1944 lines
93 KiB
Plaintext
1944 lines
93 KiB
Plaintext
![]() |
Volume 4, Number 36 21 September 1987
|
|||
|
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|||
|
| _ |
|
|||
|
| / \ |
|
|||
|
| /|oo \ |
|
|||
|
| - FidoNews - (_| /_) |
|
|||
|
| _`@/_ \ _ |
|
|||
|
| International | | \ \\ |
|
|||
|
| FidoNet Association | (*) | \ )) |
|
|||
|
| Newsletter ______ |__U__| / \// |
|
|||
|
| / FIDO \ _//|| _\ / |
|
|||
|
| (________) (_/(_|(____/ |
|
|||
|
| (jm) |
|
|||
|
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|||
|
Editor in Chief: Thom Henderson
|
|||
|
Chief Procrastinator Emeritus: Tom Jennings
|
|||
|
Contributing Editor: Dave Lovell
|
|||
|
Interview Editor: Al Arango
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews is published weekly by the International FidoNet
|
|||
|
Association as its official newsletter. You are encouraged to
|
|||
|
submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission
|
|||
|
standards are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from
|
|||
|
node 1:1/1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Copyright 1987 by the International FidoNet Association. All
|
|||
|
rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for
|
|||
|
noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances,
|
|||
|
please contact IFNA at (314) 576-4067.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Table of Contents
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1
|
|||
|
Guest Editorial by Don Kulha ............................. 1
|
|||
|
Policy4 proposal enclosed ................................ 2
|
|||
|
2. ARTICLES ................................................. 3
|
|||
|
FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ........................ 3
|
|||
|
Fido v12 (tm) Echo Conference ............................ 16
|
|||
|
FIDO-FAM and OPUS - Answers to common questions & probl .. 17
|
|||
|
Security Available For Mail Now .......................... 19
|
|||
|
REDCON An EchoMail Idea who's time has come .............. 21
|
|||
|
Repair Nightmare ......................................... 23
|
|||
|
Vietnam Veterans' Valhalla ............................... 26
|
|||
|
3. COLUMNS .................................................. 28
|
|||
|
Random Mutterings ........................................ 28
|
|||
|
Origin: Angevin Empire ................................... 31
|
|||
|
4. FOR SALE ................................................. 33
|
|||
|
ALR 386/2 Special Offer To Fidonet Sysops ................ 33
|
|||
|
5. NOTICES .................................................. 34
|
|||
|
The Interrupt Stack ...................................... 34
|
|||
|
Latest Software Versions ................................. 34
|
|||
|
IFNA Order Form .......................................... 35
|
|||
|
IFNA Membership Application .............................. 36
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 1 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
EDITORIAL
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This week's guest editorial is by Don Kulha, 1:125/7
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
On Friday eve at the Net conference in VA, as the after dinner
|
|||
|
presentations were winding down, Tom Jennings asked if he could
|
|||
|
say something. The following is a transcript of what he had to
|
|||
|
say:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"I'd like to say something here.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"It's not going to be very pleasant and it comes at a real
|
|||
|
bad time because, I mean, I feel really bad. We're all here
|
|||
|
and I like everyone here. The purpose of this is supposed to
|
|||
|
be telecommunicating. I just feel a serious conflict of
|
|||
|
interest on the board of directors. You figure out, of they
|
|||
|
on the stand, what the issues are. There's talk of changing
|
|||
|
standards, changes just assumed to be put in during the next
|
|||
|
few months; sort of...what committee do we have here? I do
|
|||
|
not want to be on the board of directors, I intentionally
|
|||
|
said I do not want to be on the board. I have severe conflict
|
|||
|
of interest and there are other authors who should not be on
|
|||
|
the board what-so-ever.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"There's no pleasant way to say it and, uh, there it is. You
|
|||
|
can view this from my point of view [that] there's a rather
|
|||
|
severe interest in anarchy here. This was an implemented
|
|||
|
archist scheme of sorts. It's run by the members of the net
|
|||
|
and we now have a top-down structure. So....for what it's
|
|||
|
worth, my two cents..."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(17 seconds of silence -- Ken closes the meeting)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Hearing Tom's emotion filled speech I started thinking about the
|
|||
|
net, our directions and the dissention within our ranks. We have
|
|||
|
a great bunch of folks working with IFNA and the various
|
|||
|
committees. Some of them, and various people in our network, have
|
|||
|
concerns about where we are going. My own thought is that
|
|||
|
something important to remember is that our association is a
|
|||
|
dynamic entity; it changes in relationship to the desires of it's
|
|||
|
active participants.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Active participants are the key words there. Before heading back
|
|||
|
to VA I heard a lot of folks saying the wouldn't go because they
|
|||
|
didn't like some of the things they percieved to be happening.
|
|||
|
Some other seemed to feel that since they were running Opus there
|
|||
|
was little reason to go -- with which I do most strongly
|
|||
|
disagree. The conference was not about Fido or any other single
|
|||
|
thing; it was about communicating and networking. I think of
|
|||
|
anarchy in our context as not necessarily meaning the absence of
|
|||
|
order, but that the largest possible number of interest be
|
|||
|
represented in and help shape our net. Diversity is healthy and
|
|||
|
it's the yeast we need to keep the net vital, growing and
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 2 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
evolving. We really need a lot more of you participating in
|
|||
|
helping shape our directions
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
IFNA will not be tommorrow what it is today; everything evolves.
|
|||
|
Membership in IFNA isn't a vote in support for whatever is
|
|||
|
happening at this particular point in time, I think it's an
|
|||
|
expression of your interest in promoting communication. The
|
|||
|
dollars requested just help cover real costs, are well accounted
|
|||
|
for and (I personally think) act as a bullshit filter, keeping
|
|||
|
those less than serious from mucking up the works. Everything
|
|||
|
about IFNA is mutable and will change with the passage of time,
|
|||
|
and with your participation. Please do.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-Don Kulha
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This issue of FidoNews is packaged with a special supplement, the
|
|||
|
complete proposed Policy4 document that was submitted to the
|
|||
|
Board of Directors at FidoCon IV. Your comments and suggestions
|
|||
|
are welcome.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 3 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
ARTICLES
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Jim Cannell
|
|||
|
128/13
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FCC NOTICE TO RAISE YOUR RATES
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
***************************************************************
|
|||
|
This document is an exact copy of the FCC Notice of Proposed
|
|||
|
Rulemaking issued on July 17, 1987. The document is provided
|
|||
|
as a service to the online community by ISSUE DYNAMICS INC., of
|
|||
|
Washington, DC. IDI is a public policy consulting firm,
|
|||
|
specializing in telecommunications policy issues, public affairs
|
|||
|
counseling and issues management. It sponsors the IDI Board
|
|||
|
703-734-1796, SYSOP is Sam Simon. The IDI Board features public
|
|||
|
policy discussions, and information about telecommunications
|
|||
|
policy issues from Washington, DC. For more information on how
|
|||
|
to participate before the FCC in this matter call the IDI board,
|
|||
|
it can be reached over PC Pursuit.
