HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu (S.E. Williams)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cable TV Standards
Date: 28 Jan 93 00:39:23 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 47, Message 8 of 11

I know that cable television isn't discussed with much regularity in
this forum, but as it is a form of telecommunications I believe my
posting here is valid.

I was wondering if the content of cable TV channels is regulated.  I'd
specifically like to know about the censorship of language, violence,
and pornography.  Certain stations (MTV, for example) will not show
nudity or allow vulgar language.  Is this a result of federal
regulation, or is it an MTV policy?  How about CNN?

Of course, it seems that services such as HBO or Cinemax can show what
they like.  Maybe it's a difference of pay services vs "free" cable
services?  Please CC: any responses to me, as I may not see it in the
Digest.


Sean E. Williams

sean e. williams, (sew7490@ultb.isc.rit.edu), is a student of imaging
and photographic technology in the college of imaging arts & sciences
at the rochester institute of technology in beautiful rochester, new
york.  (he's also taking a few telecommunications courses...)  You can
call him at 716-475-4396.
From: rvirzi@gte.com (Robert Virzi at GTE Labs)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: So That's Why You Oppose Phreakers!
Date: 26 Jan 93 17:45:19 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 46, Message 5 of 12


 ... stuff about NETel overcharging deleted ...

> [Moderator's Note: I had a phone turned on about twenty years ago at a
> place where I stayed occassionally and although the service got turned
> on, the paperwork never made it to accounting for the purpose of
> setting up a billing account. Since the line had unmeasured metro
> service (a type of service we had back then) there were never any
> extra units generated and no reason to ever issue a bill. It went on
> like that for a year. I was careful to never make any long distance
> calls from that line or do anything which would start paperwork going.
> Then one day, some $$#%&# phreak billed a third number phraud call to
> that line. From a telco unknown to me comes the billing tape; it hits
> the accounting department and of course the charges promptly fall out
> and go to suspense, there being 'no such number' to bill them to on
> this end where Accounting was concerned. In the adjustments/suspense
> investigative process, someone at telco actually dials my number and
> discovers it turned on .... hmmm, they say, and they ask the CO to
> send the paperwork all over again. The next billing cycle, I get a
> bill for *12 months to date* of service, plus the installation charge
> which never had been billed, plus next month's service in advance, and
> of course, plus the (still unknown to telco) phraud LD charge. I got
> the phraud charge removed, but was hardly in a position to argue with
> them about the service I had been using for the past year. :(   PAT]

Interesting that one person's fraud can uncover another's, isn't it!
I have to admit I read this with quite a bit of amusement given PAT's
consistently hard line against phreakers/hackers/etc.  I suppose in
one's youth, one may have a different perspective, eh?  Or perhaps
this explains the position, a long held grudge.  Many :-), for the
humor impaired.

What next, Higdon admitting to overcharging a telco in *his* youth?

Again, many, many, :-).  Thanks for the chuckle, Pat.


Bob Virzi    rvirzi@gte.com     +1(617)466-2881
Date: 20 Jan 93 07:53:16 EST
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Interchangeable NPA Prep
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 36, Message 4 of 8

Over the past several months, I have read a number of postings
concerning dialing patterns and interchangeable NPA readiness.
 
I would be very interested in any specific examples the readers of the
Digest could pass along concerning changes the various telco's are
making that have the future interchangeable NPA conversion in mind.
 
If these could be emailed to me, I will summarize and post.
 

Thanks,
 
Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*
From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What Is dBm0
Date: 23 Jan 93 19:33:10 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 41, Message 7 of 12

> I just read a paper taken from AT&T Technical Journal. The subject of
> this paper is "THE 32 KB/S ADPCM CODING STANDARD". In this paper the
> author use "dBm0" as a unit to represent the level of input signal. I
> don't know what the definition of "dBm0" is. Is "dBm0" same as "0
> dBm"? Is there anyone who knows the answer and can answer this
> question for me? I will be appreciated if someone answer my question.

dBm0 is power referenced to the test level for the circuit in
question.  (i.e. if the test level is -16 dBm and the signal currently
being measured is -18dBm, then it would be -2dBm0).  This is used
because most communication circuits have some gain or loss built into
them.  (The company I work for has +23dB of gain on all of its
circuits).  By measuring in dBm0, it is possible to have consistent
levels.  For example, if I have a circuit that has a test level of
-16dBm at the transmit, and +7dBm at the far end receive, then I can
put in a -16dBm0 tone at the transmit (-32dBm) and get a -16dBm0 tone
out at the other end (-9dBm).

