Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id OAA01971; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:17:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 14:17:18 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199608271817.OAA01971@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #443 TELECOM Digest Tue, 27 Aug 96 14:17:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 443 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Democratic Convention Chats Online! Be There! (Monty Solomon) Country Code Update (Mark J. Cuccia) Alaska Has Moved! And a New Way to Call Cruise Ships (David Whiteman) Effects of DS1 Tip/Ring Reversal? (Scott Nelson) Information Wanted on Sonet ADM Muxes (Jay Sethuram) MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent (Chris Mauritz) Telegraph and Cable In Europe? (Jeff Shinn) Spammer of the Day For Your Consideration (Ray Normandeau) Re: InterLATA Connectivity in 609? (Stanley Cline) Re: Trouble Using 888 Toll Free Services (Stanley Cline) Re: Will Full Number Portability Occur? (Jeffrey Rhodes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 23:45:23 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Democratic Convention Chats Online! Be There! Reply-To: monty@roscom.COM Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 21:00:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Voters Telecommunications Watch Subject: INFO: Democratic convention chats online! Be there! DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION ONLINE CHAT SCHEDULE! LIVE CHATS FROM THE CONVENTION! Table of contents What's New Chat Schedule Getting Chat Software WHAT'S NEW The Democratic convention's online chat program has begun! It's crucial that Netizens make net concerns a high profile issue in the online chats this year. You can do this by showing up and simply asking the right questions. Does the candidate think the Communications Decency Act is an effective method of shielding kids from material online, or parental control? Does the candidate support the use of privacy-enhancing encryption technology? Does the candidate support program such as THOMAS, that put government info in the hands of the people? If you don't ask these questions, they'll never know we care. CHAT SCHEDULE [Notably missing from this schedule are Senators Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT) and Russell Feingold (D-WI) and House member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). All three have impeccable cyberspace credentials and we look forward to seeing them online.] All chats take place at http://ichat.dncc96.org:4080/ Monday 08/26/96 - 4:20pm CDT Governor Lawton Chiles 08/26/96 - 7:15pm CDT House Candidate Michela Alioto 08/26/96 - 10:30pm CDT Congressman Bill Richardson Tuesday 08/27/96 - 9:00am CDT Senate Candidate Houston Gordon 08/27/96 - 5:00pm CDT Congresswoman Nita Lowey Wednesday 08/28/96 - 9:00am CDT - Senate Candidate Houston Gordon 08/28/96 - 10:00am CDT - Governor Gaston Caperton 08/28/96 - 3:00pm CDT - Senator John D Rockefeller IV 08/28/96 - 4:00pm CDT - Senator John Kerry 08/28/96 - 4:30pm CDT - Senator Harry Reid 08/28/96 - 9:30pm CDT - Representative Corrine Brown Thursday 08/29/96 - 10:30am CDT - Senate Candidate Houston Gordon 08/29/96 - 2:30pm CDT - Senator Kent Conrad 08/29/96 - 3:30pm CDT - Representative Eliot Engel 08/29/96 - 6:00pm CDT - Representative Barney Frank 08/29/96 - 7:00pm CDT - Senators Boxer & Murray Don't miss this opportunity to question the newsmakers on net issues such as free speech and privacy! We have to ensure that they feel appreciated for standing up for Net issues. GETTING CHAT SOFTWARE The Democratic Convention has chosen iChat's chat software for their interface. To obtain a copy, simply follow the links from the main convention homepage at http://www.dncc96.org/ to the software section. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 10:02:22 -0700 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Country Code Update The latest ITU Country Code Assignment List (associated with ITU recommendation E.164) is available, dated 31 July 1996. It is also associated with (not generally accessable via the WWW) ITU Operational Bulletin #626 (15 August 1996). The page with the selections for English, French or Spanish is: http://www.itu.ch/itudoc/itu-t/lists/tf_cc_24258.html It should also be available from the following URL, but I couldn't get it from this one: http://www4.itu.ch/itudoc/itu-t/lists/tf_cc_24258.html ^ One nice change about the new assignment list is