Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA22571; Thu, 20 Mar 1997 00:57:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 00:57:12 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199703200557.AAA22571@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #71 TELECOM Digest Thu, 20 Mar 97 00:57:00 EST Volume 17 : Issue 71 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Secrets of the Super Net Searchers" by Basch (Rob Slade) LERG Errors? (Steve Kass) Slammed by American Business Alliance (Mark Wold) Re: Slammed Again: NYNEX's Response (Stanley Cline) Re: Slammed Again: NYNEX's Response (Alan Boritz) Re: Slammed Again: NYNEX's Response (Robert Bononno) 888 Auction - It's Back! (Judith Oppenheimer) Does This Warning Really Make a Difference? (Steven V. Christensen) In Defense of AOL and its Good Features (Bill Turner) What's This Scam? (Lizanne Hurst) AT&T and Those Checks They Send Out (R.V. Head) Re: Another 800 Pay Number (Nils Anderson) Re: Another 800 Pay Number (Stuart Zimmerman) Who Will Rent Me a GSM SIM Card (John R. Covert) Programmer Needed (Dan Gauthier) For Sale: ATT KSU System (Dave Vigliotti) 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 hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@massis.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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 14:25:53 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Secrets of the Super Net Searchers" by Basch BKSOTSNS.RVW 961114 "Secrets of the Super Net Searchers", Reva Basch, 1996, 0-910965-22-6, U$29.95 %A Reva Basch %C 462 Danbury Road, Wilton, CT 06897-2126 %D 1996 %G 0-910965-22-6 %I Pemberton Press Books/Online Inc. %O U$29.95 800-248-8466 +1-203-761-1466 fax: +1-203-761-1444 online@well.com %P 350 %T "Secrets of the Super Net Searchers" Basch has interviewed thirty five net users. The interviews are presented as such. Therefore, while the interviews themselves may be of interest, the book is hardly as useful a resource as the likes of "Finding it on the Internet" (cf. BKFNDINT.RVW). I don't know all of those interviewed, but I do recognize a number of names from works I have reviewed. Two of the names are quite respectable. A rather larger number, however, belong to those who have turned out books whose value is questionable. Overall, you are not going to find any secrets here. You get the same advice on searching that you find anywhere else. In one sense, the advice is balanced because you have more than one view. In another, trying to find the balance can take a lot of time since the perspective of one interviewee contradicts that of another. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKSOTSNS.RVW 961114 roberts@decus.ca rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@vanisl.decus.ca Ceterum censeo CNA Financial Services delendam esse Please note the Peterson story - http://www.netmind.com/~padgett/trial.htm ------------------------------ Subject: LERG Errors? From: Steve Kass Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 15:46:10 -0500 Reply-To: skass@icosa.drew.edu Organization: Drew University My company has written a traffic analysis and costing program for telecom resellers, and obviously we make significant use of Bellcore's LERG tables. There are, unfortunately, errors in the LERG, from small (St. Kitts and Nevis is misspelled as St. Litts and Nevis), to more serious (the V&H coordinates for some places in South Dakota put them in the Gulf of Mexico). These errors are from last September's LERG tables, and I haven't checked a more recent issue. As for the latter error, can I assume that every telco in the country is billing some calls incorrectly because they use the LERG V&H coordinates to calculate rates for some types of calls? In this case there are intrastate SD calls with calculated mileages of over 2000 miles (try Brookings to Sioux Falls). And can anyone tell me if there's someone at Bellcore I can call to recommend that the errors be corrected? And how does Bellcore compile the LERG data? In other words, what is the likely source of errors such as this? It's not hard to find the big errors at all - just pull the V&H data from each state into a spreadsheet and graph the switches' locations. If there's a dot outside of the state, there's a problem. Two other LERG questions: There are generally no posted switches for Canadian NPA-NXXs, but there are a few: three in NPA 514, for example. Any explanation? And in NPA 809, is there a resource to let me identify the country associated with a particular NXX? Steve Kass All Trades Computing skass@icosa.drew.edu 212-532-8038 ------------------------------ From: Mark Wold Subject: Slammed by American Business Alliance Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 10:19:37 -0600 Organization: Electro Link Network, Inc., Elburn, IL, USA Reply-To: mark@elnet.com Out of the blue, every other long distance call we started making was getting 'all circuits busy'. so I call 1-700-555-4141 and find that I'm on AT&T. We call Ameritech and they show a change to American Business Alliance, an AT&T reseller. We track down these people and register a complaint and a trouble call since we can't dial half the calls we want. They are also known