HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:57:29 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 834, Message 3 of 11

In <telecom12.829.3@eecs.nwu.edu> khx@se44.wg2.waii.com (Kamran
Husain) writes:

> a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC
> power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done
> on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter
> for those people who do not have mobile phones?

Posted for a friend: send mail to gsk@procyon.cdev.com for more
info ...

I have information from a company called CELLULAR ALARM PRODUCTS, LTD.
which may be what you are looking for.  The company offers a cellular
phone backup to the landline connection to your alarm monitoring
service.  In the event the landline is cut, a trouble alarm can be
sent via cellular phone.

For more information, I would contact the company at the following address.

      CCellular Alarm Products
      2575 Southwell  Suite 104
      Dallas, Texas 75229
      (214) 620-0156  (800) 752-9719  FAX (214) 620-7205


Paul Barnett             Internet: barnett@convex.com
Convex Computer Corp.      Office: 214-497-4846
Richardson, TX        Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:43:14 +0000 (GMT)
From: Bill Berbenich <bill.berbenich@ee.gatech.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: What Shows up on OSPS Screen?
Reply-To: bill.berbenich@ee.gatech.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 840, Message 8 of 16

An article in a recent TELECOM Digest about Call Manager got me to
thinking.  Just what exactly shows up on the OSPS (operator) console
screen when I dial 00 for the AT&T operator?

I know that they at least have MY number if it's POTS and I know that
they have the number that I have dialed if I 0+ it.

So what else?


Bill Berbenich, School of EE, DSP Lab   Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: gatech!ee!bill.berbenich    Internet: bill.berbenich@ee.gatech.edu
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 18:47:41 -0500
From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cellular Phones Free?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 824, Message 3 of 9

They're really giving them away!

 From an ad in a recent sports section of {The Washington Post}

A Cellular Phone Free To The First 4,000 At Rosecroft Raceway (horse
racing near Washington D.C.).

"The first 4,000 people through Rosecroft's doors tonight get a
certificate good for a free cellular telephone, redeemable at Lite
Cellular Sales and Service.  Requires one time $35 activation fee, and
one year minimum service agreement.  Installation extra.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:30:39 MET
From: A.Cotroneo@it12.bull.it (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: World News by Email Wanted
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 840, Message 6 of 16

I am posting this request on behalf of a radio station in Russia. They
would be interested in receiving world news summaries on a daily or
hourly basis via e-mail. Since their budget is quite small, they would
be interested to know if there is such service available thru
USENET/Internet for free, or some organization does make this
available at cost.
 
I have checked other LISTS on Internet, but nothing regarding World
News was found. Thank you. 

Please reply directly to:

Alfredo E. Cotroneo, NEXUS-IBA, PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy.
fax: +39-2-706 38151 / phone +39-2-2666971 or +39-337-297788
email: 100020.1013@compuserve.com
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:48:23 CST
From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 826, Message 3 of 14

> I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the
> corresponding number but when I put it to the phone nothing happens.
> Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of
> a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. If you can shed any light
> on the subject that would be cool.

Sorry.  It doesn't work like that.  Sending a tone at Freq A and a
tone at Freb B is NOT the same as sending a single tone at a frequency
equal to the average of A and B.  The only real way to prove that is
to mathematically represent the signals, or to look at them on an
oscilloscope, but the following example may illustrate the point.  The
3 tone is 1477 and 697 Hz.  The average would be 1072Hz.  The * Tone
is 1209 and 941 Hz.  The average would be 1075 Hz.  There is only a
3Hz difference between 1072 and 1075, which would make distinguishing
the 0 and 3 almost impossible (allowing for tolerances).  However,
since sending two tones is not the same as sending the average of the
two tones, there is no problem.  If you want to reproduce the DTMF
tones, you'll have to generate both tones and add the signals.
 

Brett   (rfranken@cs.umr.edu)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 16:04:12 +1000
From: brendan@otc.otca.oz.au
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 833, Message 4 of 9

In TELECOM Digest Volume 12, Issue 825, shri%legato@cs.umass.edu
(H.Shrikumar) wrote:

> Who are the major players in CT2 equipments and in CT2 phones?