that it is a *single* document which includes both an alphabetical order by country list *and* a numerical order by code, rather than two separate documents. Some highlights include: The '0' Country Code range is 'reserved', with the footnote that +0XX Country Codes should be feasible after 31 December 2000, but assignments could be possible as early as 1 January 1997, but the question is still under study. Country Code '+1' (the North American Numbering Plan) lists all of the countries and territories in the NANP, but not yet Guam or CNMI. These two US Pacific Territories are listed as +671 and +670 respectively. Bellcore NANPA has already announced that these two locations will become a part of the NANP with permissive dialing effective 1 July 1997, with mandatory dialing on 1 July 1998. '+259' is still listed as Zanzibar, but as 'reserved for future use'. Zanzibar is usually reached by Country Code 255, Tanzania. '+269' is still shared by both Comoros and Mayotte. The +28X block, as well as the +80X, +83X and +89X blocks, have the footnote that codes from these blocks will be allocated after all other three-digit blocks not fully allocated have been exhaused. '+379' for the Vatican is 'reserved for future use'. '+388' is indicated as 'temporarily unassignable'. This code has recently been mentioned as a code for 'Europe-wide Services' '+41' (Switzerland) is still used by Liechtenstein. '+42' is still used by the now split Czech Republic and Slovak Republic. '+61' (Australia) also includes the Cocos-Keeling Islands. '+672' (Australian External Territories) includes the Australian Antarctic Bases, Christmas Island and Norfolk Island. '+7' (former Soviet Union) has been spinning off codes for the former Soviet Republics. According to the current list, '+7' includes Russia, as well as Kazakstan and Tajikstan. Also presently included in Country Code '+7' are the following countries, along with their recently assigned 'reserved for future use' codes of the 99X series: Kyrgyz Republic (+996) Turkmenistan (+993) Uzbekistan (+998) Azerbaijani (+994) and Georgia (+995) are not included in the list of '+7' countries. Kyrgyz (+996) was announced in an earlier list. The following codes from the +99X range are still indicated as 'apare': +990, +991, +992, +997 and +999. While the +80X range is held off from assignment until the +85X range is full, '+800' is reserved/assigned to 'International Freephone Service', as has been discussed earlier. '+86' is assigned to the People's Republic of China (mainland), and Taiwan is indicated as 'zone 6' within this Country Code. Many countries use the '+886' country code to reach Taiwan, which is not an ITU assigned Country Code. In this listing, '+886' is indicated as 'reserved'. The '+87X' range (mostly INMARSAT) is still all indicated as: '+870' for Inmarsat SNAC '+871' for Inmarsat Atlantic-East '+872' for Inmarsat Pacific Ocean '+873' for Inmarsat Indian Ocean '+874' for Inmarsat Atlantic-West '+875', '+876', '+877' as reserved for Maritime Mobile Service '+878' as reserved for Universal Personal Telecom Service '+879' as reserved for national puposes '+881' is indicated as Global Mobile Satellite System, shared code. '+888' is 'temporarily unassignable'. This code has been indicated in this manner *prior* to the announcement of NANP (+1) Special Area Code 888 for additional toll-free service. '+967' is the Republic of Yemen. The '+969' code is indicated as 'reserved, currently under investigation'. '+971' has been *all* of the UAE (United Arab Emirates) for some ten or more years, *including* Dubai and Abu Dhabi. '+978' and '+979' are still indicated as 'spare'. Some additional notes of mine: The only ten-blocks which are *completely* spare, with no special reservations or notes are: 28X, 83X and 89X. The only 'spare' codes from the 29X block are: +292, +293, +294, +295 and +296. At one time, San Marino (now +378 unless it is still routed/dialed via Italy, +39) was to have been +295, and Trinidad & Tobago (part of +1, the NANP) was to have been +296. +21 is indicated as Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia. In the footnote, it indicates the subdivisions as +213 Algeria, +218 Libya, +212 Morocco and +216 Tunisia. At one time, I had seen additional +21X codes for these countries: +210, +211, +212 Morocco, with +212 active +213, +214, +215 Algeria, with +213 active +216, +217 Tunisia, with +216 active +218, +219 Libya, with +218 active There is *no* mention of any assigned country codes for various island groups in the South Atlantic, South