlantic? In any event, they do offer identical equipment, so you
could look up sample jacks in Del. if you live in Md. or vice versa.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 83 14:13:54 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@brl-bmd>
Subject: some area codes in UK
Country code 44. Note the "easy-to-dial" area (city) code for London:
1 London (Eng.) 21 Birmingham (Eng.) 31 Edinburgh (Scot.) 41
Glasgow (Scot.) 51 Liverpool (Eng.) 61 Manchester (Eng.)
(0 is prefixed to these codes when dialing within Great Britain.)
------------------------------
Date: Mon 2 Jan 84 04:52:21-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: SWB update: SWB made first base, ATT up to bat
12/15/83 *** BELL SEEKS INCREASE IN TEMPORARY RATE ***
------------------------------------------------
AP - SWB, carrying through on its promise to challenge a temporary $6
53 million rate increase, complained Wednesday to the PUC that it
needs more money.
PUC Counsel Jim Boyle also appealed the interim rate order Wednesday.
He called the interim rate increase "an early Christmas gift for a
monopoly." "I am very concerned that the PUC is setting a precedent
for granting rate increases without a hearing," Boyle said.
The 2 appeals challenge a Dec 9 order by hearing examiner Jacqueline
Holmes granting the telephone company a temporary rate increase of
$653 million on Jan 1. SWB says it needs at least $292 million more.
[ SWB made an initial request of $1,7 billion, since scaled down to
$1.3 billion which will not be decided on by the PUC until April 84.
SWB, therefore, requested a temporary increase effective Jan 1, of
$978 million, including a $2.60 monthly increase to home telephone
bills. The Holmes ruling specifies that all of the $653 million
should be paid by the long-distance carriers. ]
12/15/83 *** RULING ON BELL RATES PRAISED BY GOVERNOR ***
----------------------------------------------------
Governor Mark White laude the PUC Thursday [12/21] for not allowing
SWB to, temporarily, increase the telephone rates for the consumer.
......
The commision ruling prompted officials at ATT - which will pay $617.8
million of interim rates to Bell - to threaten to file their own case
to raise Texas long-distance rates by $200 million.
12/16/83 *** ATT ASKS BOOST ON LONG-DISTANCE ***
-------------------------------------------
ATT Communications asked the Texas PUC Friday to raise long-distance
rates by 27.8%, saying the request is neccessary because of higher
rates granted Southwestern Bell.
The rate request is designed to generate $301.4 million in revenues.
.....
"Someone's pocket is about to be picked," said Jim Boyle, a commission
lawyer hired to represent consumers. Attorney General [of Texas] Jim
Mattox said, "They shouldn't get anything."
ATT wants $164.2 million in higher rates to be paid beginning Jan 1,
which would mean long-distance customers would begin paying 16.4%
more.
.....
At the same time, Boyle questioned why ATT chose to pass along the
additional costs to consumers instead of appealing the commission
ruling.
Boyle said the request makes it "obvious that the 2 pieces of the pie
are larger than the pie."
.....
Mattox ...: "They shouldn't get anything until we've had a test year
to look at it," the attorney general said. "Obviously they shouldn't
get what they've requested."
12/18/83 *** DOUBLED PHONE RATES VIEWED AS UNREALISTIC ***
-----------------------------------------------------
Washington (AP) - Assistant Attorney General William Baxter, who
engineered the break-up of ATT, has adviced consumers to be suspicious
if their local rates double, but said a 50% increase might be
realistic.
Baxter, who quit Friday after 3 years as chief of the Justice
Department antitrust division, told a news conference that the ATT
divestiture of 22 local phone companies Jan 1 will produce a rise in
the cost of local telephone service.
........
In addition, he said, the FCC is forcing local phone regulators to use
more realistic depreciation rates for equipment installed in the phone
system many years ago.
Baxter said regulators had been allowing phone companies to depreciate
over 30 years what should have been depreciated in 7 to 10 years.
Baxter said the action, which he supports, "will cause local rates to
go up to cover these accounting costs."
------------------------------
Date: 2 Jan 84 05:24:40 EST (Mon)
From: Chris Torek <chris%umcp-cs@CSNet-Relay>
Subject: Re: more on VA. pay phones // Pentagon
I don't know about pay phones within the Pentagon itself, but at the
Metro stop next to it the pay phone(s) I've used are Va. exchanges.
(I think).
Chris
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
*********************