 
Brett   (rfranken@cs.umr.edu)
From: jyacc!charles@uunet.UU.NET (Charles McGuinness)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: 21 Jan 93 22:21:35 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 37, Message 14 of 15

> At the end of the month I'm moving to a house that already has one
> phone line installed, and having a second line turned on.
> I have heard that there is a code I can dial into a phone that will
> tell me what phone number that phone is connected to.

There is such a secret code that works everywhere in your situation!
You dial the phone number of your second phone line.  The telephone
company will give you a ringing tone if you are on your first line or
a busy signal if you are on your second line. This is a little known
feature, so don't spread the word or the phone company might
discontinue it! ;-)
From: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: AT&T Reaches Out to the Arts
Date: 27 Jan 93 08:38:24 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 47, Message 6 of 11

AT&T has a reputation for supporting arts, especially during these
risky recessionary times. AT&T Foundation recently pitched in $50,000
to support the Canadian Opera Company's productions of the operas
Bluebeard's Castle and Erwartung. The COC will also be doing this
double feature at the Brooklyn Academy of Music (an institution in
which AT&T has some long-standing ties).

AT&T is reportedly the largest sponsor of American non-profit
performing arts. This latest sponsorship of Canadian arts comes at a
time when AT&T's presence in Canada is growing (ie. the part-ownership
of Unitel Communications).

ref: {Toronto Star}, Eye on Entertainment


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG


[Moderator's Note: AT&T has always been generous to service organizations 
and charities as well.  In the 1960's when AT&T and the Bells were one, 
they gave a lot of financial assistance to the civil rights movement.
This being the 25th anniversary year of the asassination of Dr. M.L. King,
I am reminded that when he came to visit us (the trustees of the
Chicago Temple invited him to speak once a year, sometimes twice), his
honorarium was always paid back to us by AT&T and the program for the
occassion would note, "Dr. and Mrs. King's personal expenses during
their visit have been met with a gift from Illinois Bell Telephone Co."
AT&T also endowed the telephone exhibit at the Museum of Science and
Industry here for perhaps thirty years.  PAT]
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 11:49:54 GMT
From: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch (Jan Steinman,- Bytesmiths -,Tel x3946)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report
Reply-To: steinman@hasler.ascom.ch
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 43, Message 5 of 12

In article 5@eecs.nwu.edu, tjrob@ihlpl.att.com () writes:

> From article <telecom13.32.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, by jimmy@denwa.info.com

(Quotes speculating on reasons for US telecom tech lag deleted.)

> No, you missed the point. It is federal tax policy which is
> dramatically different between the U.S.A. and many other countries.

Can we speculate what the change in administration may do with this?
The Clinton/Gore campaign stessed renewed infrastructure, and I
believe they specifically called for the funding of a "data highway"
system, similar in scope and effort to that which produced the
Interstate Highway System.

To me, this indicates that if telecom industry lobbyists do their job,
there should be no problem getting amortization rates for telecom gear
down to those of computer gear, at least in the next four years!


Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths		   steinman@hasler.ascom.ch
2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA   +1 503 657 7703
Beundenfeldstrasse 35, CH-3013, Bern, Switzerland   +41 31 999 3946
Date: 26 Jan 1993 19:37:21 GMT
From: petrilli@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Petrilli)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: "Advaced Switching" at SWBT
Organization: Department of Redundency Department
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 46, Message 6 of 12

As part of a project I'm working on, I needed to get some cost
estimates from SWBT (South Swestern Bell Telephone) on what it would
cost to run digital lines within the City of Austin.  When I finally
got a hold of the business office that handled the services I needed
and told the lady what I needed I was shocked at the fact that:

	1) She had no clue what T3/DS3 service was, and said that SWBT
didn't provide it and she had no way of pricing it.  She later
recended the comment when she talked to a "technical support
representative".

	2) Told me that I was "very lucky" that I was in the 83X
exchange because, and I quote: "We've just installed the most advanced
switch around."  When I asked if she was refering to a NorthernTelecom
DMS series, or perhaps the 5ESS series, she said "Um ... no, we're
using a ESS1A".

I don't know about everyone else, but while the 1A is a nice switch
and all, it doesn't quite qualified for "most advanced switch" even
with 100 adjuct boxes on it.

I was also SHOCKED at the cost of running a T1 line from the 83X
exchange (North Austin) to the AT&T POP (downtown) which is roughly 15
miles.  The cost was MORE than the cost from AT&T for a T1 line from
their Austin POP to Dallas.  Somehow I don't think this is reasonable.


