TELECOM Digest     Fri, 23 Sep 94 13:10:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 373

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FBI Wiretap Bill -- WTF? (Mahatma Kane-Jeeves)
    I Want to Be an LD Rep (interbiz@aol.com)
    Coming Soon: Son of 800 (Greg Monti)
    Three Prefixes Moved From 215 to 717 (Carl Moore)
    Programming an AT&T ISDN Phone (Alex Cena)
    Where Can I Locate Telecom Documents? (ds3man@delphi.com)
    Free Calls Offered to Service Members (Bert Roseberry)
    AT&T and McCaw Merger (pault@panix.com)
    Need Help With Fax and Answering Service (Alan N. Canton)
    EIA/TIA 568 Standards (Wilson Mohr)
    Internet Windows Interface Job Offer (Murray Gordon)
    Need California PUC IRD Information (Al Cohan)
    Book Review: "The Elements of E-mail Style" by Angell/Heslop (Rob Slade)

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 at no charge to qualified organizations
and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify:

                 * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.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:
                    9457-D Niles Center Road
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: 708-329-0571
                        Fax: 708-329-0572
  ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu **

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask.

*************************************************************************
*   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.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

Additionally, 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.

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mkj@world.std.com (Mahatma Kane-Jeeves)
Subject: FBI Wiretap Bill -- WTF?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 05:09:56 GMT


I imagine most of you here have heard about the FBI's Digital
Telephony proposal, aka the Digital Wiretap bill, by now.  (If you
haven't, please check out the EFF, CPSR, EPIC, and sources of Voters
Telecom Watch info.)  I thought this group might be a good place to
ask for some technical insights into the bill's rationale.

The FBI has claimed (but has offered scant evidence) that advances in
"digital technology" are making the telephone system impossible to
tap.  Personally, I don't get it.  What kinds of taps are they talking
about?  As far as I know, you can still tap most phones the old-fashioned 
way -- by going up the pole or down into the basement with a pair of
alligator clips, right?  More to the point, you can tap any phone by
going to the carrier with a proper warrant and getting their cooperation 
(in fact, the major carriers have claimed that there has NEVER been a
case where a legitimate agency has come to them with a proper warrant
and not gotten a tap).

So I'm trying to figure out, just what is this bill about -- REALLY?

My own theory -- based on almost NO real knowledge, I admit -- is that
the problems the FBI is having with digital communications must be in
connection with either (1) doing taps without proper authorization, or
(2) doing general surveillance on trunks (which used to be easy-to-intercept 
microwave links but are lately being replaced with difficult-to-intercept 
optical fiber).

I'd appreciate it if anybody here with a better technical grasp of the 
situation could enlighten me further.  What the @#$%&! are they talking about?
Am I too paranoid, or not paranoid enough?

Thanks in advance for any insights.


mkj


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My own opinion is that the people making
the protests are by and large over-reacting. I've included some of their
press releases and 'write your congressperson' requests here in this
Digest in an effort to be fair about it and give their side of the story,
but honestly, I can't see what they have gotten in such an uproar over.
The other day someone sent in something saying 'congressman so-and-so
says he has not received a single letter from citizens in opposition to
the bill ...', and while some of that lack of letter writing may be due
to the ignorance of the general public on 'how telephones work', I do
beleive some of it is also due to the fact that most people don't feel
as threatened by these things as do the denizens of EFF and various
privacy advocates on the net. Of course a fair rebuttal to that might be
that it is precisely because of that general ignorance of telephone
operations that people are not alarmed; that if the public in general
knew as much about telephone networks and systems as a few of us do,
they too would be greatly concerned and busy letter writing, etc. Like
yourself, I find its simply too easy to tap telephones without being
caught at it to concern myself with some new legislation on the subject.
In any large older urban area, illicit tapping of telephones is child's
play. Just get your alligator clips and go do it at any one of a dozen
demarcs between the subscriber and the central office where the cable
pairs are multipled, or available. I am not saying I *do that*; I do not
do it, and I think it ethically wrong, but anyone can do it very easily.
Between the many cellular/cordless phone snoops out there listening and
the other easy ways there are of listening to phones, why should anyone
care about still new proposals, government or otherwise?    PAT]