Pacific or Indian Ocean, such as the Pitcairn Islands in the Pacific. While telephone service (from the USA, it is manual/operator, via AT&T only) is available to many of these locations, I don't know if there is even a 'reserved' country code for some of these remote island locations. The Country Code list is a downloadable file, in MS-Word, and the paper-size is arranged in 'A-4' format. In MS-Word, I had to change the size to 'letter' (8.5x11 inches) before printing it out. MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 21:28:20 -0700 From: dbw@autopsy.com (David Whiteman) Subject: Alaska Has Moved! And a New Way to Call Cruise Ships My parents are once again going on another cruise. Some of you may have recall my previous problems in calling them through Imarsat. This time I received an advertisement from Princess Cruises about a new way to call a cruise ship by calling a 900# (1-900-CALL-SHIP). I do not know whether this new method works for all cruise ships or just Princess Cruises, whether the call signal is better or worse, or anything else. I have not used this new service. The ad does mention the price is $8.95 per minute, and you do not need the vessel ID number or any ocean region code. Also readers may remember in previous postings the problems I had in trying to reach my parents by fax. (The advertisement only mentions calling by voice, not fax) As before my parents are on a cruise ship in the Alaska area. I tried using both the Imarsat ocean code for the Pacific Ocean which did not go through, nor did the ocean code for the Indian Ocean work, which was the code that worked last time. This time the code for Atlantic Ocean-East worked, so Alaska magically moved from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. Of course in fairness I must mention that on this trip my parents are on a different cruise ship, belonging to a different company, and probably a different position in Alaska. For those not recalling the previous articles there are a class of telephones which are called Marisat or Inmarsat. Each phone has a seven digit number, and can use one of four satellites numbered 871, 872, 873, or 874. In theory you reach a phone by dialing 011 (or the international dialing code for your country), then dialing the satellite ocean code for the particular ocean your caller is in, then the id number. However sometimes because of overlapping satellite coverage, a different satellite provides better reception. That is how such funny occurrances occur like Alaska moving from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 96 11:47:10 EDT From: Scott Nelson <73773.2220@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Effects of DS1 Tip/Ring Reversal? I just finished reviewing an installation of a SONET system, and noticed that the Tip and Ring leads to the DSX panel were backwards. However, the circuit still worked, and we recorded no errors over a one hour period. I know that reversing tip and ring on voice circuits can cause problems -- especially with ringing, but what happens when you reverse the tip and ring leads on a DS1 signal? Anything? P.S. I do not care for a discussion of T/R reversals on POTS or analog VF lines, just DS1 (T1). Scott Nelson Director of Sales ANTEC - Digital Systems Division 73773.2220@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: Jay Sethuram Subject: Information Wanted on Sonet ADM Muxes Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 23:05:33 -0400 Organization: Abhiweb Corporation, Internet Services - (408) 541-1400 Reply-To: jay@abhiweb.net Does anyone know how much a Sonet ADM muxes cost? The configuration I am interested is something like Fijitsu's FLM600. I would really appreciate if someone from Fijitsu's either sends me an e-mail or post a reply. Jay ------------------------------ From: ritz@onyx.interactive.net (Chris Mauritz) Subject: MCI Stealing My LD Without Consent Organization: IBS Interactive, Inc. Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 19:23:19 GMT Is there anything we can do to prevent MCI et al from covertly switching over our long distance carrier without our permission? MCI has switched me from AT&T to their service twice in the last six months without my permission. It's becoming a major nuisance. Christopher Mauritz | For info on internet access: ritz@interactive.net | finger/mail info@interactive.net OR IBS Interactive, Inc. | http://www.interactive.net/ ------------------------------ Date: 26 Aug 96 17:38:53 EDT From: Jeff Shinn <73144.1754@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Telegraph and Cable In Europe? I understand that in many European countries, telex/cable/telegraph is often-used for business and personal communications. In these countries the postal authority offers this service, whereby persons can send and receive messages at those offices. Similarly, businesses use this form of communications to a great degree. So, just how extensive is this type of communication "over there"? Should our favorite bureacracy, the US Postal Service, consider offering similar services (or maybe email for those who don't have any other means to send or receive such)? Thanks, Jeff Shinn 73144.1754@compuserve.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Telex is still a very common method of communication in many parts of the world. The post office operates it in those countries by default, since typically the PTT manages the phones and all related things in those places. For quite a few years there was an arrangement between Western Union and the United States Postal Service called 'Mailgram'. Does anyone remember those? You dictated your message to the WUTCO operator and it was transmitted electronically to the post office nearest the recipient where the post office clerks stuffed it in an envelope and mailed it to the recipient. The idea was if the message was mailed from a post office in the same town it would get there much soon than if it was mailed at a place some distance away. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Spammer of the Day For Your Consideration From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 96 19:10:00 -0500 Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York NY - 212-274-8110 Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) The following is an UPDATE and is self-explanatory. > From: Careerpro1@aol.com > Message-ID: <960824185151_186930904@emout12.mail.aol.com> > To: ray.normandeau@factory.com > Subject: Re: Resume Xpress Now posting to 127+ databases > My company, OnLine Solutions, Inc., has a service ResumeXPRESS! that > distributes resumes for job candidates. We accept resumes from third parties > (on a wholesale basis) who sell the service to their clients. > A third party independent contractor (Marc Morris at CareerNet) hired a > marketing firm and/or purchased an email list that was supposed to contain > only names of recipients who had indicated an interest in receiving ads. > Obviously that was erroneous. We still have not figured out why you and > many, many others have received multiple emails. I have been assured that > this has been stopped. I truly am sorry and will be diligent in monitoring > such options in the future. > Wayne Gonyea > OnLine Solutions, Inc. ---------------------------- > To: Careerpro1@aol.com, CAREERPRO1@AOL.COM > From: RAY NORMANDEAU > Subj: Re: Resume Xpress Now posting to 127+ databases ... > Please supply me with this individual's (Marc Morris) 800# and or Email > address. > Thank you. > ray normandeau > ray.normandeau@factory.com ------------------------------ > From: Careerpro1@aol.com > To: ray.normandeau@factory.com > Subject: Re: Resume Xpress Now posting to 127+ databases > nysflk@aol.com > Marc Morris > 143 Moore Ave > Barrington, NJ 08007 > 215-822-2929 x2616 > No 800# [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would ask that everyone extend the usual courtesies to this newest member of the club. Help him to grasp the basic concepts under which the net operates, etc. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: InterLATA Connectivity in 609? Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 23:30:11 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: scline@usit.net On Thu, 15 Aug 96 13:52:00 EDT, you wrote: > Trivium: Ocean County N.J. spans three LATAs, with most calls across > the LATA line in fact being handled as toll calls. (Only Toms River > in 908 to Barnegat in 609 is treated as inter-LATA local.) Are there > any other three-LATA counties in the U.S.? Yes, and I'm familiar with one ... Jackson County, Alabama: Bridgeport, Stevenson (LEC BellSouth) - Chattanooga LATA (attached to South Pittsburg, TN CO); Scottsboro (LEC GTE) - Huntsville LATA (attached to BellSouth toll switch in Huntsville); Bryant/Higdon (LEC Farmers Telephone) - Birmingham LATA (attached to Rainsville CO); There are also multiple B-side cellular companies: BellSouth Mobility in most of the county, and Farmers Telephone (*switched* by BMI) in their LEC area. The Bryant/Higdon area can place local calls to Trenton, GA (Trenton