Chris Petrilli       petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu
I don't even speak for myself.
From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:00:21 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 37, Message 9 of 15

In June 1987, there was one of those high-profile murders, in
Stillwater, that kept everybody talking for weeks.  An 18-year-old
girl who lived in a nice middle-class addition shot and stabbed both
her parents to death, one night.  The girl, initially told police that
she had been out all night with her friends and had come home to find
the bloody mess.

     According to our paper, one of the things that the police did was
to ask Southwestern Bell for telephone records.  Apparently, blood was
found on a telephone and the police wanted to see who might have been
called.

     All of this occurred about a month after Stillwater got its
DMS100 switch.  I don't know what the records showed, because the
girl's story fell apart and she ended up essentially admitting to the
murders.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there is some internal
maintenance log of connections.  We do not have measured service,
here, but even the old Xbar switch printed logs of trouble reports.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group
From: starr@hriso.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Strange Intercept Message
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:24:47 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 44, Message 6 of 15

A friend of mine accidently dialed an 800 number, and received a
strange repeating intercept message.  I haven't even a clue as to the
language, but my guess is the message is attempting to say that the
number you have dialed is not in service.  The number is 800-952-5388.


[Moderator's Note: This is a good example of how '800-style' calls can
be international in scope *if* the subscriber wants international
traffic to the number. In the above example, some company in Germany
wanted calls from the USA, so they arranged for an 800 number here to
ring there. What has happened now is the service in Germany was turned
off for whatever reason and no one has yet told AT&T to quit routing
calls from that 800 number overseas.  I think what it is saying is
'this is not a working number'.  PAT]
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:31:01 -0800
From: udi@cs.washington.edu (Udi Manber)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 48, Message 9 of 13

> [Moderator's Note: You say 'the main purpose of such schemes is to
> defraud someone ...'  Who, may I ask, is attempting to defraud whom?

Students trying to defraud their universities by calling from the dorm
or from any other public phones that are not fully blocked, sleaze
operators convincing children to call back or accept calls, 800
numbers that are supposed to warn you about the charges but never do,
the list goes on and on. (These are just examples told to me by the
utility commission.)  I am sure you know more about that than I do.
Are you trying to say that there is no phone fraud?

> But if you choose to deal with their clients then you should plan
> on paying their clients.

And what if, like me, you never chose to deal with any of them (or
even knew they existed), but can't get them off your back?

> Everyone uses something to circumvent the blocking of something else
> when it suits their requirements. Why should sex-by-phone providers be
> any different?

"Everyone cheats, steals, and beats their kids, so why do you blame
me?" is not a great argument.

You missed my point.  These schemes, especially the 800-number scheme
which I was hit with, pose an unacceptable risk to many unsuspecting
victims, and allow easy fraud.  You think that when you block your
phone you're protected, but you're not.  You need to be an expert to
be really protected.  It could very well be that fraud is not wide
spread -- yet.  Maybe (probably) most of the complaints against
Integretel are from people trying to weasel out of calls they made.
Maybe Integretel knows how to cover their behind (I am sure they do),
and maybe I am paranoid, but IMHO we should *minimize* fraud
opportunities as much as we can, rather than turn a blind eye to them
until they hit us personally.

In any case, I spent too much time on that.  It's time to move on.


Udi Manber
From: jharuni@micrognosis.co.uk (Jonathan Haruni)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Date: 23 Jan 93 19:32:33 GMT
Reply-To: jharuni@micrognosis.co.uk
Organization: Micrognosis International, London
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 42, Message 8 of 14

In article <telecom13.33.11@eecs.nwu.edu>, rodg@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU
(Rod Gamble) writes:

> 	About two or three years ago the Bank of England (for some
> reason or other) decided to find out what people used as words for
> there PINs . Well guess what ... If you found a BoE card in the
> street you had a 56% chance of using it in a ATM machine if you used a
> four lettered word beginning with F*** ...

I believe this is a myth.  Most ATMs in the UK do not have letters on
the keypads, only numbers.  Furthermore, the Bank of England is not a
consumer bank, and does not have branches, ATMs, ATM cards, or PINs.


Jonathan Haruni
From: macy@fmsys.fmsystm.ncoast.org (Macy Hallock)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: MF Signaling Test Gear
Date: 24 Jan 93 00:54:00 GMT
Organization: F M Systems  Medina, Ohio USA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 40, Message 4 of 13

In article <telecom13.28.4@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:

>  Bob Turner writes:

>> Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT
>> DTMF) signalling?

If size is not too important, I'd consider used central office toll
test gear.  I know of at least two companies that buy and sell this
stuff that they get from the telco's as surplus from C.O.  upgrades.
Their are also instrument resale companies that sell at hamfests that
carry used telco C.O. test equipment.