------------------------------

From: interbiz@aol.com (InterBiz)
Subject: I Want to Be an LD Rep
Date: 23 Sep 1994 01:30:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


I am interested in being a rep for selling long distance.  However, I have
a few requirements:

1) I don't want to sell an MLM.  My goal isn't to find 50 motivated
people, it is to sell long distance with very good rates.  I'd like
the product to sell itself.  I don't want to go to Amway-type prayer
meetings where the discussions are how we will someday be rich.

2) I want to have the lowest or one of the lowest rates consumers can
get.  I want the rates to be impressive, so the service can sell itself.

Is it possible to become a rep without being entangled with the MLM
organization?  Can one sell direct for a company and bypass all the
middlemen of an MLM (I would think this would allow giving better
rates to consumers).

Please E-mail me any info that meets my requirements.  Thanks.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you don't like the Amway style of
doing things then select one of the countless other large 'switchless
resellers' of the major carriers. There are too many out there to even
begin naming them. In fact, there are so many out there -- many not
at all like Amway -- the profit margin on this has been squeezed dry.
You've got to get literally thousands of accounts under your control to
reach the point where your tiny fractional part of the whole pie amounts
to anything more than maybe a hundred dollars a month. After all the 
work I did on Orange Card a couple years ago for example, I have finally
gotten to the point they send me around fifty dollars every month as
residuals for the customers I sent their way. 

None of them will pay you an actual salary -- that is, unless you are
on their payroll and under their direct supervision -- it will always be
straight commission on traffic generated, generally with a delay of sixty
to ninety days following the traffic to allow the customer to pay them
and then in turn for them to pay you. You should plan on working three or
four months virtually full time receiving *no money at all* from the
carriers before the comissions -- what there are of them -- start coming
in. You'll have to answer lots of time-consuming questions for comparison
shoppers who won't ever sign up with you anyway. If you plan on doing this
full time, you'll need a few thousand dollars in reserve to live on while
waiting for the orders to go through, get turned on and the traffic to
start, to say nothing of hoping to Goddess the people pay their bills to
the carrier and are not deadbeats. Yes, many of the carriers have recourse
to you as the independent agent in the event the bills are not paid. And
if you only do it as a part time thing while keeping another full time 
job to live on, it will take ten times as long to reach the point where
your commissions or residuals on traffic amount to anything meaningful. 
Plan on spending all your weekends and every night answering email and
filling out paperwork. Seriously, I would not want to go back to doing
that. I tried it for a year or so; I am still starving and trying to
catch up financially in my personal life.    PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 7:30:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Greg Monti <GMONTI@npr.org>
Subject: Coming Soon:  Son of 800


A brief article in {Business Week} magazine, September 26, 1994, issue
under the name "I-Way Patrol" and entitled "Coming Soon, Son of 800,"
says that the 800 code is running out of telephone numbers.

800 numbers went from zero in 1967 to to 3.1 million in 1993.  The 
one-year step from 93 to 94, brought it to 4.1 million numbers.  The 
capacity of the code is supposedly 7.6 million numbers, which will be 
reached by 1996.

The article notes that business voice-response systems and inexpensive 
personal 800 number users are among the trends that soak up numbers.

The Industry Numbering Committee is chewing over the idea of supplementing 
800 with a second code, probably 300 or 400.