|
|||
|
***************************************************************
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Before The
|
|||
|
Federal Communications Commission
|
|||
|
Washington, D.C. 20554
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
CC Docket No. 87-215
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In the Matter of
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Amendments of Part 69
|
|||
|
of the Commission's Rules
|
|||
|
Relating to Enhanced Service
|
|||
|
Providers
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Adopted: June 10, 1987: Released: July 17, 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
By The Commission:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I. INTRODUCTION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. In 1983 we adopted a comprehensive "access charge" plan
|
|||
|
for the recovery by local exchange carriers (LECs) of the costs
|
|||
|
associated with the organization and termination of interstate
|
|||
|
calls.1 At that time, we concluded that the immediate applica-
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 4 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
tion of this plan to certain providers of interstate services
|
|||
|
might unduly burden their operations and cause disruptions in
|
|||
|
provision of service to the public. Therefore, we granted
|
|||
|
temporary exemptions from payment of access charges to certain
|
|||
|
classes of exchange access users, including enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers. Three years later, in the Second Report and Order in
|
|||
|
CC Docket No. 86-1, in which we eliminated the exemption for
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
resale carriers, we announced our intention to reexamine the
|
|||
|
exemption granted to enhanced service providers after our
|
|||
|
consideration of certain related issues in the Computer III
|
|||
|
proceeding.2 We recently completed that consideration.3 We
|
|||
|
issue this Notice of Proposed Rule Making to consider whether
|
|||
|
interstate access charges should be assessed on enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers. We tentatively conclude that it is now appropriate
|
|||
|
that enhanced service providers, like providers of interstate
|
|||
|
basic services, be assessed access charges for their use of local
|
|||
|
exchange facilities, and we propose amendments to our rules to
|
|||
|
accomplish that end.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
II. BACKGROUND
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. In the access charge proceeding, the first of our four
|
|||
|
primary goals was the "elimination of unreasonable discrimination
|
|||
|
and undue preferences among rates for interstate services."4
|
|||
|
Specifically, our objective has been to distribute the costs of
|
|||
|
exchange access in a fair and reasonable manner among all users
|
|||
|
of exchange access service, irrespective of their designation as
|
|||
|
carriers, non-carrier service providers, or private customers.5
|
|||
|
We noted in 1983 that although many entities used exchange access
|
|||
|
service, some were paying local business rates.6 We endeavored
|
|||
|
to establish a more equitable sharing of costs, and initially
|
|||
|
intended to impose interstate access charges on enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers for their use of local exchange facilities to originate
|
|||
|
and terminate their interstate offerings.7 Interstate enhanced
|
|||
|
services often use common lines and local exchange switches in
|
|||
|
the same manner as MTS and some MTS equivalent services. To the
|
|||
|
extent that this is the case, we concluded that equity and
|
|||
|
efficiency require that those enhanced service providers pay the
|
|||
|
same charges for exchange access.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. In the discussion of the application of access charges
|
|||
|
to enhanced service providers in the First Reconsideration, we
|
|||
|
said that we wanted to develop a rate structure under which all
|
|||
|
exchange access users were charged on the same basis.8 In the
|
|||
|
pre-access charge environment, facilities-based interstate
|
|||
|
carriers other than AT&T (other common carriers or OCCs) were
|
|||
|
paying carrier-type access charges in the form of ENFIA rates,
|
|||
|
while WATS resellers, enhanced service providers, and shares were
|
|||
|
paying much lower local business rates.9 Despite our resolve to
|
|||
|
distribute the costs of exchange access among all users of access
|
|||
|
service, we recognized that the immediate imposition of inter-
|
|||
|
state access charges on all users of exchange access would have
|
|||
|
some undesirable consequences. For example, we said that because
|
|||
|
WATS resellers and enhanced service providers were currently
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 5 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
paying local business rates for their interstate access, the
|
|||
|
immediate imposition of interstate access charges would have a
|
|||
|
substantial and sudden impact on their costs, which could
|
|||
|
undermine their ability to continue to provide service while they
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
were adjusting their operations in response to the new access
|
|||
|
charge rules.10
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. Because of these concerns about rate shock, we exempted
|
|||
|
certain exchange access users from the payment of certain
|
|||
|
interstate access charges in the First Reconsideration.11 At
|
|||
|
that time, we did not intend those exemptions to be permanent,12
|
|||
|
and we have since eliminated several of them. For example, in CC
|
|||
|
Docket No. 86-1, we considered the question of access charge
|
|||
|
exemptions for resellers. In the First Report and Order in that
|
|||
|
docket, we eliminated the exemptions from all access charges for
|
|||
|
WATS resellers and from traffic-sensitive access charges for MTS
|
|||
|
resellers, on the grounds that these exemptions were uneconomic
|
|||
|
and inequitable and could no longer be supported by a rate shock
|
|||
|
rationale.13 We said there that our goal was to promote
|
|||
|
competition, not to protect competitors, and we regarded the
|
|||
|
elimination of the exemptions as another step toward an
|
|||
|
economically rational pricing scheme.14
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5. In the 86-1 Second Report and Order, we eliminated the
|
|||
|
exemption for private line resellers that offer non-MTS/WATS
|
|||
|
services, which are, in general, data and telex carriers. In
|
|||
|
that order, we said that data and telex carriers, like carriers
|
|||
|
offering MTS/WATS-type services, use local exchange facilities to
|
|||
|
originate and terminate interstate traffic and should pay the
|
|||
|
same charges as those assessed on other interexchange carriers
|
|||
|
for their use of the same facilities.15 We also noted that our
|
|||
|
purpose in adopting the exemption for data and telex carriers in
|
|||
|
the first place had been to grant transitional rather than
|
|||
|
permanent relief.16 Finally, we said that our decisions to apply
|
|||
|
access charges to these resellers, as well as to resellers of MTS
|
|||
|
and WATS, represented another step toward our objective of
|
|||
|
distributing the costs of exchange access service in a fair and
|
|||
|
reasonable manner.17
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
III. THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE ACCESS
|
|||
|
CHARGE TREATMENT OF ENHANCED SERVICE
|
|||
|
PROVIDERS
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
6. When we modified our access charge plan in the First
|
|||
|
Reconsideration, we granted enhanced service providers an
|
|||
|
exemption from the payment of such charges because we were
|
|||
|
concerned about rate shock. We feared that if we imposed full
|
|||
|
interstate access charges on enhanced service providers, which
|
|||
|
were then paying local business rates for their interstate
|
|||
|
access, they would face large increases in their operating costs
|
|||
|
and might no longer be viable.18 Therefore, instead of
|
|||
|
immediately applying access charges to enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers, we decided to fashion a transition plan to avoid the
|
|||
|
severe rate impact of assessing such charges at the outset.19 As
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 6 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
a result, enhanced service providers currently pay local business
|
|||
|
rates and subscriber line charges for their switched access
|
|||
|
connections to local exchange company central offices.20
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7. We are concerned that the charges currently paid by
|
|||
|
enhanced service providers do not contribute sufficiently to the
|
|||
|
costs of the exchange access facilities they use in offering
|
|||
|
their services to the public. As we have frequently emphasized
|
|||
|
in our various access charge orders, our ultimate objective is to
|
|||
|
establish a set of rules that provide for recovery of the costs
|
|||
|
of exchange access used in interstate service in a fair,
|
|||
|
reasonable, and efficient manner from all users of access
|
|||
|
service, regardless of their designation as carriers, enhanced
|
|||
|
service providers, or private customers.21 Enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers, like facilities-based interexchange carriers and
|
|||
|
resellers, use the local network to provide interstate services.
|
|||
|
To the extent that they are exempt from access charges, the other
|
|||
|
users of exchange access pay a disproportionate share of the
|
|||
|
costs of the local exchange that access charges are designed to
|
|||
|
cover.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
8. As we stated in the Notice initiating the CC Docket
|
|||
|
No. 86-1 proceeding, "concerns with 'rate shock' cannot sustain
|
|||
|
an uneconomic pricing structure in perpetuity."22 Accordingly,
|
|||
|
in previous orders in that docket, we have concluded that such
|
|||
|
concerns no longer justify providing WATS resellers or resellers
|
|||
|
of other services with exemptions from access charges.
|
|||
|
Similarly, we tentatively conclude today that a rate shock
|
|||
|
rationale no longer justifies an access charge exemption for
|
|||
|
enhanced service providers. Enhanced service providers have had
|
|||
|
ample notice of our ultimate intent to apply interstate access
|
|||
|
charges to their operations and ample opportunity to adjust their
|
|||
|
planning accordingly.23 We discussed our intent to impose access
|
|||
|
charges on enhanced service providers almost four years ago in
|
|||
|
the First Reconsideration in CC Docket No. 78-72.24 The access
|
|||
|
charge plan itself has now been in place for almost three years.
|
|||
|
Moreover, in the Second Report and Order in CC Docket No. 86-1,
|
|||
|
we stated that after the resolution of certain issues with regard
|
|||
|
to enhanced service providers in Computer III, we would consider
|
|||
|
initiating a further Rule Making to consider the application of
|
|||
|
access charges to enhanced service providers. Furthermore, we
|
|||
|
propose that the application of access charges to enhanced
|
|||
|
service providers become effective on January 1, 1988. This
|
|||
|
should provide additional time for enhanced service providers to
|
|||
|
incorporate this change into their business planning. In sum,
|
|||
|
concerns over rate shock may justify a temporary, but not a
|
|||
|
permanent, exemption, and it now appears to us that the temporary
|
|||
|
period during which an access charge exemption was appropriate
|
|||
|
has lapsed.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
9. In addition, the financial impact on enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers from the imposition of interstate access charges will
|
|||
|
be substantially smaller than it would have been at the time of
|
|||
|
the implementation of the access charge plan and will decrease in
|
|||
|
the immediate future. As the end user contribution to common
|
|||
|
line costs through subscriber line charges increases, the
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 7 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
contribution from carriers and enhanced service providers through
|
|||
|
carrier common line (CCL) charges decreases. In May of 1984, the
|
|||
|
CCL charge for both originating and terminating traffic was 5.24
|
|||
|
cents per minute of use.25 Currently, the terminating charge is
|
|||
|
4.33 cents per minute of use, and the originating charge is .69
|
|||
|
cents per minute. This decline in CCL charges represents a
|
|||
|
sizeable drop in the costs of interstate access charges, and will
|
|||
|
mitigate the impact of the imposition of those charges on
|
|||
|
enhanced service providers. With additional increases in
|
|||
|
subscriber line charges scheduled for December 1988 and April
|
|||
|
1989, the CCL charge for both originating and terminating traffic
|
|||
|
should decrease even further.26 We are aware that, under our
|
|||
|
rules, many enhanced service providers would be assessed
|
|||
|
terminating CCL charges.27
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
10. Parties are free to comment upon our tentative conclu-
|
|||
|
sions about rate shock. Such comments should be accompanied by
|
|||
|
detailed data supporting the arguments advanced therein.