Telephone Co., Chattanooga LATA) but there is virtually NO local calling between LECs WITHIN Jackson County. This is utterly ridiculous; county emergency, etc. agencies have had to get *800/888* numbers because establishing 911, FX numbers, etc. in three LATAs/LECs is all but impossible. Other nearby counties are split by LATA boundaries: Catoosa GA: 70 customers in Atlanta LATA (ALLTEL, Tunnel Hill CO) and all others in Chattanooga (four COs, three LECs) ... calls between all of Whitfield Co. and Ringgold area sent through IXCs but not charged LD rates. Walker GA: ~100 customers in Atlanta LATA (ALLTEL, Trion CO) and all others in Chattanooga (seven COs, four LECs). Fannin GA: BellSouth customers in Chattanooga (Copper Basin/Ocoee CO); TDS customers in Atlanta (Blue Ridge CO) -- also, all cellular service is split (US Cellular [no service] and GTE Mobilnet in Chattanooga side, Palmer Wireless [was US Cellular] and BellSouth Mobility in Atlanta side) ... there are no roaming agreements between ANY of these companies! :( Marion TN: BellSouth customers in Chattanooga (four COs); Ben Lomand RTC customers in Nashville (Monteagle CO). (InterLATA local calling is possible in all of these cases.) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 ------------------------------ From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Re: Trouble Using 888 Toll Free Services Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 23:30:26 GMT Organization: Catoosa Computing Services Reply-To: scline@usit.net On Mon, 19 Aug 1996 06:22:08 GMT, you wrote: > What are the legal time requirements for Customer Owned Pay > Telephone providers to program access to 888 Toll-free services? 888 In Tennessee and Georgia at least, the phones were to have been fixed by *March 1*, the date on which 888 took effect. Most COPT/COCOT operators *have* fixed problems, but there are a couple of stubborn ones on whom I had to file TRA (Tennessee Regulatory Authority) and FCC complaints. I have found several variations on 888 problems: * Completely disallowing the call, as an invalid NPA; * Treating the call as Directory Assistance(!) and charging 60c/85c per call, or otherwise treating the call as local (25c); * Treating 888 as just another "long distance" call, charging up to $3 + per-minute charges for access. (More common is the "25c/minute within the 48 states" coin rate, but some COCOT owners still gouge on coin calls.) One payphone owner, International Payphones of Knoxville, was rather blunt when I reported the problem to them -- they said that they "don't have to provide access to 888 numbers" (I have heard variations on that with 950 numbers before, back when MCI used 950-1022) and that they'd "see what they could do." Needless to say, I called the TRA and wrote the FCC the next day. (They STILL do not have the outpulsing right -- dialing 1+888 works, but the phone dials only 1+888+XXX-X as if the call were an old-style intraNPA LD call ... callers must dial the last three digits again, after the phone stops dialing. I am calling the TRA again ...) Another company, Pierre's Communications of Chattanooga, routes all "service" calls to a CellularOne voice-mailbox -- I have never been able to get through to a person with them, I just leave message after message. I have also reported them. There have been companies that fixed 888 problems immediately upon my reporting it. Coin Phones of America, in the Chattanooga area, was blocking 888 numbers; I called the company -- the owner answered and said he'd reprogram the phones ASAP. The next day, it was fixed. Some of the 888 blocking seems to be inadvertent, but I believe that certain COPT/COCOT owners are *deliberately* blocking access to 888 numbers, despite regulations stating they CANNOT. Since some calling cards are now using 888 numbers for access (CompuServe/Premiere Worldlink's for example -- however, they have a "backup" 800 for when 888 doesn't work) blocking 888 becomes an issue of blocking IXC access, which the FCC does NOT take lightly. > various COPT vendors, I get no answers or satisfaction. And even when > I go through the local or Long Distance Provider operators, I've only > been successful once out of about a dozen tries. And this has never Most operators can't place calls to 800/888 numbers in any case. If they can, it generally must be the same company that serves the 800/888 number. > been a problem with either 800 numbers, or when using Telco owned > paystations I have run into one BellSouth payphone, retrofitted with an Elcotel board, that