The major players are in the UK, such as GPT (GEC Plessey
Telecommunications), Orbitel and Ferranti.  However, Motorola also
makes CT2 equipment in the USA and Shaye makes CT2 equipment in Hong
Kong.

> I believe CT2 was either born in UK.

Correct.  It came out of the UK DTI (Department of Trade and Industry)
initiative on "phones on the move" in 1987, or thereabouts.

> Are the major Cellular manufacturers also into CT2?

Not that I know of.  Most consider CT2 to be irrelevant, I think.

> Is CT2 faring well on the other side of the big pond?

Much more is happening outside of the "big pond" than in it (USA !=
World :-)

> If I assert that the only CT2 trials in the world have been in London
> and Illinois will someone here contradict me ? :-)

Someone will!

Three countries that I know of have *commercial* services, they are:

	Singapore
	Hong Kong
	Netherlands

Major pilot systems (pre-commercial) are also operating in:

	United Kingdom (Manchester)
	France (Paris)
	Germany (not sure where)

A major pilot system will shortly be up and running here in Australia.

I've been involved in R&D for one of the Hong Kong operators (there
are two, with a third coming along), which went commercial earlier
this year.  It's been a roaring success over there, the total market
size is over 30,000 customers now (compared with about 1000 customers
all up in the UK the first time around).

> Any CT2 in Japan?

Not that I know of.

> Also, whose standard is CT2?

Originally it belonged to the DTI in the UK (MPT 1375) but it's being
migrated across to ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards
Institute) as an interim standard I-ETS 300-131, the final version
(Release 2) of which is expected to be set in concrete by May/June
next year.

> What is CCITTs position on it (or is it them all along ?)

It's not really their business.  CCITT is only worried about
communications networks that cross national borders.  However, the
work of ETSI is sort of a market/industry based standards group that
acts as a regional preparation for input into CCITT for any issues
that are relevant to it.

ETSI falls under the umbrella of the European Commission.

> I will also be grateful for any pointers to magazine/journal/trade rag
> reports on these questions.

A number of useful journals which can keep one up to date in this
fascinating area include:

	"Mobile Europe"
	"Pan European Mobile Communications"
	"Telecommunications International"


Cheers,

Brendan Jones		ACSnet:  brendan@otc.otca.oz.au
R&D Contractor		  UUCP:  {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan
Network Access R&D	 Phone:  (02)287-3128   Fax:  (02)287-3299
|||| OTC ||	 	 Snail:  GPO Box 7000, Sydney  2001, AUSTRALIA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:38:49 GMT
From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Compuserve/MCI Email
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 837, Message 7 of 11

[story about problem with CompuServe-MCI e-mail gateway deleted]

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, the fault may very well be with MCI Mail.
> They routinely dump huge amounts of mail from the Internet undelivered.
> The sender may or may not get notice of non-delivery, depending on the
> way things occured.  Their complaint is that a single address in the
> envelope is bad; someone quit subscribing to MCI Mail but never told
> me to remove their name. The mail gets there, MCI sees one bad address
> and dumps it all.

While we're dumping on e-mail carriers, I've a couple of gripes as
well.  cc:Mail does exactly what Pat has described above, and as the
maintainer of a host-based email system that must talk to a cc:Mail
system, I can attest to the frustration of having a message with a
large distribution list dumped in its entirety because of a single bad
address.  (If only the USPS would do this for bulk mail! :-))

CompuServe also has a major problem in my opinion.  They don't support
multiple line email addresses.  This is crucial to get to many
addresses on MCI Mail for example.  We have a gateway from our host
email system to MCI that uses a so-called REMS account.  Among other
things, this means that it takes a three line address to reach most of
our users.  Since CompuServe doesn't support more than one line, most
of our users can't receive mail from CompuServe users.  CompuServe has
been aware of this problem for several years now and chooses not to do
anything about it.  It is really silly when you consider that if one
of our users sends a message to a CompuServe user, that the CompuServe
user can't even use the REPLY command, because it will reject the
multi-line address.  It's pretty hard to dispute that this is a bug on
CIS's part as far as I can see.


Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
From: davep@cac.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Date: 9 Nov 92 21:59:11 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 834, Message 1 of 11

khx@se44.wg2.waii.com (Kamran Husain) wrote:

> Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of
> operation has rendered most home security systems useless.  (I don't

> Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
> snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the
> owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then
> walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the
> weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is
> drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified
> since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back.

> a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC
> power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done
> on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter
> for those people who do not have mobile phones?

The phone company provides the means in our area to deal with this
threat.  You have the option of having the phone company put a ping on
your line every few minutes.  You can actually hear the tone if you
have a test set monitoring the line.  The alarm system must then give
back an appropriate tone.  This process is interrupted by the line
being in use on a normal call, without sending out an alarm.  If the
line is cut, or if power fails to the alarm (and it's battery backup
runs out), then the absence of this signalling notifies the alarm
company.  What happens then is between you and your alarm monitoring
company.  I suppose that a REALLY clever burglar could just tie up the
line with a call to a recording or some such, but most burglars
probably just cut the line.  Here in the Seattle/US West area it is a
fairly pricey option at about $8.00 a month.  Is this extra level of
security worth another $100/year to you?  Will you have to pay the
monitoring company more, or have different equipment installed?
You're on your own for those answers.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 14:35:54 GMT
From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What's a T1?
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 836, Message 8 of 13

In article <telecom12.830.4@eecs.nwu.edu>, John C. Fowler <fowlerc@
magellan.colorado.edu> writes:

> I've seen the abbreviation 'T1' or 'T-1' here in the Digest many times
> over the past few years, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone
> define exactly what a T1 was.  

Although many good treatments abound, allow me to offer a "Reader's
Digest" version:

T1 is a type of digital carrier system which was originally deployed
in 1962 to solve a number of problems inherent in congested
metropolitan area short haul (less than 50 mile) carrier needs.  T-1
(Or T1 as you like) specifies a four wire circuit transmitting signals
at 1.544 megabits/second (Mbps).  T1 carries its information in the
format known as DS1 (Digital Signal 1).  DS1 is a member of the
hierarchy of digital signals and describes which bits belong to what
sublevels of the hierarchy.  The signals applied to the cable are
digital bi-polar pulses (Alternating + and - ) where the 1s are
represented by pulses and 0s are represented by 0 voltage. In metallic
systems, this scheme allows for the reduction of DC bias as well as
simple single bit error detection.

The carrier system is in widespread use with each of its 24 channels
(DS0) able to support either support a voice channel or
56kbps/64kbps(clear channel) data. The entire time division multiplex
(TDM) hierarchy, generally described as DS levels 0 through 4, extends
from an analog voice channel up through 274.176 Mbps with each level
time division multiplexing up to the next.

To further compound telephoneeze, the DS1 signal (that which is
carried by a T1 system) is also referred to as a digroup (DIgital
GROUP).


Jack (John) Adams	Bellcore NVC 2Z-220	
(908) 758-5372 {Voice}	(908) 758-4389 {FAX}	
jadams@vixen.bcr.com	kahuna@attmail.com
Date: 8 Nov 92 03:19:50 EDT
From: Barton F. Bruce <Barton.Bruce@camb.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines?
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 833, Message 1 of 9

In article <telecom12.825.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1
> or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24

If your BBS was the size of, say, Compuserve, you might look at
products from Primary Access. They will take up to 20 T1s per rack and
you get out a bunch of x.25 lines with LOTS of individual sessions on
each. Each card has two DSP chips and emulates two modems. The price
you pay could be for low speed modems, and when you need higher speed,
you pay more and load in code for faster modems.

Primary Access can do ISDN and Voice games with the same hardware -
but what they currently offer as products I havn't followed. They can
connect also to FG-B and FG-D trunks. I would assume when you dial
950-1ATT this is the sort of hardware that would be there, NOT a rack
of conventional modems, but don't know for sure.

Your PC speak to an x.25 line?

There are terminal servers and protocol translator boxes that convert
x.25 to LAT or TCP/IP terminal sessions on ethernet. If your PC can't
use an x.25 connection, can you telnet to it?

These are VERY expensive, and a pile of $325 ZyXEL U-1496E modems
will prove much more affordable.