|
|||
|
Commenters addressing the rate shock issue should provide
|
|||
|
information on network configurations used by enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers and possible reconfigurations, as well as data on
|
|||
|
industry rates, revenues, and growth rates going back at least
|
|||
|
five years (which would include a period prior to the adoption of
|
|||
|
our access charge plan). For example, we request comment on the
|
|||
|
types of interstate transmission and exchange access facilities
|
|||
|
that enhanced service providers are currently using, and on the
|
|||
|
types of enhanced service providers that would be affected by the
|
|||
|
elimination of the exemption from interstate access charges.
|
|||
|
Parties should also discuss ways in which affected enhanced
|
|||
|
service providers might reconfigure their networks in response to
|
|||
|
rule changes of the kind proposed. In addition, we request
|
|||
|
comment on the rates that enhanced service providers have charged
|
|||
|
customers, as well as on industry revenues during that period.
|
|||
|
If possible, commenters should provide data on the demand for
|
|||
|
services and the revenues in the entire enhanced service provider
|
|||
|
sector (including, but not limited to, the value added networks
|
|||
|
and data base services), and on the possible effect of the
|
|||
|
proposed rule changes on demand and revenues. Finally,
|
|||
|
commenters should provide information on the growth rates of the
|
|||
|
various segments of the enhanced services industry, and the way
|
|||
|
in which those growth rates might be affected by the proposed
|
|||
|
rule changes. To the extent that a commenter proposes that
|
|||
|
application of access charges to enhanced service providers be
|
|||
|
implemented on a date later than January 1, 1988, such proposal
|
|||
|
should present specific arguments justifying the continuation of
|
|||
|
the current special treatment of enhanced service providers for
|
|||
|
the extended period.28
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
11. In addition, we request comment on issues involving
|
|||
|
implementation of the proposal to assess interstate access
|
|||
|
charges on enhanced service providers. We invite parties to
|
|||
|
comment on the method of determining interstate and intrastate
|
|||
|
usage of enhanced services for access charge billing. Parties
|
|||
|
that address the measurement issue are requested to comment on
|
|||
|
the possibility of using the Entry/Exit Surrogate (EES) method
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 8 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
currently used to estimate jurisdictional usage for Feature Group
|
|||
|
A and Feature Group B services.29 Finally, parties are of course
|
|||
|
free to identify any other implementation problems they think the
|
|||
|
Commission should address prior to applying access charges to
|
|||
|
enhanced service providers and to suggest possible approaches to
|
|||
|
resolving these problems.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
IV. PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
12. The proposal contained herein has been analyzed with
|
|||
|
respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 and found to
|
|||
|
contain no new or modified form, information collection and/or
|
|||
|
recordkeeping, labeling, disclosure, or record retention
|
|||
|
requirements, and will not increase or decrease burden hours
|
|||
|
imposed on the public.30
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
13. Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 201-05, 218,
|
|||
|
and 403, and 5 U.S.C. 553, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of the
|
|||
|
proposed adoption of new or modified rules.31
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
14. All interested persons MAY FILE comments on the issues
|
|||
|
and proposals discussed herein not later than August 24, 1987 and
|
|||
|
replies may be filed not later than September 14, 1987. In
|
|||
|
accordance with the provisions of Section 1.419 of the
|
|||
|
Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.419 an original and five copies
|
|||
|
of all statements, briefs, comments, or replies shall be filed
|
|||
|
with the Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C.
|
|||
|
20054 [sic], and all such filings will be available for public
|
|||
|
inspection in the Docket Reference Room at the Commission's
|
|||
|
Washington, D.C. office. In reaching its decision, the
|
|||
|
Commission may consider information and ideas not contained in
|
|||
|
filings, provided that such information is reduced to writing and
|
|||
|
placed in the public file, and provided that the fact of the
|
|||
|
Commission's reliance on any such information or ideas is noted
|
|||
|
in the Order.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
15. For purposes of this nonrestricted notice and comment
|
|||
|
Rule Making proceeding, members of the public are advised that ex
|
|||
|
parte contacts are permitted until the time a public notice is
|
|||
|
issued stating that a substantial disposition of the matter is to
|
|||
|
be considered in a forthcoming meeting or until a final order
|
|||
|
disposing of the matter is adopted by the Commission, whichever
|
|||
|
occurs earlier. In general, an ex parte presentation is any
|
|||
|
written or oral communications (other than formal written
|
|||
|
comments, pleadings, and oral arguments) between a person outside
|
|||
|
the Commission and a Commissioner or a member of the Commission's
|
|||
|
staff that addresses the merits of the proceeding.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
16. Any person who submits a written ex parte presentation
|
|||
|
must serve a copy of that presentation on the Commission's
|
|||
|
Secretary for inclusion in the public file. Any person who makes
|
|||
|
an oral ex parte presentation addressing matters not fully
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 9 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
covered in any previously-filed written comments for the
|
|||
|
proceeding must prepare a written summary of that presentation,
|
|||
|
and that written summary must be served on the Commission's
|
|||
|
Secretary for inclusion into the public file, with a copy to the
|
|||
|
Commission official receiving the oral presentation. Each ex
|
|||
|
parte presentation described above must state on its face that
|
|||
|
Secretary has been served, and must also state by docket number
|
|||
|
the proceeding to which it relates. See generally, Section
|
|||
|
1.1231 of the Commission's Rule, 47 C.F.R. 1.1231.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
|
|||
|
William J. Tricarico
|
|||
|
Secretary
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
APPENDIX A
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Part 69 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
|
|||
|
amended as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Part 69 - ACCESS CHARGES
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. The authority citation for Part 69 continues to read as
|
|||
|
follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
AUTHORITY: Secs. 4, 201, 202, 203, 205, 218, 403, and 410
|
|||
|
of the Communications Act as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 201, 202,
|
|||
|
203, 205, 218, 403, and 410.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
47 CFR Part 69 is amended to read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Section 69.2 is amended by revising paragraphs (m) and
|
|||
|
(gg), and adding a new paragraph (nn), to read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.2 Definitions.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(m) "End user" means any customer of an interstate or
|
|||
|
foreign telecommunications service that is not a carrier or an
|
|||
|
enhanced service provider except that a carrier other than a
|
|||
|
telephone company or an enhanced service provider shall be deemed
|
|||
|
to be an "end user" when such carrier or enhanced service
|
|||
|
provider uses a telecommunications service for administrative
|
|||
|
purposes and a person or entity that offers telecommunications
|
|||
|
services exclusively as a reseller shall be deemed to be an "end
|
|||
|
user" if all resale transmissions offered by such reseller
|
|||
|
originate on the premises of such reseller;
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(gg) "Access minutes" or "access minutes of use" is that
|
|||
|
usage of exchange facilities in interstate or foreign service for
|
|||
|
the purpose of calculating chargeable usage. On the originating
|
|||
|
end of an interstate or foreign call, usage is to be measured
|
|||
|
from the time the originating end user's call is delivered by the
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 10 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
telephone company and acknowledged as received by the
|
|||
|
interexchange carrier or enhanced service provider's facilities
|
|||
|
connected with the originating exchange. On the terminating end
|
|||
|
of an interstate or foreign call, usage is to be measured from
|
|||
|
the time the call is received by the end user in the terminating
|
|||
|
exchange. Timing of usage at both the originating and
|
|||
|
terminating end of an interstate of [sic] foreign call shall
|
|||
|
terminate when the calling or called party disconnects, whichever
|
|||
|
event is recognized first in the originating and terminating end
|
|||
|
exchanges, as applicable.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(nn) "Enhanced service provider" means a person providing
|
|||
|
"enhanced services" as defined in Section 64.702(a) of these
|
|||
|
rules.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Section 69.5 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to
|
|||
|
read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.5 Persons to be assessed.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(b) Carrier's carrier charges shall be computed and
|
|||
|
assessed upon all interexchange carriers or enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers that use local exchange switching facilities for the
|
|||
|
provision of interstate or foreign telecommunications services or
|
|||
|
enhanced services.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. Section 69.105 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)
|
|||
|
and (c) to read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.105 Carrier common line.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(a) A charge that is expressed in dollars and cents
|
|||
|
per access minute of use shall be assessed upon all interexchange
|
|||
|
carriers or enhanced service providers that use local exchange
|
|||
|
common line facilities for the provision of interstate or foreign
|
|||
|
telecommunications services or enhanced services.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(c) Any interexchange carrier or enhanced service
|
|||
|
provider providing interstate or foreign telecommunications
|
|||
|
services or enhanced services shall receive a credit for Carrier
|
|||
|
Common Line charges to the extent that it resells services for
|
|||
|
which these charges have already been assessed (e.g., MTS or MTS-
|
|||
|
type service of other common carriers).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5. Section 69.106 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) to
|
|||
|
read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 11 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.106 Line termination.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(a) A charge that is expressed in dollars and cents
|
|||
|
per access minute shall be assessed upon all interexchange
|
|||
|
carriers or enhanced service providers that use local exchange
|
|||
|
switching facilities for the provision of interstate or foreign
|
|||
|
telecommunications services or enhanced services.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
6. Section 69.107 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to
|
|||
|
read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.107 Local switching.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(a) Charges that are expressed in dollars and cents
|
|||
|
per access minute of use shall be assessed upon all interexchange
|
|||
|
carriers or enhanced service providers that use local exchange
|
|||
|
switching facilities for the provision of interstate of foreign
|
|||
|
telecommunications or enhanced services.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7. Section 69.108 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to
|
|||
|
read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.108 Intercept.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(a) A charge that is expressed in dollars and cents
|
|||
|
per access minute of use shall be assessed upon all interexchange
|
|||
|
carriers or enhanced service providers that use local exchange
|
|||
|
switching facilities for the provision of interstate or foreign
|
|||
|
telecommunications or enhanced services.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.111 Common transport.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(a) A charge that is expressed in dollar and cents per
|
|||
|
access minute shall be assessed upon all interexchange carriers
|
|||
|
or enhanced service providers that use switching or transmission
|
|||
|
facilities that are apportioned to the Common Transport element
|
|||
|
for purposes of apportioning net investment.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
9. Section 69.112 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1)
|
|||
|
and (c) to read as follows:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
69.112 Dedicated transport.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* * * * *
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 12 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(b) Appropriate subelements shall be established for
|
|||
|
the use of interface arrangements. Charges for such subelements
|
|||
|
shall be assessed and computed as follows: (1) Such charges
|
|||
|
shall be assessed upon all interexchange carriers or enhanced
|
|||
|
service providers for the interface arrangements they use to
|
|||
|
provide interstate or foreign telecommunications or enhanced
|
|||
|
ervices:
|
|||
|
(c) A charge for the use of voice grade transmission
|
|||
|
facilities shall be assessed upon interexchange carriers or
|
|||
|
enhanced service providers that use such facilities to provide
|
|||
|
interstate or foreign telecommunications or enhanced services.