Cute graphic accompanies:  a telephone with what looks like an automobile 
odometer on it, reading 1 800 999 9999, with the 999 9999 part about to 
"turn over" like a car that hits a million miles.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    +1 202 414-3343
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      +1 202 414-3036
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: gmonti@npr.org

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 14:18:53 GMT
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.MIL>
Subject: Three Prefixes Moved From 215 to 717


Thanks to Paul A. Lee (email address /DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@smx.sprint.com)
I have received the following copies of letters regarding prefixes moving
from 215 to 717 (not to 610), because their telephone companies also serve
adjacent exchanges in area 717.  A while back, there was the blurb about
Denver 267 and Adamstown 484 going to 717 (Denver using 717-336 because
717-267 is in use at Chambersburg), but there is new information: that
445 Terre Hill has moved to 717.  Before I learned that Terre Hill had
moved to 717, I thought Terre Hill had dropped 1 for long distance within
area code and that Enterprise Telephone's area 717 part had also done so.

                                *******

(letter regarding Denver and Adamstown)

January 11, 1993

Our Denver, PA., and Adamstown, PA., exchanges are presently in the
215 area code.  On January 1, 1994, Bell of PA. is splitting the 215
NPA into 215 and 610. Also, the state of Pennsylvania is going to
implement a new dialing pattern for intra-NPA calls.

Because of these two changes, the Denver and Ephrata Telephone and
Telegraph Company has decided to move both the Denver and Adamstown
exchanges from the 215 NPA into the 717 NPA.  Our Adamstown exchange
is presently 215-484 and will become 717-484.  Our Denver exchange is
presently 215-267 and will become 717-336.

The reassignment of these two exchanges from NPA 215 to NPA 717 will
take effect at 12:01 a.m., Thursday, July 1, 1993.  From July 1, 1993,
until April 1, 1994, we will accept incoming calls to either the 215
or 717 NPA codes.  As of April 1, 1994, we will only accept incoming
calls to the 717 NPA code.  As of July 1, 1993, the 10 digit Automatic
Number Identification (ANI) from these two exchanges will be
717-484-XXXX for Adamstown and 717-336-XXXX for Denver.

Please make any required preparations within your company for these
changes.  Thanks you in advance for your assistance.

Very truly yours,

Leonard A. Burns
Manager, Central Office Engineering
(Denver and Ephrata Telephone and Telegraph Company)

*******

(letter regarding Terre Hill)

March 26, 1993

With the announcement from Bell of PA that the 215 NPA will split in
January of 1994, Enterprise Telephone Company has decided to reassign
our Terre Hill Exchange (NXX 445) to the 717 NPA. Customer notification 
began in January of 1993. Please use this letter as your company's
official notice that this number change will be effective 1/94, coinciding 
with the Bell of PA 215 split.

Sincerely,

John H. Gehr
General Manager
(Enterprise Telephone)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 10:24:58 EST
From: Alex Cena <acena@wfcsmtp.ie3.lehman.com>
Subject: Programming an AT&T ISDN Phone


I recently signed up for an ISDN service to my home.  It was a
nightmare to have the company deliver the service since there are very
few people who trained to help you and the current downsizing does not
help.  After Bell Atlantic agreed to install the line, it took thirty
days for the first installer to arrive and one and a half weeks before
the service was actually working properly.  It took no less than two
technicians at a time to finally have it working.

Now for my problem.  The ISDN station set arrived by mail.  It's an
AT&T ISDN 7506 API.  The phone works fine, but a programming manual
did not come with the phone for reasons unknown to me so I have to
call an AT&T help desk every time I need help.  They in turn have to
page an engineer to help me out.

Can someone help me program this phone for use as three phantom lines
and program some of he basic buttons to work.  i.e. drop, hold,
conference.  If I want to use it as two voice and one data, how?
Where can I find a programming manual for this darned thing?


Regards,

Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers, acena@lehman.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you have not yet paid for the phone
which arrived in the mail, the easiest thing to do at this point is not
pay for it until the documentation arrives. If you have already paid
try stopping the credit card charge if that's still possible on the
premise that the order was shipped incomplete.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: ds3man@delphi.com
Subject: Where Can I Locate Telecom Documents?
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 22:31:38 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Does anyone have a good FTP address or telnet address for telecom documents?
I am mainly looking for standards or tutorials on subjects like X.25, SS7,
etc.

