[fa.telecom] TELECOM Digest V3 #52

Telecom-Request%usc-eclb@brl-bmd.UUCP (Telecom-Request@usc-eclb) (08/23/83)

TELECOM Digest           Tuesday, 23 Aug 1983      Volume 3 : Issue 52

Today's Topics:
               Echo Suppressors / Touch-Tone / Tariffs
                    Manual Modem Security Control
             Why Can't They Charge For Acoustic Couplers?
                            TSPS Operator
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Friday, 19-Aug-83 02:19:44-PDT
From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM>
Subject: Echo suppressors / Touch-Tone / Tariffs

Greetings.  A few brief comments:

Echo suppressors do indeed respond to modem answer carrier (nominally
2225 Hz.)  However, this is a purely local action within the
suppressors, and no information regarding the detection of a modem is
passed back along the network.  Even if this *was* done, it would only
detect relatively long distance calls.

---

ESS offices allow Touch-Tone to be enabled or disabled easily on a
line by line basis.  In Crossbar offices, an entire vertical of the
crossbar switch is normally enabled whenever a single subscriber in
that vertical orders Touch-Tone service.  With step by step, all bets
are off -- there are all sorts of ways of providing the service, but
normally groups of numbers are enabled at the same time.  In fact, in
many cases, entire offices are enabled, period.  For example, I
believe that every subscriber line in General Telephone step by step
offices in Los Angeles is currently enabled for Touch-Tone use.

---

Finally, the fact that a person is using an acoustic modem (instead of
a direct-connect) makes no difference in terms of terminal usage
tariffs such as those of Southwest Bell.  Telco tariffs generally
allow wide latitude in their handling of "unusual" users, how ever
those are defined.  For example, it is possible in some cases for
telco to have your line disconnected if you receive a large number of
calls and you refuse to get a rotary.  At least, they can *try* to do
this to you -- and the tariffs often do contain such provisions.  The
issue is *how* you are using the line, not whether or not you are
directly attaching equipment.

--Lauren--

------------------------------

Date: Friday, 19-Aug-83 18:20:51-PDT
From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM>
Subject: Manual modem security control

Oh yeah... Having a security guard answer the modem lines is a *fine*
idea!  All you gotta do now is put Votrax chips into all the
autodialers so that *they* can talk to the guard just like a human
could, right?  Give me a break!  Uh, how about a control-C?

--Lauren--

------------------------------

Date: 20 Aug 1983 1152-PDT
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest   V3 #51
From: Ian H. Merritt <MERRITT@USC-ISIB>

To: RK at MIT-MC, Re: TouchTone enabled randomly

212-853 is crossbar, and therefore will probably handle touch-tone on
all lines anyway.  717-894 is old step-by-step. very strange stuff.
Usually on SxS, if there is a touch-tone subscriber in a given block
of numbers (assuming it is offered), the tones will work from any
number in that block.

                                                <>IHM<>

[Lauren's message is a bit more accurate. --JSol]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 21 Aug 83 23:47:34 EDT
From: Ron Natalie <ron@brl-bmd>
Subject: Why can't they charge for acoustic couplers?

There was this case called the Carterfone decision.  The device was an
acoustic coupler for hooking up a telephone to a two-way radio.  The
phone company was barred from prohibiting or charging this hookup.
This case has to be 10 or 15 years old by now and was the first step
in the Consumer telephone battle.

-Ron

[This really doesn't address the issue, which is "is transmitting data
over a phone line a separate service?" --JSol]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Aug 83 15:55:35 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@brl-vld>
Subject: TSPS operator

For the 1st time today, I heard the above term ("TSPS operator") used
in reference to the local operator I reach by hitting "0".  (Since the
Bell System strike is still on pending acceptance of settlements, the
operator I got was probably one of the supervisory personnel.)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest
*********************