|
|||
|
Such charges shall be expressed in dollars and services. Such
|
|||
|
charges shall be expressed in dollars and cents per unit of
|
|||
|
capacity. Total units of capacity provided to an interexchange
|
|||
|
carrier or enhanced service provider shall be measured by
|
|||
|
ascertaining the number of conversations that could be
|
|||
|
transmitted simultaneously without producing blocking in the
|
|||
|
dedicated transport facilities. The capacity unit charge for
|
|||
|
carriers that offer MTS shall be weighted by a distance factor
|
|||
|
that reflects the airline distance between the entry switch and
|
|||
|
the interexchange facility. The capacity unit charged for other
|
|||
|
carriers or enhanced service providers shall be weighted by a
|
|||
|
distance between the entry switch and the interexchange facility
|
|||
|
or the airline distance between the entry switch and any
|
|||
|
interexchange facility of carriers that offer MTS that is located
|
|||
|
within 5 miles of such carrier or enhanced service provider's
|
|||
|
interexchange facility.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FOOTNOTES
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. MTS and WATS Market Structure, Memorandum Opinion and Order,
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
97 FCC 2d 682 (1983) (hereinafter First Reconsideration).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. WATS-Related and Other Amendments of Part 69 of the
|
|||
|
Commission's Rules, Second Report and Order, CC Docket No. 86-1.
|
|||
|
FCC 86-377, para. 15 (released August 26, 1986) (hereinafter 86-1
|
|||
|
Second Report and Order).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. We concluded in our Computer III proceeding that protocol
|
|||
|
processing would continue to be treated as an enhanced service.
|
|||
|
Amendment to Sections 64702 of the Commission's Rules and
|
|||
|
Regulations (Third Computer Inquiry), Report and Order, CC Docket
|
|||
|
No. 85-229, FCC 87-102 (released May 22, 1987) (hereinafter Phase
|
|||
|
II Order). That decision had the effect of continuing to exempt
|
|||
|
from access charges a major class of service providers -- the
|
|||
|
VANs (value added network providers), which offer protocol
|
|||
|
processing combined with packet-switched data services. See
|
|||
|
Amendment of Sections 64702 of the Commission's Rules and
|
|||
|
Regulations (Third Computer Inquiry), Supplemental Notice of
|
|||
|
Proposed Rule Making, CC Docket No. 85-229, FCC 86-253 (released
|
|||
|
June 16, 1986), para. 46 n. 56.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. See, e.g. First Reconsideration, supra note 1, at para. 3.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 13 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5. Id. at para. 77.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
6. Id. at para. 79.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7. Id. at para. 76.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
8. Id. at para. 77.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
9. Id. at para. 83.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
10. Id. at paras. 83-85.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
11. See 47 C.F.R. 69.5 (1985).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
12. First Reconsideration, supra note 1, at para. 83.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
13. WATS-Related and Other Amendments of Part 69 of the
|
|||
|
Commission's Rules, Report and Order, CC Docket 86-1, FCC 86-115,
|
|||
|
paras. 26-27 (released March 21, 1986) (hereinafter First Report
|
|||
|
and Order). To the extent enhanced service providers resell MTS
|
|||
|
or MTS-equivalent services in offering their services, we propose
|
|||
|
that they be treated like MTS resellers -- that is, that they be
|
|||
|
assessed the traffic-sensitive access elements, but not the
|
|||
|
carrier common line charge. See infra Appendix section
|
|||
|
69.105(c).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
14. Id. at para. 26. The amendment of the rule deleting the
|
|||
|
exemption for WATS resellers became effective June 1, 1986. We
|
|||
|
also provided a short transition period for WATS resellers. The
|
|||
|
rule changes applied as of June 1, 1986, to all traffic on resold
|
|||
|
WATS lines put in service after the order was adopted. For
|
|||
|
traffic carried on resold WATS lines already in service as of the
|
|||
|
adoption date of the order, we required resellers to pay all
|
|||
|
traffic-sensitive access charges, effective June 1, 1986, but
|
|||
|
deferred their payment of carrier common line charges until
|
|||
|
January 1, 1987.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
15. Second Report and Order, supra note 2, at para. 11. The
|
|||
|
amendment of the rule deleting the exemption for non-MTS/WATS
|
|||
|
resellers became effective January 1, 1987.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
16. Id. at para. 11.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
17. Id. at para. 14.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
18. First Reconsideration, supra note l, at para. 83.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
19. Id.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
20. See 47 C.F.R. 69.5(a). Because enhanced service
|
|||
|
providers are not carriers, they are treated as end users for the
|
|||
|
purposes of Part 69. See 47 C.F.R. 69.2(m). To the extent
|
|||
|
that they purchase special access, enhanced service providers
|
|||
|
also pay special access surcharges. 47 C.F.R. 69.5(c).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
21. See First Reconsideration, supra note 1, at para. 77.
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 14 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
22. WATS-Related and Other Amendments of Part 69 of the
|
|||
|
Commission's Rules, Notice of Proposed Rule Making, CC Docket No.
|
|||
|
86-1, FCC 86-1, para. 11 n. 27 (released January 6, 1986).
|
|||
|
(hereinafter Notice).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
23. See. e.g. First Reconsideration, supra note 1, at para 76.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
24. Id. "Our intent was to apply these carrier's carrier
|
|||
|
charges to interexchange carriers and to all resellers and
|
|||
|
enhanced service providers...."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
25. MTS and WATS Market Structure, Amendment of Part 67 of the
|
|||
|
Commission's Rules and Establishment of a Joint Board.
