Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id AAA28142; Mon, 21 Apr 1997 00:37:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 00:37:11 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199704210437.AAA28142@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V17 #97 TELECOM Digest Mon, 21 Apr 97 00:37:00 EDT Volume 17 : Issue 97 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Radio Call-In Contest Regulations (John Higdon) Re: Radio Call-In Contest Regulations (John Nagle) Re: Pay Phone Charges Now 25c in Massachusetts? Yes or No? (Peter Morgan) Re: Whowhere, Database America Pulls Reverse Lookup Service (G Novosielski) Re: NYNEX Offers Free CLID Boxes (No Purchase Necessary) (Justin Hamilton) Re: Ten-Digit Dialing and Overlays (was Re: FL PSC and 904) (Michael Adams) Re: Internal Termination, Specialized Cable Runs? (Michael Wright) Re: Internal Termination, Specialized Cable Runs? (Travis Dixon) Re: Internal Termination, Specialized Cable Runs? (Bruce Bergman) 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: * subscriptions@telecom-digest.org * 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: 847-727-5427 Fax: 773-539-4630 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org (WWW/http only!) 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 archives@telecom-digest.org 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 20:30:27 -0700 From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Radio Call-In Contest Regulations scs@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) wrote: > I've speculated that special contest numbers are > used which are known to all of the switches in a metropolitan area, so > that the load of returning busy signals to N-1 callers can be > distributed among all of the CO's, rather than swamping the one switch > attached to the contest line (and tying up lots of trunks). This practice (yes, it did exist -- I even hosted a radio talk show dedicated to the topic back in the seventies) was known as a "choke network". A prefix was designated as a "high volume" exchange and all radio stations using lines for contests and requests were required to obtain numbers in that special exchange. Stations not served by that particular central office were required to haul it in via foreign exchange. It worked like this: a very limited number of trunks were used to carry calls from each central office to this particular prefix. The number was usually around two. That meant that if there were two people from a particular office calling any station's request lines, the third caller and all subsequent callers to try would get "all trunks busy" (a fast busy signal). What bothered station owners was the fact that any station in the area holding a contest would effectively shut down all other stations' request lines for the duration of the contest. Telco argued that unless this procedure was used that the entire area could be shut down by one contest -- and indeed one such event triggered the implementation of the choke network in this area. Telco insisted that by implementing the choke network, the stations were the beneficiaries since the alternative was to forbid the use of the telephone for contests. > Also, if there's anything to this, what enforcement powers does the > telephone company have? If a radio station conducts an unauthorized > contest, can the phone company cut off their service? Fine them? Get > them hauled off to jail? The usual threat, never realized, was to cut off the station's service. Holding a contest was not a crime, nor was it a tariff violation, but it came under the purvue of maintaining service to customers. The radio stations, as much as they complained about the concept of the choke network, were a pretty cooperative bunch. I speak of all this in the past tense because in the era of SS7 and intelligent routing networks, trunk management can be done on the fly. A virtual choke network can be created instantly. As a result, the old choke exchange has fallen into disuse. However, telco never bothered to inform stations that they no longer needed those expensive foreign exchange lines, and many stations paid for these circuits for years after SS7 made them unnecessary. John Higdon | P.O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX: john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | +1 500 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407 | http://www.ati.com/ati/ | ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: Radio Call-In Contest Regulations Organization: Netcom On-Line Services Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 00:15:01 GMT scs@eskimo.com (Steve Summit) writes: > Once upon a time I heard, I don't remember where, that radio stations > operate under strict telco rules when they have those "the seventh > caller wins a prize" contests. As I understand it, radio stations may > operate such contests only in careful cooperation with the local > telephone company. I've speculated that special contest numbers are > used which are known to all of the switches in a metropolitan area, so > that the load of returning busy signals to N-1 callers can be > distributed among all of the CO's, rather than swamping the one switch > attached to the contest line (and tying up lots of trunks). At one time NYNEX was considering imposing a fee for incoming calls which resulted in busy signals, with the first 100,000 calls per month free. That was their approach to dealing with the problem. I don't know if that ever happened, though. John Nagle ------------------------------ From: Peter Morgan Subject: Re: Pay Phone Charges Now 25c in Massachusetts? Yes or No? Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 10:51:47 +0100 In message albert@husc.harvard.edu (David Albert) wrote: > "The number you are dialing cannot be reached from this phone. Please > check the instruction card on the telephone or dial your operator". > What's going on? If calls are a quarter, okay, fine. But shouldn't > the phone say so in the instructions? And as for the intercept > message, it nearly kept me from getting through -- I really thought > perhaps I had misremembered the number. Surely they can come up with > something more informative? While visiting San Francisco, I had a few instances where the payphone message was like "the call you have dialled cannot be completed until you have inserted 20c" (of course I had inserted either 20c or a quarter). Is this message generated when the coin collection box is full? While writing, I'm interested to know how much the hotels normally charge, as I felt the 50c charge I had was OK. (I can understand they have provided the phone, and they were generous to let me off the last $1 I spent on the day I checked out, when it wasn't shown on the bill they printed. Grant Plaza in S.F. for anyone interested -- it is the budget end of the market, though, at $45 per night single, in case you all like flying business class, and it may not be as luxurious as you're used to :-) Peter http://www.ultranet.com/~pgm/sf-cafe.html <- Net cafes I used http://www.ultranet.com/~pgm/radio.htm listen to WRN [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Around here when the coin box is full -- as detirmined by a sensor mechanism in the phone, and the sensors can and are frequently faulty -- the deposit of a coin brings back a message from the central office saying, "Coins cannot be used at the phone you are using at the present time. Please select another method of payment." PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: GPN Consulting Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 14:27:28 -0400 From: Gary Novosielski Subject: Re: Whowhere, Database America Pulls Reverse Lookup Service In TELECOM Digest Volume 17 : Issue 94, John Cropper wrote: > The last two directory service providers to supply reverse lookup > capabilities have pulled their reverse lookup services over privacy > concerns. > Whowhere pulled its listing quietly around mid-week, while Database > America pulled it while in the process of a merger with American > Business Information. They did, sort of, but those weren't the "last two" out there. There is still a reverse lookup service at: http://www.555-1212.com which formerly linked to Database America, but now uses a search engine hosted by: http://www.pc411.com The latter is a marketing site for a PC-based phone lookup program which (for a fee) may be used to process mailing lists. But onesie-twosie lookups, including crisscrosses, may be done for free at that web site. When a web lookup succeeds, the user can click on it, and go directly to a map showing the location of the address, via a link to: http://www.mapquest.com By the way, although Database America pulled the reverse search fill-in form from their home page, the service is still operational (as of Saturday afternoon) if you use the direct URL in order to reach it: http://api2.databaseamerica.com/cgi-bin/gpfind.cgi?p=npa-nxx-nnnn where: npa-nxx-nnnn is the phone number, formated with dashes as shown. Gary Novosielski mailto:gpn@techie.com PGPInfo: KeyID A6172089 GPN Consulting http://idt.net/~gpn 2C 5C 32 94 F4 FF 08 10 B6 E0 DE 4F A2 43 79 92 ------------------------------ From: JHamilton@Mindspring.Com (Justin Hamilton) Subject: Re: NYNEX Offers Free CLID Boxes (No Purchase Necessary) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 21:01:31 GMT Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Reply-To: JHamilton@Mindspring.Com On Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:05:17 GMT, rem@world.std.com (Ross E Mitchell) wrote: > They call it (internally) the "blitz" campaign. Businesses can > sign-up for Caller ID with no installation charge AND a free box. But > in the small print it says "No purchase necessary." > Turns out that the FCC won't allow them to require people to sign up > for Caller ID in order to get the box. So, I tried calling the > business office and told them I wanted the box but not the service. > They said that couldn't be possible, but I disagreed. They contacted > the product manager for CLID and, voila, my free box will be sent > within ten days. > Why get a box without the service? Well, you might want it for a > residential line. You might want to wait and sign-up for Caller ID at > a later date. You might want to give it to a friend. Whatever ... > Sometimes it pays to read the fine print. Does the fine print mention that you have to be a Nynex customer, or that you have to live in a Nynex area? Please could you most/email the number you called :) Justin Hamilton http://www.mindspring.com/~tmenet ------------------------------ From: mda-970418a@triskele.com (Michael D. Adams) Subject: Re: Ten-Digit Dialing and Overlays (was Re: FL PSC and 904) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 18:01:53 GMT Organization: The Owl's Roost Reply-To: mda-970418a@triskele.com Mark J. Cuccia wrote: > I understand that if southwest Pennsylvania's overlay actually does > take effect on 1-May-1997, and intra-NPA-code dialing is still allowed > as seven-digits, with local and toll calls to the overlaid > geographically co-existing area code dialable only as 