as 'The Phone Company'. They say they have a verification firm which indicates that I authorized the switch on 12/13/96 which took place on 03/11/97. I never authorized anything. So they call back today and have produced a tape of a phone call to our number with somebody claiming to be me. It's not me and the conversation never happened. I don't know what or who to believe. Either the verification firm called a wrong number and somebody played the game as me, or the tape was created as a fake. Fortunately, Ameritech was able to get us back on our real carrier within an hour. Anybody else out there ever deal with these folks? They are based somewhere in Pennsylvania. Mark ------------------------------ From: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com (Stanley Cline) Subject: Slammed Again: NYNEX's Response Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 14:27:23 GMT Organization: An antonym for Chaos Reply-To: roamer1@RemoveThis.pobox.com On Sun, 16 Mar 1997 12:53:09 -0500, in comp.dcom.telecom Pat wrote: > their check. Has anyone else gotten a check from AT&T for a line > which the company earlier had cut off from service? PAT Strangely enough -- yes. I disconnected my "second" line in January (actually, I let the bill slip by as I have been out of work) and not only have I received a check *and* one of those "switch for software" things again, but AT&T continues to have my 500 number in service [I received a letter TODAY -- nearly three months later -- stating that they had FINALLY heard from BellSouth that the number was disconnected]. I've also received a couple of mailings, one of those about AT&T's relay services. (I had used the Georgia Relay Service a couple of times; that may explain that.) As for the hanging 500 number, I'm moving to Atlanta in about a week, and I'll probably retain the 500. (AT&T will provide my LD service there, too.) I called BellSouth to tell them that *FINALLY* I was paying the $140 I still owe them, and they said they would not require a deposit from me again, since I had otherwise had "good credit" with them. (A couple of bills had been paid a bit late, and I was disconnected once for four hours!) (OTOH, Georgia Power is forcing me to pay a $120 deposit, and now the apartment complex I'll be at wants more money from me, as a result of a rather mixed credit history. Of course, I'll get those back with interest -- eventually :( ) Stanley Cline (Roamer1 on IRC) ** GO BRAVES! GO VOLS! Unofficial MindSpring Fan ** mailto:scline@mindspring.com mailto:roamer1@pobox.com ** http://www.pobox.com/~roamer1/ From: line changed so I get NO SPAM! See http://www.vix.com/spam/ ------------------------------ From: aboritz@cybernex.net (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Slammed Again: NYNEX's Response Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 23:04:12 -0500 In article appeared: > Robert Bononno wrote: >> Someone asked me about NYNEX's response to being slammed by >> AT&T. Basically NYNEX said, er, um, uh, that it couldn't have >> happened. I have two phone numbers. I was slammed last year by >> Heartline. At the time I specifically requested that NYNEX put a >> freeze on *both* numbers. And they told me they had. When I called >> right after the AT&T mishap, they told me there was a freeze only on >> *one* number. They said they would correct the situation at once. When >> I told them that both numbers had been switched to AT&T, the operator >> said that couldn't have happened. Well, it did happen. > Here's a thought: > If your mail delivery is questionable (i.e. someone could be stealing > your postal mail, which is known to happen), then it IS possible that > the party in question could potentially intercept a check from an IXC, > "sign" it over to themselves, and leave you holding the bag. > No only do they get free cash that you wouldn't have known about, but > they also change *YOUR* LD service. They don't need to steal your mail to change your PIXC. My boss's brother-in-law signed up for an MCI calling card a while ago, using his address (with permission, he travels a lot for business). MCI slammed my boss's home phone, based on the calling card order. What the morons at MCI didn't notice (and Bell Atlantic didn't challenge) was that the name on the calling card didn't match the name on the account for the contact phone. I had him file a PUC complaint against Bell Atlantic, and MCI paid for the PIXC change. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 17:57:18 -0500 From: rb28@is4.nyu.edu (Robert Bononno) Subject: Re: Slammed Again: NYNEX's Response Organization: Techline In article , jcropper@NOSPAM.lincs.net wrote: > If your mail delivery is questionable (i.e. someone could be stealing > your postal mail, which is known to happen), then it IS possible that > the party in question could potentially intercept a check from an IXC, > "sign" it over to themselves, and leave you holding the bag. > No only do they get free cash that you wouldn't have known about, but > they also change *YOUR* LD service. Could be, at least in theory. (For example, Heartline claimed I had signed something approving the switch. In that case the signature, which they sent me, is an obvious forgery.) But AT&T never claimed I had signed anything or even approved anything. Neither AT&T nor NYNEX seemed to have any idea how this might have happened. Amazing, isn't it? Robert Bononno - rb28@is4.nyu.edu - CIS:73670,1570 ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Subject: 888 Auction - It's Back! Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 10:24:36 -0500 Organization: ICB Toll Free News Reply-To: joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com 888 AUCTION - IT'S BACK! The auction of toll-free vanity numbers, first proposed by Congress last year, is back, slipped obscurely into the 1998 Budget Proposal. And it's rumored to be green-lighted. Full text at http://www.icbtollfree.com, "Industry News & Analysis." ICB Toll Free News has been redesigned. Please let me know if you find any links not working, copy or format glitches, etc. Also if there are any links you'd recommend we include. Thank you, Judith Oppenheimer ICB TOLL FREE NEWS - 800/888/global800 news, analysis, advice. http://www.icbtollfree.com, mailto:news-editor@icbtollfree.com Judith Oppenheimer - 800 The Expert, ph 212 684-7210, fx 212 684-2714 mailto:j.oppenheimer@worldnet.att.net, mailto:icb@juno.com ------------------------------ From: Steven V. Christensen Subject: Does This Warning Really Make a Difference? Date: 18 Mar 1997 17:52:15 GMT Organization: pobox.com In article in comp.dcom.telecom, Steven H. Lichter wrote: [thread deleted] > *****LEGAL NOTICE TO ALL BULK E-MAILERS***** > > NOTICE TO BULK EMAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, > Subchapter II, 227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent > to this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the > amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. This is off-topic, but have you (or anyone) been able to apply the above-mentioned penalty to spammers? Regards, Steven From the desk of: Steven Christensen N9XJY Internet: chrissv@pobox.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting that you ask, because I was going to inquire about the very same thing. Until last year, and even at the start of this year, I *always* edited out all the 'no spam' and other notations people were putting in their mailing address and signature lines. I just thought it was in poor taste to have those as part of the Digest. But it got to be so bad with spammers writing to so many of the readers here that many folks complained to me and I started leaving in the obstacles designed to make automated spamming a bit more difficult. Now lately I have been leaving in all the notices and warnings and dummy site names, etc although personally I still cringe a little at doing so. So how has it been going with you people who put those things in your messages? Has the spam and junk mail subsided at all? Are those idiots with their business opportunities and other worthless mail getting the hint at all? If the junk has continued, have you successfully been able to enforce your various 'contracts'? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Turner, WB4ALM Subject: In Defense of AOL and its Good Features Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 14:15:47 -0500 Organization: Amateur Radio Station WB4ALM Reply-To: wb4alm@gte.net > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you are correct about certain > features on AOL not being available elsewhere. They have lots of > Business Opportunity spams/scams, chain letters to help you Make Money > Fast, and FBI agents posing as very cute young boys trying to get into > your (and each other's) pants among other things. They have employees > who steal customer credit card numbers; they have an endless supply of > crackers on line at all hours. Ah, and of course! How could I almost > forget: they have their Terms of Service and Guides who are always > willing to throw their weight around and show you who is boss. PAT] While I understand the Tounge-in-check, I'm not sure that all of your readers do. The features that I was referring to are the offerings of a number of businesses that provide special services, such as American Express and the ARRP, not to mention the small computer businesses that have support "forums" on or via AOL. Unfortunatly the other items also occur, but to my knowledge they occur at or from virtually every Internet Service Provider in the country. Enuf said. Now back to the program which was in progress before this interuption. /s/ Bill Turner, wb4alm [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Certainly some ISPs are better than others and some seem to attract more troublesome and/or dimwitted users than others. AOL is however, just frankly outrageous. Yes, AOL does have a few things not found elsewhere that are good, but I think overall the bad outweighs the good. My belief is that if Compuserve (to name one example) really made a strong marketing push to convert the better quality AOL customers over to CIS, inc- luding some of the better forums on AOL, quite a few would jump ship in a minute and head for the much higher quality CIS. Ditto many of the ISPs; if they really went after the better quality AOL customer and made them a good offer, I'll bet a lot of them would quit AOL without hesitation. I suspect