|
|||
|
Recommended Decision and Order, CC Docket Nos. 78-72 and 80-286,
|
|||
|
FCC 87J.1, para 43 (released March 31, 1987) (hereinafter
|
|||
|
Recommended Decision and Order).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
26. MTS and WATS Market Structure, Amendment of Part 67 of the
|
|||
|
Commission's Rules and Establishment of a Joint Board, Report and
|
|||
|
Order, CC Docket Nos. 78-72 and 80-286. FCC 87-133 (released
|
|||
|
May 19, 1987). On July 1, the subscriber line charge cap
|
|||
|
increased from $2.00 to $2.60; the charge is scheduled to
|
|||
|
increase in December 1988 to $3.20; and in April 1989 to $3.50
|
|||
|
per month. In addition to the direct reduction in CCL charges
|
|||
|
from the implementation of SLC's the associated stimulation of
|
|||
|
usage of the network will further reduce such charges. Enhanced
|
|||
|
service providers would of course also pay traffic sensitive
|
|||
|
charges. Although these charges vary by jurisdiction, the
|
|||
|
average nationwide traffic sensitive rate is currently 3.12 cents
|
|||
|
per access minute of use. See Tier I Tariff Review Plan (from
|
|||
|
October 3, 1986 tariffs).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
27. Many enhanced services are provided pursuant to a network
|
|||
|
configuration in which a call originates over an "open" end and
|
|||
|
terminates over a "closed" end. Our rules provide that
|
|||
|
terminating CCL charges apply on the "open" end where a call has
|
|||
|
only such end. CCL charges are not assessed on "closed" ends of
|
|||
|
calls. See First Report and Order, supra note 13, paras. 50-53:
|
|||
|
see also 47 C.F.R. 69.207.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
28. We note that the application of full access charges to WATS
|
|||
|
resellers was accomplished pursuant to a modest phase-in. See
|
|||
|
First Report and Order, supra note 13, at para. 2. In that
|
|||
|
instance, however, we concluded that a phase-in was warranted
|
|||
|
because of another significant change in our access charge plan,
|
|||
|
that is, inclusion of WATS closed end lines in the special access
|
|||
|
category, that was made concurrently with our decision to remove
|
|||
|
the resellers' exemption. Similar circumstances do not appear to
|
|||
|
exist in the instant situation.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
29. This Commission has generally provided for the use of this
|
|||
|
surrogate pending a decision by the Federal/State Joint Board in
|
|||
|
CC Docket No. 85-124. See Determination of Interstate and
|
|||
|
Intrastate Usage of Feature Group A and Feature Group B Access
|
|||
|
Service, Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rule Making, CC Docket
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 15 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
No. 85-124 (released December 9, 1986). That Joint Board is
|
|||
|
considering a permanent resolution for the proper allocation of
|
|||
|
costs and revenues between the state and federal jurisdictions
|
|||
|
for FGA and FGB.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
30. We hereby certify that the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
|
|||
|
U.S.C. 60-612(1982), is not applicable to this proceeding. We
|
|||
|
have previously determined that the formal provisions of the
|
|||
|
Regulatory Flexibility Act are not applicable to proceedings to
|
|||
|
adopt or revise access charge rules because local exchange
|
|||
|
carriers, the parties directly subject to the access charge
|
|||
|
rules, do not fall within the Act's definition of a small entity.
|
|||
|
Id. sec. 601. See Mid-Tex Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC,
|
|||
|
773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985); Notice at para. 33, n. 54; and MTS
|
|||
|
and WATS Market Structure, Third Report and Order, 93 FCC 2d 241,
|
|||
|
paras. 358-62 (1983). While we have not applied the formal
|
|||
|
procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act in this proceeding,
|
|||
|
we have considered and will consider the effects of the rule
|
|||
|
changes on enhanced service providers, some of which are small
|
|||
|
businesses, just as we considered the effects of rule changes on
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
resellers in CC Docket No. 86-1. We will also consider the
|
|||
|
impact of rule changes upon small telephone companies. See WATS
|
|||
|
Related and Other Amendments of Part 69, Memorandum Opinion and
|
|||
|
Order, para. 29, CC Docket No. 86-1 (released January 15, 1987).
|
|||
|
In accordance with the provisions of section 605 of the
|
|||
|
Regulatory Flexibility Act, a copy of this certification will be
|
|||
|
sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
|
|||
|
Administration at the time of publication of this NPRM in the
|
|||
|
Federal Register.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
31. If we adopt the rules proposed in Amendment of Part 69 of
|
|||
|
the Commission's Rules and Regulations, Access Charges, To
|
|||
|
Conform It With Part 36, Jurisdictional Separations Procedures,
|
|||
|
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, CC Docket No. 87-113 (released
|
|||
|
May 1, 1987), we would, of course, revise the rules proposed in
|
|||
|
this notice to ensure consistency.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 16 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
John Hamilton, 143/8
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Fido v12 (tm) Echo Conference
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
An echomail conference has been established for sysops running
|
|||
|
Fido v12. The conference is intended to provide support and an
|
|||
|
exchange of ideas amongst the users of the software (sysops) and
|
|||
|
the developers. Tom Jennings has agreed to participate, and
|
|||
|
messages will be echoed to the beta testers as well.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
143/8 will coordinate the echo. I am looking for a number of
|
|||
|
nodes in PC Pursuit cities to establish direct links for the echo
|
|||
|
in order to optimize distribution. If you would be willing to act
|
|||
|
as a direct link in the distribution of this echo, please contact
|
|||
|
me at 143/8.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I have been told the Region 1 BUG nodes (1:1/98, 1:1/99) will no
|
|||
|
longer support prior versions of Fido. With the advent of this
|
|||
|
echo, support for v12 should be more than adequate. Anyone who
|
|||
|
wants more technical support than this should probably purchase
|
|||
|
the software directly from Fido Software at the commercial price.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In addition to providing a forum for technical discussions
|
|||
|
relating to v12, the echo will serve as a method of announcing
|
|||
|
utilities, upgrades, and so on. Anyone intending to write
|
|||
|
software in support of Fido v12 would be most welcome as a
|
|||
|
participant. I do think it necessary to limit access to sysops,
|
|||
|
though. I for one don't want my casual caller to read anything
|
|||
|
which might give him/her any creative ideas!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Well, that's it. A netmail message to 143/8, and a little
|
|||
|
patience, is about all it will take to link in. By the way, the
|
|||
|
scan name of the conference is FIDO (used with TJ's permission, I
|
|||
|
hope).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
[Fido and FidoNet (tm) Tom Jennings]
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 17 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Using FIDO-FAM Ver 3 with OPUS Ver 1 by Dennis Glaeser
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Problem: When attempting to run FIDO-FAM under the Outside
|
|||
|
#1 function of OPUS the program terminates with:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Run-time error 10, PC=xxxx
|
|||
|
Program aborted
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Solution: Create FAMOPT and FAMOVL environment strings. The
|
|||
|
FAMOVL string must be the path which contains the
|
|||
|
FIDO-FAM.00? files. The FAMOPT string should contain
|
|||
|
any command line options desired. The FAMOPT string
|
|||
|
can contain junk, in case no default options are
|
|||
|
desired, but the string must contain something (or DOS
|
|||
|
will remove the name from the environment).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Reason: The 'local' environment handed to FIDO-FAM is not
|
|||
|
terminated properly. FIDO-FAM is looking for its
|
|||
|
environment names until it finds them, or it reaches
|
|||
|
the end of the environment. Outside the 'legitimate'
|
|||
|
environment the data is trash, and the program fails
|
|||
|
trying to build an illegally long environment name.
|
|||
|
This solution simply assures that FIDO-FAM will stop
|
|||
|
looking within the real environment area.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Problem: FILES.BBS contains ANSI control sequences in some
|
|||
|
#2 comment lines, but does not display properly. There
|
|||
|
are stange 'Missing' files that appear in the FIDO-FAM
|
|||
|
display.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Solution: On each (comment) line which begins with an ESC char,
|
|||
|
put a space before the ESC char.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Reason: FIDO-FAM is treating the ESC sequence as a file name.
|
|||
|
Recall that a comment line is one that begins with:
|
|||
|
1) a space 2) a dash, or 3) the '@ 'char
|
|||
|
Anything else (including the ESC char) means the line
|
|||
|
represents a file name.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Note: Future versions of FIDO-FAM will recognize the ESC
|
|||
|
char as a comment line. This solution is a near term
|
|||
|
work-around.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If the FILES.BBS contains an ANSI clear screen command
|
|||
|
(ESC [2J) the header and footer displays in FIDO-FAM
|
|||
|
are lost. It would make FIDO-FAM unacceptably slow
|
|||
|
(especially remote) to constantly repaint those lines.
|
|||
|
Therefore it is highly recommended to not use the ANSI
|
|||
|
clear screen command in a FILES.BBS
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Problem: FILES.BBS contains ANSI control sequences, and lines
|
|||
|
#3 are truncated after processing by FIDO-FAM.