failed to allow 888. A quick call to BellSouth coin phone repair service (an 888 number itself!) got that taken care of. In that case, the phone hadn't been "polled" for months since it was so rarely used. In other areas (and especially non-Bell areas), LEC phones use switching in the CO rather than the phone, so any changes made at the CO take effect immediately at all payphones in a CO. Once CO-based signaling becomes ubiquitous (as the telecom bill requires) many of the COCOT problems will disappear. Even in independent LEC areas that allow equal access, I have seen strange problems -- in Ringgold, GA for example, LEC payphones cannot dial 10XXX+0 at all (calls go to dead air), while COCOTs(!) and non-coin phones can. Ringgold Telephone Co. is investigating why that is happening -- they say it should not happen -- that their payphone switching is messed up. > allowing connection, or is the only recourse to start a California PUC > complaint file on every carrier? I have been reading through Best bet is to contact both the CPUC *and* FCC on each payphone owner that is violating the regulations ... the CPUC takes "primary" responsibility for COCOTs, while the FCC will look at 888 blocking as IXC blocking (which it can be construed as.) > P.S.: Anyone else noticed how quiet switchrooms are today? Yup. I took a tour of the Chattanooga BellSouth downtown CO in 1992(?) with the UT-Chattanooga IEEE; the area where the digital switches (DMS-100, SS7 routers, etc.) were was *quiet*, while a 1AESS still there was rather noisy. (I've been in an independent's #5XB CO several years ago, too ... that is really noisy!) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://pobox.com/~roamer1/ CompuServe 74212,44 ** MSN WSCline1 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The old crossbar and stepping-switch type systems were always very noisy. A long time ago I lived not too far from Illinois Bell's central office at 61st and Kenwood Street, right across the alley from the University of Chicago phone switch on East 60th Street. This was in a time when air conditioning of large buildings was not yet all that common (early 1960's) or at least they seldom retrofitted real old buildings for air conditioning so on a hot summer night they would have all the windows open on the ground floor where the switching equipment was located and the second floor where the operators and switchboards were located. Starting about a block away as you walked down the sidewalk in that direction you could hear 'Kenwood Bell' as it was called chattering and clacking. That was not the case in the winter when the windows were all closed. But in the summer, especially at night when it was otherwise very quiet outside you could almost gauge how busy the telephone exchange was by listening to the relays chattering as you walked past right outside the building. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com Subject: Re: Will Full Number Portability Occur? Date: Mon, 26 Aug 96 15:04:37 PDT Organization: AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. In article in a response to Al Varney's post on this subject, Pat mentions: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Al, what I do not understand is how > anyone could be expected to know where they were calling or how much > it would cost if phone numbers could be taken all over the USA. If > I took my 847 number and moved to California then what would happen > when my next door neighbor in California wanted to call me? I assume > they would dial my 847 number but would telco in California first > assume the number was in Illinois and look over here to the telco > to get instructions on forwarding it back to California, etc? I > think portability in a geographic sense would be a disaster. PAT] Local Number Portability implies that a ported number NOT create long distance calls where none existed before. Am I wrong? I believe the intent of the FCC's LNP rules is to promote competition for existing local loops all within a geography defined as a "Rate Center", and is not intended to help subscribers keep the same number forever. National Number Portability does not promote competition for the local loop so why is it needed? Sure one would never have to change numbers but some new mechanism would be needed to inform callers about long distance charges when calling a number that has been ported between area codes. Jeffrey Rhodes at jeffrey.rhodes@attws.com ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #443 ******************************