1+ten-digits, > the FCC has required that this be only temporary, with ten-digit > dialing for all calls, by 1-November-1997. If the overlay and > ten-digit dialing does take effect, I don't know what Pennsylvania > regulatory is going to do about any 1+ or lack of 1+, toll vs. local. Just as an additional datapoint: Relief of Maryland's 410 and 301 area codes is set (unless something's happened while I wasn't looking) to become effective on June 1. Permissive 10-digit dialing has been in effect since the middle of '96, and is set to become mandatory on May 1. In Baltimore, a couple of radio stations I listen to regularly are running Bell Atlantic adds roughly twice an hour, announcing the changeover. After May 1, all local calls will be dialed as 10D (1+10D optional), while toll calls will be the usual 1+10D scheme. Granted, I'm relatively cloistered right now, preparing for a couple of professional exams, but I've heard relatively few complaints in the media about the change over; most of the press coverage has been along the lines of "it's going to happen; remember to make the appropriate changes to speed dials, alarm systems, etc." This is quite a contrast from my experience in southern Alabama, when area code 334 became the first geographic split invovling the "new" area codes, and it became painfully clear just how many PBX's there were in North America that couldn't grok area codes without 0's or 1's in the middle. A few businesses in Mobile and Montgomery sought to get the split reversed due to the amount of business they were losing. Michael D. Adams Q: What did God say when He created actuaries? Triskele Consulting A: He scratched his head and said, "Go figure." They Baltimore, MD took Him literally..... mda@triskele.com ------------------------------ From: voe@telalink.net (Michael Wright) Subject: Re: Internal Termination, Specialized Cable Runs? Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 14:04:49 GMT Organization: Telalink Corporation, Nashville, TN, USA bagdon@rust.net (Steve Bagdon) wrote: > I've requested termination inside the basement for my new phone line, > for fear that someone will walk up to the back of my house and slap a > phone ot the termination box (to the RJ-11 jack!), and make calls on > my line. Is this founded? It would be pretty darn rare. But of course, it is possible and easy to do for anyone with a screwdriver. > If someone does this, am I responsible for the charges? Yup. Of course, you can easily dispute them. > Logic would say if the termination is inside the house > they would have to B&E to get to the phone (and I have a police report > to back up my no-pay claims) or else cut the phone line (which is on > the phone companies side of the point of termination). Any thoughts, > anyone? I'd say you're quite paranoid. Millions and millions of residences have the RBOC demark on the exterior and if this type of toll fraud amounted to anything at all, you can bet our scandal-hungry media would have told you about it by now. > Also, I'm trying to run a massive cable run form my basement to my > attic (home-run of video, data and voice to every room in the house), > and have only about a 3/8" hole to work with. As I have two floors of > studs to go through, I figure this might be the *one* thing that I > would actually pay someone else to do (expand the holes all the way > up, and thread through some string). Here's what this will involve (there's no *magic* technique to *expand* holes. Pick a spot using a stud-finder to come up thru the floors between wall studs. Remove a section of wallboard on your first and second floors and drill large holes all the way thru the footers, flooring and anything underneath. Go to the attic and drill a large hole directly over the ones you've already drilled. Pull your second floor cabling all the way up to the attic where you can easily drill and drop into the walls of all your upstairs rooms. Now, replace the sections of wallboard (sheetrock) and carefully compound and sand the surfaces, then repaint. Your first-floor rooms may be cabled by using surface-mount outlets on the baseboard and drilling thr the floor in each location into the basement. > Is there a 'standard' place to look in the yellow pages, or do I > have to rely on word-of-mouth to find a *good* company to do this > work? Unless you're really good at this sort of thing and enjoy taking walls apart (yes, you have to do this ... the longest drill bit anyone carries is six feet and that won't do what you want to do) andspending lots of time in a 140-degree attic, I'd hire it out. I'd look in the yellow pages and get three bids. Take the one yo're most comfortable with. > Thanks in advance to anyone who can shed some light on the > termination and cable-run issues. An easier way, and the one I'd likely choose, is to run an EXTERIOR conduit up the side of the house in an inconspicuous location. Run this conduit from basement level to the easiest access point to the attic below the roof. Put T-angles on this conduit at each end. I'd use 3-inch conduit and do it strictly according to Code. MUCH easier than all that wall work. Michael VoiceX 1-888-2-Voice-X ------------------------------ From: travisd@saltmine.radix.net (Travis Dixon) Subject: Re: Internal Termination, Specialized Cable Runs? Date: 18 Apr 1997 18:37:37 GMT Organization: RadixNet Internet Services Steve Bagdon (bagdon@rust.net) wrote: > I've requested termination inside the basement for my new phone line, > for fear that someone will walk up to the back of my house and slap a > phone ot the termination box (to