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 18 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Solution: None. The only way to get what you expect is to reduce
|
|||
|
the length of the line (either remove the ANSI
|
|||
|
sequences or reduce the length of the displayed chars).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Reason: FIDO-FAM doesn't do ANSI (yet). The length of a line
|
|||
|
is truncated to assure that lines do not wrap around
|
|||
|
when being displayed by the BBS program. Unfortunately
|
|||
|
the 'non displayed' chars are counted just the same as
|
|||
|
displayed ones.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Note: Future versions of FIDO-FAM will not truncate any
|
|||
|
lines which contain an ESC character. The user will be
|
|||
|
responsible to see that the display does not wrap.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Problem: FILES.BBS contains ANSI control sequences, and editing
|
|||
|
#4 lines with ANSI commands (with the Edit command)
|
|||
|
creates unpredictable results.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Solution: None. Don't use FIDO-FAM Ver 3 to edit lines which
|
|||
|
contain ANSI sequences.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Reason: FIDO-FAM doesn't do ANSI (yet).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Note: It is unclear yet to what extent FIDO-FAM will support
|
|||
|
editing of lines containing ANSI commands. Any
|
|||
|
comments and/or suggestions from users are welcomed.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 19 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
107/246 Gene Coppola
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Security Available For Mail Now
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
With the rash of SCOTT TISSUE type messages and the purloining of
|
|||
|
mail packets going on it seems that it might be wise to start
|
|||
|
protecting both EchoMail and mail packets by protecting them with
|
|||
|
passwords.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
SEAdog 4.1 as well as Confmail and Opus all allow some type of
|
|||
|
password protection. But that is also the problem as the
|
|||
|
selection of passwords can become a critical and often
|
|||
|
interesting problem.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
For example, one Sysop in our Net uses his name for mail pickup
|
|||
|
password protection. Another Sysop I know uses his type of car as
|
|||
|
a password. Great idea, but any decent hacker could crack those
|
|||
|
passwords in minutes.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Many studies have show that the only truly safe password is one
|
|||
|
selected or generated if you will by truly random methods. As the
|
|||
|
size of the password gets bigger a RANDOM password provides
|
|||
|
greater security.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
So, how do I select a RANDOM password? Well you could just poke
|
|||
|
some keys blindfolded, and it might be random, however there is a
|
|||
|
much better method.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
With the help of a program called GENERATE.EXE you may create
|
|||
|
truly random passwords based on the latest Bureau of Standards
|
|||
|
specifications for secure password generation.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
GENERATE.EXE does not access any BBS files, and generates truly
|
|||
|
random passwords based on a combination of variables, some input
|
|||
|
by you, and some read directly from the system itself.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In a recent test run over a 72 hour period the program DID NOT
|
|||
|
create any duplicate passwords. Over 10 million passwords were
|
|||
|
generated during this test. The test was run on an IBM PS/80
|
|||
|
under OS/2. The program also runs on true IBM PC's, XT's, AT's
|
|||
|
and 100% compatibles and provides comparable results, with less
|
|||
|
speed!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Once you have generated the passwords you wish to use, the next
|
|||
|
step would be to read the documentation for the mail, archive,
|
|||
|
and toss/scan utilities to see how to implement password
|
|||
|
protection. Then contact the Sysops you send/receive mail from on
|
|||
|
a regular basis, and decide how you wish to implement password
|
|||
|
protection.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
While password protection IS NOT the ultimate answer, it will
|
|||
|
make it harder for the hackers and SCOTT TISSUE types to do
|
|||
|
anything to disrupt the mail flow.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If a caller uploads or mails you a packet he should not have, and
|
|||
|
it has not been encrypted with the proper password, it will not
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 20 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
be processed by the system. If someone calls in and tries to
|
|||
|
purloin your mail packets and you have them set for pick-up
|
|||
|
protection by password, he will not be able to get them.
|
|||
|
Eventually he will give up although I grant you it might take a
|
|||
|
while.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
GENERATE.EXE in combination with SEAdog 4.1 and Confmail, is a
|
|||
|
very effective combination to provide security for your system
|
|||
|
when all three are used properly.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This program is released to the Sysops for use on their systems
|
|||
|
providing NO attempt is made to reverse compile or otherwise view
|
|||
|
or modify the program. It is FREEWARE and NO contributions are
|
|||
|
expected for the software. Support will be given directly from
|
|||
|
107/246. If you have any questions or problems contact us with
|
|||
|
those questions and/or problems.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The source code for GENERATE.EXE will NOT be released to anyone
|
|||
|
for any purpose. Furthermore, this program IS NOT available to
|
|||
|
Sysops outside of the UNITED STATES. A version for export
|
|||
|
(GENROUT.ARC) is now available to anyone who needs one outside of
|
|||
|
the United States.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
You may request/download GENROUT.ARC from 107/246 directly. This
|
|||
|
is the EXPORT version and is slightly less secure than the full
|
|||
|
version. Netmail messages to 107/246 for the full version
|
|||
|
available ONLY to systems within the United States.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In my humble opinion, any program of this nature which does not
|
|||
|
have these restrictions IS NOT worth the time it takes to
|
|||
|
download. Just like SUPERKEY from Borland, there are certain
|
|||
|
restrictions that must be made if you desire to use the full
|
|||
|
Bureau of Standards requirements.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This program has been in development for over 6 months and we
|
|||
|
welcome your comments on its use to you.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
SEAdog is a trademark of System Enhancement Associates.
|
|||
|
Confmail is a trademark of Spark Software.
|
|||
|
Superkey is a trademark of Borland.
|
|||
|
OS/2 is a trademark of Microsoft.
|
|||
|
PS/80 is a trademark of IBM.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 21 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Ben Mann / Amnon Nissan
|
|||
|
OPUS 151/1000
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
[R]aleigh,NC [E]chomail [D]ata [CON]centrator
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Net 151 in region 18 has been a busy place from the very
|
|||
|
start. Getting the most from our HUBS means changing the ROUTE
|
|||
|
files all the time.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
At a meeting last summer of the NC SYSOP's we let the
|
|||
|
conversation drift towards the management of net mail and
|
|||
|
echomail. After dismissing the possibility of using the space
|
|||
|
shuttle as a bounce point for out new lazer communicator, we
|
|||
|
talked about a data concentrator that would service the net.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The problem was to service the nodes that couldn't get to PC
|
|||
|
PURSUIT lines and still provide service to those who could.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
What has come of this initial idea is REDCON. A Turbo-AT with
|
|||
|
30 meg. HD, 1 meg. RAM, floppy drive and a TeleBit Trailblazer
|
|||
|
9600 baud modem. It is situated in Raleigh, NC (919), a PC
|
|||
|
PURSUIT city. It is devoted to ECHOMAIL, with the exception of
|
|||
|
some net 151 traffic and the latest node*.* and fnews*.arc. We
|
|||
|
plan to have all ECHOMAIL, from ALL the ECHO's, on the system
|
|||
|
bundled and ready at all times. This means one place to call to
|
|||
|
get it all.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
But this still doesn't help the non PC PURSUIT sysops. So a
|
|||
|
second data concentrator was added. GEDCON.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
[G]reensboro,NC [E]chomail [D]ata [CON]centrator
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It is a Turbo-AT with 30 meg. HD, 1 meg RAM, floppy drive and
|
|||
|
a TeleBit Trailblazer 9600 baud modem. It is connected to a
|
|||
|
national out WATS. It will send ECHOMAIL to those who do not have
|
|||
|
access to PC PURSUIT. Again one call does it all.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To those who wish to use either of these data concentrators
|
|||
|
send netmail to Ben Mann at 151/0 or Amnon Nissan at 151/100. The
|
|||
|
REDCON and GEDCON systems are setup as PRE-REGISTERED only, so
|
|||
|
please contact us BEFORE calling.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
GEDCON is on a out going WATS line so you can't call into it.
|
|||
|
You MUST contact Amnon Nissan or Ben Mann to be registered BEFORE
|
|||
|
the system will call you.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
So there you have it. Two data concentrators. One handling
|
|||
|
ECHOMAIL traffic to PC PURSUIT users. The other calling nodes
|
|||
|
that do not have access to PC PURSUIT.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
To other ECHOMAIL BACKBONE(tm) sysops. Please contact us so we
|
|||
|
may better coordinate our efforts to provide ECHOMAIL services to
|
|||
|
the nodes of an even stronger FidoNet.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
A list of the ECHOMAIL handled by REDCON/GEDCON is in a file
|
|||
|
REDCON.ARC which may be requested from 151/0 or 151/100.
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 22 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Now let's see... A ten jewel lazer ... Amnon got any spare 10
|
|||
|
meter dishes ?????
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 23 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Dot Falcon, Co-Sysop of The Falcon's Rock, 109/648
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
REPAIR NIGHTMARE
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This is the story of how our attempts to get the manufacturers of
|
|||
|
our computer to perform repairs. ("We" refers to me and my
|
|||
|
husband and co-sysop, George Falcon.)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Our computer, an IBM XT clone with two speeds, had some rather
|
|||
|
subtle problems that we suspected were hardware problems.
|
|||
|
Several of our more knowledgeable friends suggested we might be
|
|||
|
having a problem with the DMA controller. Also, our hard disk
|
|||
|
was making a screeching noise. We purchased this computer in May
|
|||
|
of 1986 from PC-Expanders in Bailey's Crossroads, Virginia (about
|
|||
|
half a mile from the Radisson Mark Hotel in Alexandria where the
|
|||
|
IFNA conference was held), and have been running it 24 hours a
|
|||
|
day ever since. The computer is no longer under warranty, but we
|
|||
|
decided PC-Expanders would still be the best choice to repair it,
|
|||
|
since they manufactured it.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 1: We brought the computer back to PC-Expanders. (Bailey's
|
|||
|
Crossroads is about forty-five minutes from our apartment, so
|
|||
|
each trip consumed an hour and a half in travel time, not to
|
|||
|
mention the time, usually an hour or more, spent waiting for the
|
|||
|
repairs.) PC-Expanders spent several hours, without success,
|
|||
|
attempting to duplicate the problems we'd been having. Then they
|
|||
|
called and asked us to come in and help demonstrate the problems
|
|||
|
to them so that they could diagnose them.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 2: We spent about and hour and a half demonstrating the
|
|||
|
problems to them. They had not recognized the screeching noise
|
|||
|
from the hard disk, and thought we were hearing the fan. We
|
|||
|
pointed out the noise, and they said it meant the hard disk was
|
|||
|
about to fail, and we would need a new one. As for the other
|
|||
|
problems, they suggested perhaps replacing the motherboard would
|
|||
|
help. They said the various chips (including those that involve
|
|||
|
the DMA controller) could not be purchased separately, so the
|
|||
|
entire motherboard would have to be replaced. We agreed to try
|
|||
|
this. It then took another three weeks for their shipment of
|
|||
|
motherboards to clear customs in Baltimore, and for them to
|
|||
|
install our new motherboard.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 3: We picked up our computer with the new motherboard. When
|
|||
|
we got home, we discovered that our modem wasn't working.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 4: We took the computer back and explained that our modem
|
|||
|
wasn't working. They said it was probably a defective modem, and
|
|||
|
since we hadn't bought it from them, they wouldn't touch it. We
|
|||
|
didn't believe that our modem had failed by coincidence while in
|
|||
|
their shop, and said we thought it had something to do with the
|
|||
|
installation of the new motherboard. They investigated, and told
|
|||
|
us that the I/O board they originally sold us had later proved to
|
|||
|
have problems with internal modems. Again, we were skeptical,
|
|||
|
since we had been running our bulletin board with that modem and
|
|||
|
that I/O board for two solid months with no problem, but we
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 24 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
agreed to a new I/O board. They insisted that such coincidences
|
|||
|
were possible, and gave us a discount on the originally quoted
|
|||
|
price. (Total cost at this point: over $300).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 5: We picked up our computer with the new I/O board in it.
