HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:25 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 19, Message 9 of 10

tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> writes:

> Perhaps PacBell is making a marketing mistake by not offering caller
> id even though mandated blocking restrictions would apply? Perhaps
> their total revenues would be higher than if no blocking at all was
> available?

Maybe so. I, for one, would buy Caller-ID even if blocking applied to
99% of the state's telephones on a per-line basis. For me, the
telephone is an instrument whose purpose is to communicate with
friends, business associates, and customers -- plus people who could
potentially become one of these. ALL OTHERS are of no interest to me
whatsoever.  Those who fit into the desired category of callers would
never block CNID to me; those in the undesired category can block all
they like.

I look at CNID as sort of a "wired PL". Just as there are many users
on some commercial two-way radio bands who stay out of each others'
hair by the use of "private line" encoding, CNID allows a similar
enhancement when using the public telephone network. You know that
when the phone rings, it is a "desirable" rather than a wrong-number-
idiot, a mysterious one-ringer pest, a hangup-when-you-answer creep, a
telesales slime, or even a former customer whom you wish never to hear
 from again.

Now if I could just convince Pac*Bell that there are others like me
out there. Perhaps I could show them my e-mail ...


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115     |       FAX:
john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:32:34 GMT
From: joel@wam.umd.edu (Joel M. Hoffman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: What Should I Know if I'm Buying a Cellular Phone?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 12, Message 12 of 13

I'd like to purchase a portable phone -- one that I can take with me
and use in the car, but don't know anything about them.  Is there
somewhere I can look for info?  Or, would some kind soul like to tell
me what I should know?

The phone will mostly be used in the New York City area (in the city
and in the suburbs), if that makes any difference.

Many thanks!


Joel


[Moderator's Note: You might want to get the back issues of the Digest
from the Telecom Archives (anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu) and read over
the numerous discussions we have had on this in the past. It is really
an applications problem: how do you intend to use the phone, how
often, etc. There are far too many deals in the market place at any
given time to cover them all here.  PAT]
From: rspence@cix.compulink.co.uk (Richard Spence)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: USA to UK Clear Calls
Date: 4 Jan 93 19:34:00 GMT
Reply-To: rspence@cix.compulink.co.uk
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 9, Message 10 of 15

I know that it is possible to get a 'digital line' to the USA by using
a different dialing code from the UK.  This results in a full 64kbps
line being made available for ISDN terminal to ISDN terminal calls.

It must be possible to do the same operation from the USA, but I don't
know the code.  Does anybody out there know?

Just for interest the code from the UK would be 0101 aaa nnnnnn for a
'normal' line and 01001 aaa nnnnnnn for an ISDN line.


Thanks,

Richard Spence   rspence@cix.compulink.co.uk    CompuServe: 100112,304
>>>MATRIX version  1.21e
From: knauer@cs.uiuc.edu (Rob Knauerhase)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery
Date: 7 Jan 93 21:03:35 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 14, Message 13 of 14

> Does anyone know how I can get an Internet feed via dial-up? (with
> something less than a $0.95 for the first 3000 characters and .05 per
> 1000 after that?)

You might not want to trade per-char fees for per-minute fees,
depending on how fast your modem is.  However, for the price of the
call there is the Cleveland Free-Net, (216) 368-8888 which provides
both Internet mail and Usenet newsgroups (so you can read the TELECOM
Digest either way) at no cost to you.  There are also Free-Net systems
in Youngstown OH and Peoria IL if those are closer or otherwise
preferable to you.

    Combined with PC-Pursuit (30 off-peak hours of data LD for $30 --
see the Digest archives) that might be an even better solution for
you.


Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science


[Moderator's Note: There are numerous other services available as well
that while not free, are reasonably priced. Here in Chicago, both
chinet and gagme accept public subscribers. There is also the Portal
Communications Company in San Jose, and the nice thing about Portal is
their direct connection to Sprintnet; if you subscribe to PC Pursuit
then you can make an easy connection to Portal (@C PORTAL) at regular
PC rates.  And don't forget the Well as another possibility.  PAT]
From: mickeyf@clipper.zfe.siemens.de (Mickey Ferguson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune
Date: 12 Jan 93 00:41:12 GMT
Reply-To: mickeyf%clipper@pnsts412-sun.zfe.siemens.de
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 20, Message 2 of 17

> If you always thought that 1-800 numbers (in the US) are toll free,
> think again. With new technology and the lack of regulations, people
> are finding new ways to make money.