Pricing is very flexible.  Much of the equipment is W.E., Northeast
Elecronics, H.P., W&G and the like.  Most of the units are -48 VDC
powered (rather than powered from 110 VAC).  Its a good idea to know
what you want and something about the models/specs.  The sellers don't
know very much about this stuff, they're just salvage brokers.  I've
seen a lot of the Northeast and HP MF test units for sale for $100 to
$400.


Macy Hallock  N8OBG +1.216.723.3000 Fax +1.216.723.3223 macy@fmsystm.ncoast.org
F M Systems, Inc.  150 Highland Drive  Medina, OH USA         macy@fmsystm.uucp
Date: 24 Jan 1993 20:51:06 -0800
From: ken@sdd.hp.com (Ken Stone)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 43, Message 8 of 12

In article <telecom13.40.1@eecs.nwu.edu> dan@phoenix.az.stratus.com
(Dan Danz) writes:

> If I send Skytel "**12345", I get back **12345 ... INVALID NUMERIC
> MESSAGE ... ENTER NUMERIC MESSAGE:>

> However, since when did SkyTel start using IXO/TAP?  I'm currently
> talking to them using their menu-driven PC connection that is
> definitely not IXO/TAP, which I would prefer.

SkyTel has their own stuff on one dial in number and IXO/TAP on
another.  Last time I set it up, I had to call their tech assist
number and go thru three people before I got some one that understood
what I wanted.


Ken
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 04:11:14 GMT
From: sasbge@unx.sas.com (Gantt Edmiston)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 43, Message 9 of 12

tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes:

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664. 

Works from 919 too!  


Gantt Edmiston - SysAdmin      SAS Institute Inc. 
Quality Assurance - V416  Cary NC 27513    919-677-8000 x6091  
sasbge@unx.sas.com
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 19:02:16 GMT
From: ssay@prefect.cc.bellcore.com (say,halim s)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Voice Mail For Small PBXs
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 38, Message 11 of 11

How can I get product information on multi-line answering
machine/voice mail equipment that can be connected to small PBXs?
Would that be in a trade journal? A special issue perhaps?  

Thanks for your reply,


SABiT SAY   ssay@cc.bellcore.com
From: mcnally@wsl.dec.com (Mike McNally)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC intra-LATA LD
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:26:29 GMT
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 44, Message 7 of 15

I just c alled my voice mailbox to check voice mail (it's in 415, I'm
in 408) and as I listened to the "Thank you for using Pacific Bell"
recording I though of the recent thread concerning intra-LATA long
distance.  On a whim, I decided to try 1-800-CALL-ATT to see if I
could force ATT to carry the call instead.  (PacBell won't let 10288
work for such calls; you get a recording.)  It worked.

I wonder which is cheaper?  I billed both calls to my DEC-issued ATT
card, so I'll never know.


   Mike +   Software +   Digital Equipment +   Western Software +      mcnally@
McNally +    Laborer +         Corporation +         Laboratory +   wsl.dec.com


[Moderator's Note: I've noticed that when an intra-LATA call is placed
here via AT&T because they were more or less forced into handling it
due to it being on their calling card (or via Easy Reach, etc) the
billing for same will come on the AT&T portion of the Illinois Bell
bill, with a statement saying 'call handled on behalf of Illinois Bell
by AT&T'. It is almost as though they are saying, "we cannot legally
handle this call as AT&T, but we can act as agents for Illinois Bell
and handle it for them."  I think AT&T functions like a 'reseller' or
open-ended (no defined customer base) aggregator for the local telcos,
and pays the telcos for calls which are 'rightfully' the telco's to
handle.  In many cases, they may just let the local telco handle the
whole thing but at AT&T rates.  I suspect the same arrangement is in
effect in everywhere with the telco of record for that territory.  PAT]
From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Pac Bell to go All Digital
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:34:38 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 47, Message 5 of 11

An article in this morning's (1/26) {Tri-Valley Herald} reports that
Pac Bell plans to upgrade ALL telephone switches (14 million lines) to
digital switches by 1997. The billion dollar plan attributed to
rapidly growing competition from other carriers.

Just three years ago Pac Bell was in the technical backwaters. I live
in one of the fastest growing areas in the state and still was on an
old crossbar. They had little plan for ISDN or any other digital
service. Then came competition!

I am now on a DMS-100. The local office also provides ISDN from a new
5ESS with SS7 widely (if not universally) implemented both within the
service area and between Pac Bell and at least AT&T. It still catches
my attention when I place a long distance call and the line rings
instantly without apparent delays or any switching sounds.

Simply amazing what a little competition can do.


R. Kevin Oberman		Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: koberman@llnl.gov	(510) 422-6955