Thanks a lot.

------------------------------

From: Bert Roseberry <ROSEBERRY@Eisner.DECUS.Org>
Subject: Free Calls Offered to Service Members
Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society
Date: 22 Sep 94 23:32:29 -0400


I thought others might be interested in this offer from AT&T.

                     --------------

Navy News Service - NAVNEWS BY EMAIL - navnews@opnav-emh.navy.mil
NAVY NEWS SERVICE - 22 SEP 94 - NAVNEWS 057/94

NNS617.  Free Calls Home Offered to Service Members in Caribbean

WASHINGTON (NNS) -- Free three-minute phone calls home are being
offered by AT&T to service members deployed on board U.S. Navy and
Coast Guard ships involved in Cuba/Haiti operations in the Caribbean.
Sailors and Marines can place calls to the U.S.  mainland, Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

The free offer will begin at 12:01 a.m. EDT on Saturday, Sept.  24 and
end on 11:59 p.m. EDT on Monday, Sept. 26.  The AT&T High Seas Radiotele-
phone Service can be used by an any vessel with high frequency, Single
Side Band (SSB) radiotelephone service, often referred to aboard ships
as Military Affiliated Radio Service (MARS).

To place the free phone calls, each ship's radio officer will select a
channel to call one of AT&T's coast stations (WOM in Florida or WOO in
New Jersey).  When the signal is clear, the technician at the coast
station will pass the call to an AT&T operator.  The service member
will tell the operator the number she or he is trying to reach and the
call will be connected.  When that service member's time is up, the
phone will be passed to the next person and they will give their
number to the operator.  This way, a channel does not have to be
obtained for each individual call.  When U.S. military personnel
arrive in Haiti, long distance service to the U.S. is available.


Bert Roseberry         roseberry@eisner.decus.org     -or-
US Coast Guard         roseberry@duane.comdt.uscg.mil

------------------------------

From: pault@panix.com (Paul)
Subject: AT&T and McCaw Merger
Date: 22 Sep 1994 21:13:56 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


I would like to know what you all think of the merger between AT&T and
Mccaw.

a: Do you believe that this will lower cellular rates in Mccaw markets?
 
b: Do you believe that it will effect employment in both companies?

Any responses would be greatly appreciated.

------------------------------

From: acanton@delphi.com
Subject: Need Help With Fax and Answering Service
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 00:10:43 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Our answering service wants to auto-fax messages to our business.  Our
Brother 600 fax machine has a telephone answering device interface, so
we connect an AT&T (two tape) answering machine to it.
 
With everyone else on the planet, the system works fine. The answer
machine comes on and then shuts down and the fax is received.
 
However, with the answering service, most of the time the answering
machine comes on, clicks off and the line is dropped. The fax is not
received. It does work every once in a while.
 
Can anyone give me some suggestions (besides getting a dedicated fax
line ... too expensive) on what to do ... if anything.

 
Please e-mail.
 
Alan N. Canton

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 11:48:23 CDT
From: mohr@orange.rtsg.mot.com (Wilson Mohr)
Subject: EIA/TIA 568 Standards


Vic.Franco@lambada.oit.unc.edu writes:

> Does anyone know if the new EIA/TIA 568 standard has been set, and
> where can I retrieve it on the Internet?

Well, Toby Nixon of Hayes Mirocomputer Products (tnixon%hayes@uunet.uu.
net) provided this information back in November, 1992.

Quote:

The Electronic Industries Association (EIA) and Telecommunications
Industry Association (TIA) have contracted out the distribution of
their published standards to Global Engineering Documents.  All orders
for EIA or TIA standards should now be directed to Global Engineering
Documents instead of the EIA/TIA Sales Department (although EIA/TIA
still handles proposed standards and other work in progress).