         [stuff deleted]

> It is possible, and apparently perfectly legal, to set an 800 number
> such that when you call you hear a recording that tells you that there
> will be charges for the call.

         [more stuff deleted]

> So here are some scam ideas (these are all fiction; do not try it at
> home):

         [more stuff deleted]

How long will it be before the COCOTs jump into the calling card
fraud?  How difficult would it be to program a pay phone to look for
when a caller dials the 800 number which is associated with one of the
long distance providers, and then just capture the calling card
digits, but pass on the digits and complete the call?  Then the COCOT
software just writes the calling card digits and the long distance
provider into its private database, which is then dumped and sold off
to the drug dealers, etc.  The more I think about this, the more I get
terrified at just how easy such a scam would be.  Hmmmm, maybe I'll
just go out and buy a pay phone and modify the software ...  NOT!

Maybe one idea to regulate COCOTs without too much difficulty or
paperwork would be to require them to be bonded, just like a home
contractor is.  Since the possibilities are just sitting there, this
would at least help to pay for any fraud that could result.  Or am I
being too paranoid?


Mickey Ferguson -- PhoneMail Development -- ROLMfax and Eclipse
From: rathmann@nic.cerf.net (Raul Rathmann)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Hooking up a US Modem in Czechoslovakia
Date: 11 Jan 93 08:22:52 GMT
Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 8 of 18

Hi,

I have a friend of a friend that is teaching at university in
Czechoslovakia.  He wants to hook up a modem to the university phone
system.  I'm assuming that he can use the extension line coming in to
his office to dial out, then with his modem hooked up, he can get the
modem to grab the connection with an AT command and he's on his way.
Problems I can forsee will be mainly with the phone system and wiring.
Could he splice into the phone system and expect the modem (and phone)
to work?  I'm sure the power situation will be a concern.  Does anyone
have any good ideas here?  By the way, he has said that there is no
way to get this info from the university, they're in the dark ages and
information is not readily shared.


Thanks,

Raul     rathmann@cerf.net
From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV (Paul Robinson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: About C&P's "Swipe Reader" Phones
Date: 12 Jan 93 02:39:37 GMT
Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 14 of 18

The number to call to get information about C&P's "Swipe Reader"
telephone is 1-800-999-9699.  If this call is not accessible from your
area, let me know.
From: wrf@speed.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Calling Canada From Italy - answers
Date: 7 Jan 93 00:52:21 GMT
Reply-To: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 12, Message 1 of 13

In December I asked how to call Canada from Italy since AT&T and MCI
didn't do it (with US cards).

Several people said that there is a "Canada Direct" number from Italy,
172 1001.  It charges, roughly, $6 for 3 minutes, then $1 per minute,
and say that they take AT&T calling cards.  Thanks to:

   johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
   Tony Harminc <TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA>
   Samuel Ho <ho@teeeee.enet.dec.com>

The Italian PTT prints a wallet card giving direct numbers like this
for many countries.  It's available at some visitor centers and
international airports.

I mentioned about using MCI to call from Italy to Germany.  That's a
real example, they have large ads for the service.  They charge
$2/minute, which suggests that the call is routed via the USA.
Calling Germany directly from Italy is only (!!) $1/min.  Italy is
apparently one of the more expensive European countries for
international calling.

International directory assistance from Italy can be complicated.
They try to use their own copies of the foreign directories instead of
connecting you to a foreign operator.  When I tried to get a number in
Zurich, the Italian operator who could talk to me in English could not
easily read the German phonebook to look up the really obscure number
I wanted, that of the Swiss Post Office.

On the plus side, the newer pay phones have an LCD display for
messages, and the messages are available in four languages.

Italy has variable length phone numbers, even within one city, such as
Genoa.  Area codes are also variable.

I'm available for questions about phones in Italy since I just came
back from three months over there.