|
|||
|
The modem was working again, but now the keyboard was acting
|
|||
|
funny. Every so often, hitting the shift key would hang the
|
|||
|
computer, or else it would force CAPS LOCK or NUM LOCK on, or
|
|||
|
reverse PgUp and PgDn.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 6: PC-Expanders said it sounded like our keyboard might be
|
|||
|
bad. We were appalled that all our hardware seemed to be failing
|
|||
|
at once -- motherboard, I/O board, hard disk, and keyboard. They
|
|||
|
lent us one of their keyboards to take home, just to prove that
|
|||
|
the problem was really our keyboard. We were convinced that our
|
|||
|
keyboard had no problems, that the problem was somehow caused by
|
|||
|
the new hardware they had installed, but we went along with them.
|
|||
|
We had exactly the same problems with their keyboard as with our
|
|||
|
own.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 7: We returned PC-Expanders' keyboard and told them it had
|
|||
|
acted the same. PC-Expanders said perhaps it was a software
|
|||
|
problem, in which case they weren't responsible. We said no, it
|
|||
|
wasn't a software problem, because we had never had this problem
|
|||
|
until they installed the new hardware. They said perhaps there
|
|||
|
was a defect in the new motherboard, and they replaced it with
|
|||
|
another new motherboard of the same type. We went home and found
|
|||
|
that (a) we still had the same keyboard problems, (b) our modem
|
|||
|
had stopped working, and (c) the power and turbo mode indicator
|
|||
|
lights on the front of the computer no longer worked. We still
|
|||
|
weren't really sure that our original subtle problems had cleared
|
|||
|
up, since the new problems that were introduced had kept us from
|
|||
|
using any software long enough to find out.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
At this point, after seven trips to Bailey's Crossroads, each
|
|||
|
trip introducing more problems than it solved, we were fed up.
|
|||
|
We weren't willing to give PC-Expanders any more chances to
|
|||
|
attempt repairs. Instead, we demanded that they remove all of
|
|||
|
their new hardware, reinstall all of our old hardware (which we
|
|||
|
had retained) and give us a full refund, including labor costs.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Then things began to get ugly. The service manager refused to
|
|||
|
refund the labor costs, saying, "So in other words, in regard to
|
|||
|
all the work we put into your computer, you're just telling us,
|
|||
|
'Tough luck.'" I said that we didn't feel we had gotten any
|
|||
|
service at all, and so in other words, when it came to getting
|
|||
|
our computer fixed properly, he was telling us "Tough luck." He
|
|||
|
finally agreed to our demands on the condition that we would sign
|
|||
|
a release stating that PC-Expanders was no longer responsible for
|
|||
|
the condition of our computer. We agreed.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Trip 8: The exchange was made. The service manager told us we
|
|||
|
could not get a refund on the spot, but a check would be mailed
|
|||
|
to us in 7-10 days. We got a statement to that effect in
|
|||
|
writing. In exchange for that written statement, we signed the
|
|||
|
release.
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 25 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
While there, we asked them to fix the indicator lights on the
|
|||
|
front of our computer. They fixed one, but were unable to fix
|
|||
|
the other and refused to investigate it. Both the service
|
|||
|
manager and the technician who did all the work on the computer
|
|||
|
said, "You told us that light never worked." We had said nothing
|
|||
|
of the kind, since the light had always worked.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
After we took the computer home, the hard disk (which had been
|
|||
|
removed and reinstalled) no longer screeched. The modem and
|
|||
|
keyboard worked just fine, as they had before PC-Expanders.
|
|||
|
However, we did up with another NEW problem, however -- our
|
|||
|
printer didn't work. It was hooked up to the only serial port on
|
|||
|
the computer, but it was now LPT2 instead of LPT1. We were
|
|||
|
forced to take the computer to another repairperson, and he found
|
|||
|
that they had forgotten to return one of our ports and the ribbon
|
|||
|
cable that connected it to the graphics board inside the
|
|||
|
computer. It cost us $60 to repair that.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
We had received the written statement on August 21. On September
|
|||
|
1 we received the refund check for the full amount.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
So, our bulletin board was down nearly eight weeks, and we're out
|
|||
|
$60, just to get our computer back to nearly the condition it was
|
|||
|
in before PC-Expanders got their hands on it (the turbo indicator
|
|||
|
light is still broken). We still have not had an accurate diag-
|
|||
|
nosis of the subtle problems we had before, and we are now
|
|||
|
waiting to see if those problems manifest themselves again.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Conclusion: Although PC-Expanders has been in business for
|
|||
|
several years, and has a good reputation among a lot of people,
|
|||
|
and although they have some of the best prices around, would you
|
|||
|
want to go through this?
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 26 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
VIETNAM VETERANS' VALHALLA, Inc.
|
|||
|
143/27 (Opus)
|
|||
|
408-293-7894
|
|||
|
300/1200/2400 Bauds
|
|||
|
by Todd Looney - Sysop
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I know a lot of you have called the Vietnam Veterans'
|
|||
|
Valhalla in San Jose, and a few of you carry the International
|
|||
|
Vietnam Veterans' EchoConference on your own systems. For that,
|
|||
|
Nancy and I both want to thank you.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The sysops of this bulletin board are both Vietnam Combat
|
|||
|
Veterans; I fought during the war as a Medical Field Surgeon in
|
|||
|
the service of my country, and spent more than my fair share of
|
|||
|
time in a VC/NVA prison camp across the border in Laos, and Nancy
|
|||
|
my wife, who is a veteran of a different sort, having fought HER
|
|||
|
war years after I had returned to the United States, battling the
|
|||
|
problems I brought back from that little country tucked thousands
|
|||
|
of miles away in Southeast Asia.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
We have, for the most part, conquered all of the problems of
|
|||
|
that traumatic past through years of hard work! But many of the
|
|||
|
men and women who returned from that war continue to carry it's
|
|||
|
memories and nightmares with them today. For some, every day is
|
|||
|
a bitter struggle to survive, trying to find some way to either
|
|||
|
escape the horrible memories, or to come to terms with themselves
|
|||
|
so they and their families can begin to live a normal life!!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Nancy and I feel it is our responsibility as caring and
|
|||
|
empathetic individuals to share as much of ourselves as possible
|
|||
|
with those Vietnam Combat Veterans of both kinds; the ex-military
|
|||
|
soldier-at-arms, and their wives, friends and lovers. We do this
|
|||
|
with the hope that somehow the knowledge and understanding we
|
|||
|
gained from the years encompassing our own struggle might be of
|
|||
|
some help to those who are still fighting their war!!!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If you haven't called our system in a while you're in for
|
|||
|
quite a surprise. We've added a dozen veteran-related message
|
|||
|
areas and plan to add a few more as soon as we can make the right
|
|||
|
resource contacts.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
You might have noticed the "Inc." tacked onto the end of our
|
|||
|
name at the header of this article, well that's another thing
|
|||
|
that's happened to us. We are in the process of getting a non-
|
|||
|
profit organization from the Internal Revenue Service (probably
|
|||
|
the only thing they've ever given to ANYbody!), and are working
|
|||
|
out the details of an application for funding which we will use
|
|||
|
to try to get working capital so that we can get a lot MORE done.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Currently we are helping vets get their discharges upgraded,
|
|||
|
get the medals they were awarded but never got, the pensions they
|
|||
|
didn't know they had coming, and, well...anything in general that
|
|||
|
the veterans who call us for help need. We work very closely
|
|||
|
with veterans' crisis centers across the country, and if you
|
|||
|
haven't noticed the Fido Newsletter lately, we have finally
|
|||
|
syndicated the International Vietnam Veterans' EchoConference
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 27 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
into 50 BBS systems spanning the entire continent. That may not
|
|||
|
mean much to the coordinators of the larger national and
|
|||
|
international echo's, but it sure means a lot to us! At least
|
|||
|
once a month we help a veteran get over a major crisis in his or
|
|||
|
her life, and those two words, thank you, make all the bitter
|
|||
|
struggles with the Veterans' Administration and all those other
|
|||
|
government bureaucrats more than worth it!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Soon we'll be able to afford to purchase equipment we can
|
|||
|
use to set Vet Centers up with so their psychologists and
|
|||
|
counselors can participate on-line instead of through personal
|
|||
|
meetings. Soon we'll be able to have money to provide emergency
|
|||
|
financial assistance for needy veterans and their families.