Global Engineering Documents can be reached at:

For inquiries from within the USA:

        Global Engineering Documents
        1990 M Street NW, Suite 400
        Washington DC 20036
        800-854-7179 Voice
        202-331-0960 Fax

For inquiries from outside the USA:

        Global Engineering Documents
        2805 McGaw Avenue
        Irvine CA 92714
        +1-714-261-1455

Unquote:

The EIA and TIA documents are not "freeware" (for lack of a better
term) as far as I know. They are meant to be purchased.

As a datapoint, I did call them this morning on an unrelated issue.

Their current cost for the 568 standards is $80 plus 5% Shipping and
Handling plus applicable local sales tax. They also have a version of
the new proposed 568 standards revision for $122 plus (et.al).

The mailing address they gave me was:

Global Engineering Documents
7730 Carondelet Avenue
Suite 407
Clayton, Missourri 63105


Wilson Mohr    mohr@cig.mot.com       
Strategic Quality - Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group
1501 W. Shure Drive - Rm 3C9, Arlington Heights, IL 60004  USA

------------------------------

From: quetzal@panix.com (Murray Gordon)
Subject: Internet Windows Interface Job Offer
Date: 23 Sep 1994 13:31:06 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


INTERNET/WINDOWS Programmers wanted:

We need to get some experienced Windows programmers on board soon, for
a project for a client, who wants to create a Windows interface for
accessing the Internet.  (Similar to Pipeline)

If you have experience in writing for Windows (probably Visual C++,
but we might consider other languages for this development project),
and hopefully you know the "ins and outs" of the Internet reasonably
well, then:

Contact:

 Murray Gordon
 Quetzal Computers
 1708 E 4th St.
 Brooklyn, NY 11223
 
 Phone 718-375-1186.  Fax 718-645-1496,
 
or respond via CIS mail, or via the Internet to Quetzal@panix.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Sep 94 11:47 EST
From: Al Cohan <0004526627@mcimail.com>
Subject: Need California PUC IRD Information


 I understand that sometime last week the California PUC
approved a sweeping rate change for both Pac Bell and General
Telephone. I have heard that base rates have dramatically increased
and ZUM 3 and local service area long distance has decreased as much
as 50%.
 
This PUC decision sets the terms for Intra-Lata toll traffic competition.  
Does anyone have a synopsis of the new rates? or a copy of the decision?
 

Any help will be appreciated. 


Thanks in advance, 

Al

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 15:46:37 EST
From: Rob Slade <roberts@decus.ca>
Subject: Book Review: "The Elements of E-mail Style" by Angell/Heslop


BKMALSTL.RVW  940526
 
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company
P.O. Box 520  26 Prince Andrew Place
Don Mills, Ontario  M3C 2T8
416-447-5101  fax: 416-443-0948
73171.657@Compuserve.com tiffanym@aw.com bobd@aw.com johnw@aw.com
keithw@aw.com lisaro@aw.com
"The Elements of E-mail Style", Angell, 1994, 0-201-62709-4, U$12.95/C$16.95
dangell@shell.portal.com bheslop@shell.portal.com
 
On the one hand, electronic mail is simply another form of written
communications.  On the other hand, email's very earliest beginnings
lie only twenty years back.  Ten years ago, less than a million people
in the world had access to the medium, and the rapid growth in the
popularity of email, while it means there are many current practitioners, 
also means that few users have any depth of experience.  In addition,
the speed and ease of electronic communications allow the unwary to
get themselves into considerable trouble.  There is, therefore, a need
for an email style guide.
 
That is not to say that it need be this one.  Indeed, it is very
difficult to say that this is an email guide, at all.  It is simply a
writing and style guide, and, for those in the market for such an
item, it may be suitable as a quick reference.  As far as email goes,
however, while mention is frequent, material is scant.
 