Wm. Randolph Franklin,  wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261 
ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA
Date: 5 Jan 1993 05:09:00 GMT
From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: CNID on Answering Machines?
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 8, Message 4 of 11

I find the current discussion of CNID features on modems very
interesting.  But, being in the market for a new answering machine, I
want to know if there are any which store CNID, if received, and play
it back when messages are retrieved.  Or are there other techniques
available?  Anybody?


Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993  19:02:51 EST
From: Paul Robinson <FZC@CU.NIH.GOV>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 1-800-RIP-OFFS (Was Calling 1-800 Can Cost a Fortune)
Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 20, Message 8 of 17

In TELECOM Digest Vol 13 #12, Udi Manber <UDI@CS.WASHINGTON.EDU>
suggested:

> You can get an 800 number that is one digit away from
> a widely used 800 number and rip off anyone who makes
> a mistake...You can put ads for information on how to
> make $10 a minute - just call 1-800-747-6337.  That's
> 1-800-Rip-Offs...

 From a Government Centrex number in Maryland that is authorized to
dial 1-800 numbers, I got the message:

  "Recording C2.  We're sorry, the number you've dialed is not
authorized from this location.  C2."

And this repeats several times.  So it looks like some of us are
protected from RIP-OFFS!  :)


Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
"If I or anyone else is caught making opinions, the Secretary will
disavow any knowledge of our actions..."
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 93 00:56:39 EST
From: Tony Harminc <TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 976 Fraud in Toronto
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 10, Message 3 of 11

This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized
calls to (416) 976-9467 made on one of its lines.  Each call was one
minute long and was billed at $24.  Thinking back, we remember the
likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on
someone who supposedly used to work at the office address.  There were
several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as
puzzled as we were.  He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he
did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with
display and claimed he was calling his voicemail.

Bell Canada has agreed to remove the charges, but will not tell us the
name of the owner of this number.  We are not eager to pursue it with
the police, because of the small amount of the fraud, but we are
concerned that this may be part of an organized scam (else how would
the 'process server' benefit?) and others may also have been hit.  The
$24 charge is quite a bit higher than the usual sex and sleaze lines
which -- according to the ads -- are mostly $10.

We have cleaned up our act for handling of future visitors who want to
use the phone (for now we dial it, and toll restrictors are coming
soon), but I would like 1) suggestions for how to pursue this, and 
2) to hear from anyone else in 416 who has been hit with calls to this
number.  Perhaps someone in an adjacent NPA could dial it and let me
know who answers.


Many thanks.

Tony Harminc
From: alan@acpub.duke.edu (Alan M. Gallatin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cellular One Offers FREE Weekends in NC
Date: 11 Jan 93 23:27:30 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 18, Message 18 of 18

Cellular One in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina is offering
a new feature on most of their calling plans.

In addition to whatever monthly charge you are currently paying, for
an extra $10 they will give you unlimited airtime on the weekends
(defined as 11:59pm Friday to 12:01am Monday) for all calls made (or
received) while in your local calling area.  The only charges incurred
would be for directory assistance or long distance land charges.

Off-peak minutes with C1 go as low as $.20/minute with some plans (and
are often more than that) so the break-even point is 50 minutes (or
less).

Any ideas why they'd just open the floodgates like this?

As an aside, Centel (the only competitor in this market) is not
matching the program or even coming up with something remotely close.


Alan M. Gallatin <alan@acpub.duke.edu>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 93 01:36:49 EST
From: Tony Harminc <TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Equivalence Charges
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 12, Message 7 of 13

I was reviewing the phone bill for a company where I am consulting,
and realized that Bell Canada is charging for one more equivalence
feature than I would expect, e.g. there is a hunt group of three lines
- the one published number hunts to the second if busy, which hunts to
the third if second is busy, and that's the end - busy signal.  Bell
charges for three equivalence features for this.

The droid in the business office insists that there is an 'ending
feature' that must be installed on the third line to make it all work.
I believe this is complete nonsense, but just before I open my mouth
wide, could someone confirm that technically there is no 'feature'
that need be installed on the last line of a hunt group?

It would seem that this scheme of charging penalizes small business
and residential users who have only a few lines.  Large users will
barely notice the 'n+1' charge distributed over many lines.