the RJ-11 jack!), and make calls on > my line. Is this founded? If someone does this, am I responsible for > the charges? Logic would say if the termination is inside the house > they would have to B&E to get to the phone (and I have a police report > to back up my no-pay claims) or else cut the phone line (which is on > the phone companies side of the point of termination). Any thoughts, > anyone? You may be able to get them to put a lockable Network Interface up for you if they don't do that standard already. Make them seal their side with one of those tamper-evident tags, and put your own lock on the "customer" side of the box. This way everyone can get to their side of the box when necessary. If they can't put up a lockable Box, possibly you could get it installed into one of those weather-proof, lockable electrical panel boxes. You also might be able to get them to armor the cable from the box to below grade (or to the overhead lines) - some standard electrical conduit should be sufficient. > Also, I'm trying to run a massive cable run form my basement to my > attic (home-run of video, data and voice to every room in the house), > and have only about a 3/8" hole to work with. As I have two floors of I'd suggest just looking for the "handman" type who can come in and bore the holes, or better yet run some 2" or better PVC pipe. Look for the area where the electrical and plumbing go up to the second floor also -- sometimes this is a "dead" area near the center of the house that might be accessible one way or the other. If the inside isn't viable option possibly consider going outside, taking the appropriate lightining precautions. Oh yeah, the usual suggestion: However many wires you think you're going to need: pull double that. -travis ------------------------------ From: bbergman@westworld.NOSPAM.com (Bruce Bergman) Subject: Re: Internal Termination, Specialized Cable Runs? Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:10:19 GMT Reply-To: bbergman@westworld.NOSPAM.com bagdon@rust.net (Steve Bagdon) wrote: > Just bought a house a few months ago, and it's *completely* low-tech! > But that's great, in that I can do up the cable-runs the way I want > (video, data, voice, etc). But I've run across a couple of > 'situations', when dealing with my service-providors (and I use > 'service' loosely!), as this is my first house that I've owned (rented > before). > I've requested termination inside the basement for my new phone line, > for fear that someone will walk up to the back of my house and slap a > phone ot the termination box (to the RJ-11 jack!), and make calls on > my line. Is this founded? If someone does this, am I responsible for > the charges? Logic would say if the termination is inside the house > they would have to B&E to get to the phone (and I have a police report > to back up my no-pay claims) or else cut the phone line (which is on > the phone companies side of the point of termination). Any thoughts, > anyone? Most Network Interface Device boxes are set up so the customer access side can be padlocked, and a tamper-resistant screwdriver is needed to access the Telco side. They are reasonably secure, and if you are worried, you can put a locked door over the NID/Demarc, and have the local telco leave a lockbox or special padlock which uses a restricted key that only their technicians have. If the telephones start acting up and the Demarc is in the basement, you'll have to stay home to let in the technician - or they drag you out with "It worked from the pole ..." > Also, I'm trying to run a massive cable run form my basement to my > attic (home-run of video, data and voice to every room in the house), > and have only about a 3/8" hole to work with. As I have two floors of > studs to go through, I figure this might be the *one* thing that I > would actually pay someone else to do (expand the holes all the way > up, and thread through some string). Is there a 'standard' place to > look in the yellow pages, or do I have to rely on word-of-mouth to > find a *good* company to do this work? Look under 'Electrical Contractors', and have three or four 1" or 1 1/2" conduits (PVC, EMT or Flex, depending on codes) run through from basement to attic, one for tel, one for TV, one for data, and an extra. While you're at it, you may want one or two for any extra electric circuits you may add on the second floor. Don't skimp, you don't want to rip holes in the walls again in two years when the one 3/4" conduit is full. Conduit will allow you to push a fishtape through if the string breaks. And good RG-6-Quad CATV coax is fairly large. If local codes require, or to be safe, get a couple of pounds of ductseal putty as a smoke stop in case of a fire in the basement, and putty around the wires at the attic end, and cap the unused ducts. > Thanks in advance to anyone who can shed some light on the termination > and cable-run issues. Telephone, CATV and Data are Class 2 power-limited circuits, and do not require too much special handling or conduits -- just keep it dry and neat. I'd offer my services, but since there aren't too many houses with basements in Los Angeles, I'd suspect you aren't local ... Former GTE COE Installer & Cable Splicer, 'Current' Electrician :) **** NEW .SIG - ALTERED RETURN ADDRESS - READ!! **** Bruce Bergman, P. O. Box 394, Woodland Hills CA. 91365-0394 (USA) NOTICE : Address Altered to Avoid Spammers - remove the NOSPAM WARNING: No Unsolicited Commercial E-Mail. Send it and your account is toast. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V17 #97 *****************************