The content would seem to indicate that the authors, while they have
some familiarity with the use of email, have very little experience
with the broad range of online communications systems, and no feel for
computer mediated communications as a whole.  The limited exposure
shows up in areas such as the coverage of, for example, flaming (the
generation of abusive messages).  Their suggestions, while not
inappropriate, are not particularly helpful, either.  Read your
message twice.  (From experience, this just tends to increase your
determination.)  Would you say this to the person's face?  (Heck, yes!
I'm mad!)  A more practical alternative is to write it, hold it, and
then re-read the original message before sending it.  (And remember,
if the original message isn't worth re-reading, it isn't worth a
response, either.)  Another indication of limited experience is the
use of specific suggestions rather than general principles.  Line
length and font styles are mentioned in regard to terminal
characteristics, but there is no discussion of common terminal
characteristics or alternative forms of emphasis.  We are told not to
say "no" to an offer from a Japanese correspondent but with no other
examples of cultural diversity, this is of little use.
 
Chapter one is a list of the standard email do's and don'ts.  The
points are generally good, but the supporting text is less than
useful.  Chapter two *is* useful; a very cogent list of suggestions
for structuring email text for greatest impact.  Chapters three to
seven, covering vocabulary, tone, sentence structure, spelling and
punctuation, could be summed up in two words: learn English.  The
material specific to email from all five chapters is, in total, less
than the space devoted to one list of frequently misspelled words.
Chapter eight gives some recommendations on the use of formatting and
special characters.  Some points are good; many (such as the use of
tabs for column alignment) are not.  (Many systems use eight character
cells for a tab character, but some use other alignments and thus,
tabs can be more trouble than help.)  Most of the chapter, however, is
dedicated to the promotion of ASCII art and the use of special
characters.  The special characters are those that use the eighth bit.
These are sometimes called "high ASCII" or "upper ASCII" and are, in
truth, not ASCII or any other standard.  Fidonet echo rules often
expressly forbid the use of such characters, since they may be deleted
by mail transfer agents, be incomprehensibly different on the end
user's system, or, in the worst case, be system control characters.  A
glossary is included which would have been more useful if it had more
terms from email (IMHO) than from English class.  An appendix about
Internet posting conventions talks only about Usenet and basically
recaps suggestions made earlier.
 
For those completely new to email and net systems, this does contain
points to ponder, with some shortcomings in terms of practical advice.
For the B1FFs of the world, they could certainly stand to learn
English but probably won't.  For those interested in a serious
examination of the email field, this will be disappointing.
 
copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKMALSTL.RVW  940526. Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists.

DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters
Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733
Author "Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses" (Sept. '94) Springer-Verlag


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I rarely comment on anything in Mr. Slade's
reviews, but something definitly needs correction this time. Email did NOT
begin 'only twenty years back'. If Telex and TWX were not considered email, 
then I don't know what you would call them. Telex and TWX were both essenti-
ally the same product with the former having been developed by Western
Union more than half a century ago. TWX (<T>ype<W>riter E<X>change) was 
developed by AT&T in the 1950's when they decided to try and encroach on 
Western Union's territory.  Both involved machines with modems which had 
keyboards and printers.  An operator at one end typed on the keyboard and
the resulting message printed out on the paper at the other end. It is true
the term 'email' itself came into usage only about twenty years ago and
into common usage during perhaps the past decade, but we have had the
essence of email for a long time. Long before 'every business can have their
own telegraph operator' as someone at WUTCO once commented during the Second
World War era, every town large and small had a public telegraph office.
These functioned as sort of community email places where operators sat at
keyboards entering messages which came out on the printers of similar devices
in distant cities. To be sure, we called them 'telegrams' rather than the
modern term 'email' ... but it existed none the less.

After AT&T began marketing TWX, they got sued by Western Union to force
them out of the business with WUTCO claiming the voice traffic belonged
to AT&T while the written traffic should be the exclusive property of
WUTCO ... a court agreed and AT&T had to divest themselves of TWX. That
was in the middle 1960's I guess. 

Those Western Union public offices were really something else. I'll print
something about them here in the Digest soon.     PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #373
******************************