You may be where T1 access is cheap. Here it is a total ripoff -
priced way more than 24 1MBs and sold as a slightly cheaper way of
getting DID trunks. But all DID services are kept very high priced to
protect the way overpriced Centrex telco peddles as: "Saves you from
using expensive DID trunks" - talk about honesty in advertising ...
From: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: BC Tel Pay Numbers
Date: 8 Nov 92 17:30:54 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 829, Message 7 of 9

The following appeared in RISKS Digest 13.89.

It appears to indicate that BC Tel is doing something *really* stupid.
Anybody got any further info?

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

 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:07:31 PST
 From: rslade@sfu.ca
 Subject: Pay-per-call-back-verify

Padgett Peterson was telling me about his recent success in getting a
BBS set up with one of the new modems with a "Caller-ID" feature.  I
think this is going to be a feature that a lot of sysops are going to
want.

It happened that just last week I had a request to look into a
security problem for a local sysop.  He is concerned with security and
misuse of his board, and so he has installed a call-back-verify system
to check out callers.  If he can't call back and get a confirmed phone
number, they don't get an account.  Many sysops use this to avoid
having to "voice verify" each and every caller.

Most call back verify systems have an option that will prevent the
system from returning long distance calls.  Obviously, this will also
apply to "900" pay-per-call numbers.  Padgett reminds me that recently
there was a scam in New York wherein pager wearers were "paged" by
"540" pay-per-minute calls.

The problem in Vancouver is that BC Tel has recently started up
pay-per-call numbers, but they do not yet have identifiable prefixes.
Therefore, ankies have been calling various BBSes that have
call-back-verify, and leaving these pay-per-call numbers.  The sysop
who talked to me had lost about $50 in the last month, and this has
only just started.


Vancouver Inst. for Research into User Security, Canada V7K 2G6 604-526-3676
Robert_Slade@sfu.ca ROBERTS@decus.ca rslade@cue.bc.ca p1@CyberStore.ca

                       -------

uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org


[Moderator's Note: Well, that's the price he is going to pay for not
wanting to personally verify his users. I know a couple BBS sysops who
take the trouble to at least call each user once. Having users who
know that you know who they are helps keep boards in nice condition.  PAT]
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:15:55 EST
From: Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 840, Message 13 of 16

tg@chmsr.gatech.edu (T. Govindaraj) writes:

> Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since my wife
> and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for occasional
> calls...Is anybody using this option?

> [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared
> this with the cellular company?  Most do NOT allow two or more phones
> to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone
> and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about.

Change "most" to ALL.  There should be NO US cellular carriers that
will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone
number.  Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC
rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR).

But Pat, why are you applying analog logic to a digital problem? ;)
Don't forget that a digital switch runs the cellular exchange.
Generic switch features can be used to similate two phones bridged on
a single line.


Alan Boritz	72446.461@compuserve.com


[Moderator's Note: You are correct that generic switch features can be
used for this simulation, however my point was that *provided there
has been no tapering with the wire pair between subscriber and CO*, the
pair identifies the subscriber regardless of what the subscriber may
say to the operator or what tricks he might play on a long distance
company, etc.  As an absolute recourse against billing fraud and
other forms of tomfoolery, once a call has been traced at the CO to
your wire pair, it has been traced to you (as the person responsible
for the use of your instruments, etc). You can lie about your phone
number, you can put improper tones on the line, etc, but the wire pair
serves as the absolute identity of who you are, playig the same role
as the <E>lectronic <S>erial <N>umber does in cellular.   PAT]
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:30:54 GMT
From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines?
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 833, Message 2 of 9

In article <telecom12.825.9@eecs.nwu.edu> hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1
> or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24
> individual phone lines and 24 modems driving 24 serial ports.  It
> seems that we should be able to have a single DS1 line driving a
> single interface board in the computer that would sort out all the
> data (figure out which user is on which line and is in which time
> slot, etc.).  This would compare favorably to all that extra hardware.

Keep in mind that once you sort out the datastream into the 24
channels, that the raw data is not the "data" that you're expecting
for the BBS, but rather the digital representation of the analog modem
signal that the caller is sending.  You have to unmodulate that
somehow, either by breaking the T1 into individual channels that have
modems on them, or with some really fancy software and DSPs.


Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com