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: When I worked at the UC phone room about 1960,
there was one group of incoming trunks with *97* lines in a rotary
hunt. MUseum 4-6100 hunted 6101 which hunted 6102 and on up the line
to 6196. Outgoing calls from the switchboard started the other way
around, with the first outgoing call on 6196 then backward one at a
time. In actual practice the incoming calls met the outgoing calls
around 6150. I thought that many lines in a hunt group was pretty
outrageous.  One time I tried busying out all the lines from 6100
through 6195, then placed a call to 6100 ... it took maybe two seconds
longer than usual to hunt that far before sure enough, it rang in on
6196. (This was about four in the morning.)  PAT]
From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Date: 7 Jan 93 01:49:34 GMT
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 13, Issue 14, Message 1 of 14

In article <telecom13.10.7@eecs.nwu.edu> rboudrie@chpc.org (Rob
Boudrie) writes:

> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
> prefixes?

I had a similar setup recently, but strictly speaking, it was
busy-transfer rather than hunting.  It was on a 5ESS switch.  The fact
that I wanted the busy-transfer was known at the time I placed the
order for the two lines, and the computer happened to select numbers
on two different prefixes.  I would imagine that on a modern SPC
switch, the prefix difference would not matter.


Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
From: DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA (David Leibold)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Bell Canada Proposes Extended 911 Service (For a Price)
Date: 7 Jan 93 05:15:05 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 12, Message 3 of 13

{The Toronto Star} reports that Bell Canada has applied to bring 911
service throughout Ontario (and not just certain municipalities that
elect to have the service, as is currently the case). Bell proposes
that customers be charged 30 cents per month as part of the local
monthly service, though.

70% of residences in Ontario have access to 911 at present, paid for
by municipalities involved. If approved, the extended 911 service
would be installed within five years. Municipalities would still have
to staff response centres and connections to emergency services, if
they join the 911 service.

There are occasional cases outside of 911-serviced territory where
calls to 911 are attempted, but fail. In those areas, the operator is
normally able to handle emergency calls, but the lack of universal 911
service can be dangerous for the unwary.


dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993  20:05:56 EST
From: Paul Robinson <FZC@CU.NIH.GOV>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: C&P Enters Electronic Services Market
Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 16, Message 1 of 12

Article Summary

C&P, Herndon Firm Introduce Interactive 'Scanfone' (Washington Post,
Jan 7, Page D11)

John Burgess tells about Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company, in
cooperation with Herndon, VA-based U.S. Order, the company that
created it, a new phone for use with electronic services such as
banking.

The phone appears similar to a kitchen wall-mounted telephone stuck on
the left side of a credit card reader with a swipe slot and a bar-code
wand.

The phone with services rents for $11.95 a month.  You can order
things by using the wand to scan some bar codes, and then select items
from the LED display.  It is called a "Scanfone' and when you order
something you can then swipe your credit card through the reader.

Some companies have agreed to sign up for the service, including
Safeway, which will deliver groceries for a $9.95 service charge
through Grocery Express (who already does the same thing for the same
price by picking up the phone and calling them voice.)

Maryland National Bank is already running a bank-by-phone four-line
display phone.  This type of service has not been very popular because
it has usually been hard to use and overpriced.

The people selling it, naturally, claim that with some practice you
can pay bills easier and faster with this system than with a pen and a
checkbook (which since not everyone you pay bills to will be
subscribed to this, you are still going to need and have to pay with,
anyway.)

One instant disadvantage is if you order something from a merchant
using this method and it's out of stock, you get a notice by U.S.
mail, not on the same call as you would on a voice telephone call.


Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
These opinions are mine alone.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 13:20 EST
From: lmt@homxb.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 20, Message 7 of 17

Pat:

With reference to a recent article in comp.dcom.telecom, I wonder if
you could refer me to (or send me a copy of) a telecom discussion
detailing just how calls to 800 numbers are charged for and end up on
someone's bill.  I'm having a hard time understanding it.  Thanks for
any help.


Lou Taff, AT&T Bell Laboratories
185 Monmouth Parkway   West Long Branch, NJ 07764
(908) 870-7584    lmt@homxb.att.com


[Moderator's Note: I'll do better than that, Lou. I'll print another
whole issue on the topic -- you are reading it now. Perhaps some of
the people who have raised the topic in the past will share their
wisdom with you.   PAT]