many AOL subscribers just stay there by 'default'; that is, perhaps they are fairly new to the online scene, have never had other services make a pitch directed specifically at them, and do not really know where else to go. I guess my biggest complaint about AOL would be that Steve Case seems perfectly willing and eager to give accounts to government agents such as FBI and Customs Service for no other reason than to just deliberatly try to stir up trouble and entrap people by sending them kiddie porn, etc and then rushing off to arrest them as soon as they accept it. Maybe he is not 'perfectly willing and eager' ... maybe they have something on him also and are using his company as a tool in their dirty business; I really don't know, but I will say if I were an ISP I certainly would not want government agents on my system hassling my users and spying on them or trying to make criminals out of them. The whole thing is repugnant and very ugly. I dunno, using that system -- and I rarely do any more -- just gives me the creeps. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 16:11:52 EST From: lh00@lehigh.edu (Lizanne Hurst) Subject: What's This Scam? I'm hoping a kind TELECOM Digest reader can shed light on what we suspect is some kind of scam. Our students have reported three consecutive rashes of incoming calls since January. A man rings in on an outside call, identifies himself as a telephone repair person, and asks the student to hold on while he "checks the line." He instructs the student to hang up after seven minutes, and says he will then ring back to confirm the line is functional. We try to educate our user community to be conscious of potential fraud, and the effort seems to be paying off because most of the students hung up immediately. One student we spoke to, however, followed the caller's instructions. After she waited the seven minutes and hung up, she was then called back by another man making sexually explicit suggestions. What's the angle here? I've been reviewing our bills carefully and have found no unusual charges or calling patterns. Are the students assenting to some ungodly charge by hanging on, and it just hasn't shown up on our bills yet? Or is the caller somehow trying to appropriate our dial tone? I'm not sure how they can pull that off, since they're coming in to our PBX via one-way DID trunks. Any clues would be greatly appreciated! Lizanne Hurst Information Resources Lehigh University 610.758.5014 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Continue stressing to your students and employees that no one, but no one is authorized to deal with anyone 'from the phone company' except personnel in your own depart- ment. They should continue hanging up when those calls come in, and in the event they feel the call might be legitimate their only response should be, "I will transfer you to the phone administrator's office; they can help you with line testing/repairs, etc." PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: AT&T and Those Checks They Send Out From: rvhead@juno.com (R.V. Head) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 09:41:24 EST TELECOM Digest Editor noted: >. Readers may recall my > mention a couple times in the past about the fiasco which resulted > when AT&T decided to pull their billing arrangements away from the > local telco Ameritech, and how mixed up the billing was the first > month following the conversion. AT&T's response to the billing mixup > was to simply place a large number of customers with the Gulf Coast > Collection Agency in Houston. I ignored GC and just kissed AT&T > goodbye, giving the lines in particular to other carriers. So the > check over the weekend was quite interesting to say the least. When > I try to dial 10288 plus a long distance number on the line in > question (which AT&T sent me a check on) I still get the 'access to > the AT&T network is denied' message. I guess I will cash the check > and tell them go ahead and put that line on their network ... grin ... > and see how they choose to handle it. The letter which arrived with > the check touted their 'one rate' (fifteen cents per minute) program > and promised 'no gimmicks and no games'. I suppose if they try to > put that number back on their service, it will bounce around for a > while through their collection department which has a 'hold' on it > for the earlier alleged non-payment. Meanwhile, I will have cashed > their check. Has anyone else gotten a check from AT&T for a line > which the company earlier had cut off from service? PAT] Yes. A couple of years ago, one of my lines was hooked to AT&T for Intra-LATA calls, without my knowledge or assent. I had been happily paying MCI several hundred dollars every month, along with my South Central Bell bill (They offered LEC Billing, and AT&T did not, at that time in my area of Louisville, Kentucky). Some time passes, I keep getting letters from AT&T, but throw them away unread, as I was getting a REALLY good deal from MCI, and I wasn't interested in changing carriers. Several months later, my Really Good Deal from MCI expired, and the next time I got a check from AT&T, I cashed it. A few days later I tried to make a call on that line and got the Net Denied message. Thinking this was exceedingly odd, I called AT&T to find out what was wrong, and they told me I owed them $68.42 from a year earlier. I had to speak to three or four levels of progressively-less-helpful flunkies before I found one who told me of the Intra-LATA mixup, which was news to me - I hadn't noticed. She said I could Western Union them the money and they'd turn it back on as soon as they received my payment. As soon as I hung up, I called MCI and asked them what they'd pay me to come back. They gave me another good deal (though not as good as the one before), plus a hundred bucks. Since that time, I've moved to a different state and have signed up with AT&T's dime-a-minute, any time all the time plan. Not a word has been said about that $68.42. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I made things a bit fuzzier for them. I used their check along with a couple of old 'Pay to the Order of the Telephone Company' vouchers (also from AT&T) I had laying around to pay my phone bill a couple days ago. We'll see what happens in a few days. I trust they won't try to slam my other two lines in the process, but who knows ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: nilsphone@aol.com (Nils Andersson) Subject: Re: Another 800 Pay Number Date: 18 Mar 1997 01:05:35 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com In article , sicherman@lucent.com (Col. G.L. Sicherman) writes: > Then, last month, came the payoff. For America Online, that is. A > payoff in the amount of more than $1,000 charged to a credit card used > by Eschelbach for his AOL account. Get a grip! Firstly, the charge for the 800 is quite clearly stated in several places. Secondly, common sense should tell you that nobody is going to give you unlimited 800 service free. Thirdly, AOL will let you check you billing at any time, the items are at least essentially up-to-the-minute. I have used AOL a lot, including from overseas locations (most are charged 10c a minute, as the US 800 number), which is pretty reasonable. Regards, Nils Andersson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 10:56:25 -0500 From: Stuart Zimmerman Reply-To: f_save@snet.net Organization: Fone Saver Subject: Re: Another 800 Pay Number In article , David E. Bernholdt wrote: > Indeed, my ISP, which also happens to be a small long distance > company, has an 800 number for which they charge $6/hr. > More interestingly, this ISP also has an 800 number for which they do > _not_ charge which they use to offer service as a "local" call in some > areas where they don't have a large enough customer base to install a > full POP. > Of course I'm an honest guy and have no wish to abuse their service > or give them reason to discontinue either form of 800-number access, I > have not tried to use the "local access" number when I'm on the road. To which Pat responded: > They would be better off offering just > the one single 800 number, and then rebating or crediting the charges > for use of it to selected customers who had no other choice. As it is, > they have to hope that honest customers like yourself will not abuse > the 'local access' number. PAT] The ISP probably only allows access to their "local access" 800 number from those exchanges where they wish to permit local access and block it from the rest of the country. (It is a simple matter to have an 800 number set up with access from only certain exchanges within an area code, or certain area codes. Other callers get a recording saying that the 800 number is not available from your area.) That is probably why they have a second 800 number available for national access. If the ISP is not smart enough to set it up this way, I would look for a new ISP, because they will not survive long. Stuart Zimmerman Fone Saver, LLC "Helping Consumers and Businesses Save on Long Distance" Phone: 1-800-31-FONE-1 Web: http://www.wp.com/Fone_Saver ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Mar 97 22:47:17 EST From: John R. Covert Subject: Who Will Rent Me a GSM SIM Card What reliable commercial firms are there out there who will rent me, at reasonable prices, a GSM SIM card for my Motorola 7200 for occasional travel from the U.S. to GSM equipped countries? /john ------------------------------ From: Dan Gauthier Subject: Programmer Needed Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 18:38:05 -0600 Organization: Tellus Technologies Tellus Technologies has a (relatively) short-term software development project for a call processing application. The application will run under Windows-NT. The development environment and the skill set required is Visual C++, SQL Server 6.5, and TAPI. If you are interested in this project, e-mail me with your qualifications and I will provide you additional information. Dan Gauthier, President - Tellus Technologies ------------------------------ From: dvigliot@sprynet.com (Dave Vigliotti) Subject: For Sale: ATT KSU System Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 21:15:11 GMT Organization: Sprynet News Service ATT Spirit System 308, with (4) 6 button phones and (1) 24 button phone. Looking for good price. email me at dvigliot@sprynet.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #71 *****************************