TELECOM@Usc-Eclb (12/28/82)
TELECOM AM Digest Tuesday, 28 December 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 141 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Bad Reply-To Addresses Different Numbered Billing Rates Classes Of Service And Restrictions Query - Type Of Local Central Office ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 Dec 1982 2103-EST From: Alyson L. Abramowitz <ALA at MIT-OZ> Subject: Bad Addresses in Telecom Jon: I'm not sure if your realized this, but the last TELECOM Digest contained a number of addresses which are not viable to use for a personal responce. All the addresses contained "RHEA::CASTOR::J_COVERT%Shasta at SU-Score". While I'm sure this was the exact address you got the messages from, unfortunately you've hit into a multi-network addressing software bug. As you may be aware there is now a gateway between the ENet and USEnet. Messages can be addressed over this link from the ARPAnet by sending them via USEnet. Unfortunately, the software providing the gateway currently has a bug in it which creates addresses which cannot be replied to on EITHER side of the gateway. A message coming from the ENet to USEnet gateway is easily recogized by it's address which always starts with RHEA::, includes either %Shasta or @Shasta and ends with "at SU-SCORE" or "at SUMEX-AIM". Unfortunately to reply back you need a TO: field of the form: decwrl!<site>::<user>@shasta@SUMEX-AIM where SU-SCORE could be substituted for SUMEX-AIM (except that SCORE is down for two weeks), <site> is the host of recipient, and <user> is the username of the recipient. For example, the message from "RHEA::CASTOR::J_COVERT%Shasta at SU-SCORE" should really read "decwrl!CASTOR::J_COVERT@SHASTA at SU-SCORE". You may want to change these addresses or at least be aware of the problem if someone complains they can't respond. Best, Alyson PS The problem is with the stanford software providing the USEnet end of the link and has been reported. Supposedly it will be fixed in the next release from Shasta.--ala [I am posting this as information which readers might need to know when replying to messages. I will watch out for this in the future. --JSol] ------------------------------ Date: 27 Dec 1982 0631-PST From: Chris <Pace at AFSC-SD> Subject: Different Numbered billing rates This is in response to Dale message about billing rates. Whereas, I cannot speak to N. E. Tel situation, in the Los Angeles area, I have two telephone numbers on different billings for the same reasons that you mentioned (ie one for personal calls and one for modem calls). I have message unit service on the personal line and unlimited for the modem line. The only restriction that we have is that if you have unlimited service in the same residence, you must have at least 60 msg unit service, rather than the slightly cheaper 30 msg unit service. Our telco is Pacific Tel. Chris. ------------------------------ Date: 27-Dec-82 1752-PST From: Jon Solomon <JSol at USC-ECLC> Subject: Measured Service, Lifeline, Unlimited Service, etc. What the telephone company provides in your area is usually a combination of what is demanded of it, and what is "cost effective" to provide. In areas where there is a large investment of Step-by-step switching, it is unreasonably expensive to provide timed measured service, although untimed measured service is possible. I will discuss 3 types of service: Untimed Unlimited - This type of service allows as many calls as you like within your local calling area. The charge for these calls is expected to be included in the basic rate for the service, but in practice is usually recovered from long distance charges, directory assistance, installation charges, and whatnot. All types of switching support this form of service, including those that aren't direct dial. Untimed Measured - This is a type of service where you pay by the call, like a coin phone, for local calls, but you can talk as long as you like (note: some areas have timed coin phone calls also.) Older switching can only support this form of measured service, because this only requires a counter on your line to count how many calls you complete. Timed Measured - This service is the most lucrative for phone companies. Most switching forms can handle this easily. Step-By-Step switching is the only form of switching where it is not cost effective to time and measure calls. Pacific telephone is doing it in Los Angeles (and in other areas as well), but not on local calls (on "zone calls") and I can only imagine the headaches and cost of implementing it on that form of switching. You pay by the call, and per minute (or per 5 minutes). "Lifeline" service - this is not actually a form of service, but was intended as a solution to a social/political problem. People were complaining that they could not afford the "high" cost of phone service, yet felt entitled to service, forced all the phone companies to implement *some* form of measured service that would not cost quite as much as normal "unlimited" service. This was interpreted differently in each area, depending on the phone companies ability to provide one of the services listed above, and whether or not they already provided a viable alternative. The way you know this service is in affect is that the service rep won't let you mix it with other forms of service. In some areas that means not even two lifeline phones, in others it just means you can't mix them, but you can have more than one. In the Pacific Telephone case, Lifeline is the 30 call service, you can't have more than one line (even if it is also lifeline) and "Timed Measured" service is allowed to mix with flat rate (unmeasured) service in normal situations. General Telephone, on the other hand, has "Lifeline" (they call it MLS for Measured Local Service), and unlimited, and you can't mix them. This is due to the fact that they have mostly Step-By-Step exchanges, and can't support all the measured traffic they would like. In New Hampshire (New England Telephone) "measured" service is the lifeline. In Boston, Mass (also NET) you can get both Timed Measured, and Unmeasured in the same house, and Measured was considered cheap enough to satisfy the "Lifeline" people. In New York city, their standard service is untimed measured, and allows 75 calls. You can get the same form of service, without the allowance for $2.50, so that was considered reasonable. They have no restrictions on class of service. In Connecticut (Southern NE Telephone - 18% owned by Bell), they have "Lifeline" as untimed measured service, and you can not mix that with flat rate service, but you can have more than one measured line (my father has 2 and loves it). This information is changing rapidly, with the conversion of areas from mechanical to electronic switching, and with the divestiture on Jan 1st of AT&T and the subsequent deregulation of the phone company, there should be some interesting changes in all areas. Keep us informed of the changes in your area, by mailing to TELECOM@USC-ECLB. Cheers, [--JSol--] ------------------------------ Date: 27-Dec-82 12:27:35-EST (Mon) From: cbosgd!mark@Berkeley (Mark Horton) Subject: type of local central office Anybody have an algorithm for determining what kind of central office a given phone is on (e.g. #1ESS, #5 Xbar, SxS, etc?) Over Christmas I go to Youngstown to visit and half the time I can't get through. (My father in law says it's because the tomato can is being used.) Modem calls fail 2 out of 3 times, when I dial I have to disconnect the modem to prevent it from "detecting carrier" halfway through the number being dialed, touch tone is not available. Over Christmas, I could dial 1+one or two digits of the area code before getting a busy signal. And once, I dialed the number (in Eastern Washington), got an operator who wanted my phone number, which I gave her, then got a recording telling me all circuits were busy. This area is served by Bell, not GTE, and normally they do not ask for my number when I dial direct. 0+ works. Is it step by step or might it be something else? [If you get a busy signal after dialing two digits of an area code, then it's probably Step-By-Step switching. Bell is not perfect either, just better than GTE in California (opinion.) --JSol] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest ********************** -------