|
|||
|
Soon, soon....... I do that a lot, I know. Money doesn't grow on
|
|||
|
trees and "Rome wasn't built in a day", and all that. Well,
|
|||
|
things are happening...slowly but steadily on.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
We have plenty of room for voting members of board at the
|
|||
|
Valhalla. All you have to do to be qualified is CARE. It won't
|
|||
|
cost you any money (can't promise I won't ask once in a while,
|
|||
|
but there's no obligation). You may have to attend a meeting
|
|||
|
once in a while, but then that's how you can help us figure out
|
|||
|
how to battle the problems we have to deal with. Not all of them
|
|||
|
require money, in fact most of the problems require nothing more
|
|||
|
than simple brain and will power. And the more brains and wills
|
|||
|
we can put together the easier it will be to get done what needs
|
|||
|
to be done.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
There are several special interest groups you might find
|
|||
|
yourselves leaning toward if you decide to join our team;
|
|||
|
POW/MIA, Agent Orange, Buddy Search, Employment, Vet Centers, Bui
|
|||
|
Doi (Amerasian children), the Small Business Association, Veteran
|
|||
|
Resources, Veterans Administration liaison, Veterans Organization
|
|||
|
liaison ...... and on and on. As you can see there's a lot to
|
|||
|
do!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Well, I guess I've rambled enough. Nancy and I hope to hear
|
|||
|
from you all, even if it's just to browse around the Vietnam
|
|||
|
Veterans' Valhalla!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
See ya there!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Respectfully,
|
|||
|
Todd C. Looney
|
|||
|
President, Vietnam Veterans' Valhalla, Inc.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 28 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
COLUMNS
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Patrick McDonald
|
|||
|
SEAdog/Opus 1:109/657
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Random Mutterings
|
|||
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Adding Control To Your Batch Files
|
|||
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Owing to the amount of travelling my job requires, the batch
|
|||
|
file that runs my system is fairly involved, and entails several
|
|||
|
layers and categories of automated processing to handle things
|
|||
|
when the system is unattended (or I am being lazy). Many of
|
|||
|
these automated processes are such that I would like to be able
|
|||
|
to turn them on and off at will depending on the situation (or my
|
|||
|
mood). On the other hand, I don't want to spend half my time
|
|||
|
editing the batch file either. The solution I have come up with
|
|||
|
is one that works well here, which some of you might also find
|
|||
|
interesting or useful. The general approach is a simple on.
|
|||
|
First, I have a dedicated directory (for example:
|
|||
|
C:\OPUS\AUTOCTL\) which holds various "switches". A switch is
|
|||
|
simply a filename of the form:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<switch_name>.<switch_state>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
where:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<switch_name> is the name of the process being
|
|||
|
controlled
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
<switch_state> is either "ON" or "OFF"
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Usually I have the file contain a brief text which explains what
|
|||
|
the switch does in order to refresh my memory at a later time in
|
|||
|
case the switch name is not obvious.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In my batch file, each conditional block of lines (that is, a
|
|||
|
block of lines which is controlled by a switch file) looks like
|
|||
|
this:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
if not exist c:\opus\autoctl\<switch_name>.ON goto <label>
|
|||
|
.
|
|||
|
.
|
|||
|
.
|
|||
|
:<label>
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In this way, a number of the processes which can be routinely
|
|||
|
handled in my batch file can be enabled or disabled as the
|
|||
|
situation warrants, without touching the batch file itself (by
|
|||
|
renaming the <switch_name>.ON file to a <switch_name>.OFF file).
|
|||
|
Activities such as automatically updating the nodelist as
|
|||
|
nodediffs are received, compiling the weekly newsletter and
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 29 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
shipping it out, updating the BW area megalist and shipping it
|
|||
|
out, pruning message areas, renumbering message areas, generating
|
|||
|
logfile reports, and so on, are all controlled in this manner via
|
|||
|
switches. When I go away out of town, I will typically turn off
|
|||
|
those activities which are more likely to encounter problems when
|
|||
|
running unattended due to a variety of reasons, and turn on those
|
|||
|
activities which I usually like to do manually but which have to
|
|||
|
be done automatically if I am not here. In addition, to
|
|||
|
facilitate changing switch states I have two batch files
|
|||
|
(TURNON.BAT and TURNOFF.BAT) in a pathed directory to allow me to
|
|||
|
simply say something like:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
TURNON NEWSCAN
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
These batch files look like this:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
TurnOn.Bat
|
|||
|
----------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
echo off
|
|||
|
cd c:\opus\autoctl
|
|||
|
c:
|
|||
|
if not exist %1.off goto bad1
|
|||
|
rename %1.off %1.on >nul
|
|||
|
echo %1: Switch enabled
|
|||
|
goto end
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
:bad1
|
|||
|
if not exist %1.on goto bad2
|
|||
|
echo %1: Switch is already on
|
|||
|
goto end
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
:bad2
|
|||
|
echo %1: Switch does not exist!
|
|||
|
dir
|
|||
|
:end
|
|||
|
cd \opus
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
TurnOff.Bat
|
|||
|
-----------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
echo off
|
|||
|
cd c:\opus\autoctl
|
|||
|
c:
|
|||
|
if not exist %1.on goto bad1
|
|||
|
rename %1.on %1.off >nul
|
|||
|
echo %1: Switch disabled
|
|||
|
goto end
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
:bad1
|
|||
|
if not exist %1.off goto bad2
|
|||
|
echo %1: Switch is already off
|
|||
|
goto end
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
:bad2
|
|||
|
echo %1: Switch does not exist!
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 30 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
dir
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
:end
|
|||
|
cd \opus
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If I want to know what the current status of the auto switches
|
|||
|
is, I need merely do a directory of the auto control subdirectory
|
|||
|
and the naming convention makes it immediately clear what's on
|
|||
|
and what is not. There probably are more sophisticated ways to
|
|||
|
do this type of thing but I have found this method of conditional
|
|||
|
control to be quite useful and hope that it might be of benefit
|
|||
|
to someone.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 31 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
O r i g i n : A n g e v i n E m p i r e
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Issue #3: BBS Individuality
|
|||
|
Aaron Priven (1:161/1154)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Back in the good old days, I was on two really good BBS's.
|
|||
|
One is still around, but it is the other that illustrates my
|
|||
|
point. That now-gone one was "The Baudville City Limits",
|
|||
|
(before the company "Baudville") and was run by a 16-year-old
|
|||
|
hacker kid in Silicon Valley on an Apple II+ with two floppy
|
|||
|
drives. It was always running out of message space, was slow as
|
|||
|
the devil and only had -- yes -- 300 baud.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Why was it my favorite? One reason was because the sysop came
|
|||
|
across very mature over modem, particularly compared to some of
|
|||
|
the kiddie boards I had frequented at that time. But mainly it
|
|||
|
was because it was *BAUDVILLE* -- it was your average film-
|
|||
|
western town, set in Modem Territory. The sysop was Mayor Mike.
|
|||
|
The main message area was the Gossipers Cafe. There was a saloon
|
|||
|
(joke area). E-mail was at "The Post Office." The statistics
|
|||
|
function was "The Sheriff's Office," and the Yell function was
|
|||
|
the "Mayor's Office." There was a lottery and a general store.
|
|||
|
In short, it was FUN to be there -- you were playing "western".
|
|||
|
Even if you didn't read Louis L'Amour or watch John Wayne -- as I
|
|||
|
never have -- it was still fun to imagine oneself there.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It was the individuality of Baudville that got to me. It was
|
|||
|
"Let's Pretend" with modems. I admit it might not seem very
|
|||
|
dignified, but in a significant way it was this FUN part of
|
|||
|
modeming that got me into it in the first place (at least in a
|
|||
|
continuing way). It was enjoyable.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Things changed. Baudville went down a long, long time ago,
|
|||
|
and the telephone number has been reassigned. I haven't seen a
|
|||
|
BBS like it since.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
What happened to that individuality? I don't know. I found
|
|||
|
other BBS's -- a politics board called "DataTech 4: Cro's Nest
|
|||
|
II" (the one referred to above) and a board run by a Cro's user
|
|||
|
called "TECHNet" -- but while DT4 came close, nothing ever had
|
|||
|
that feeling of fun, escapism, and individuality.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
And now, we have ECHOMAIL, of course. Now I'm absolutely the
|
|||
|
last one to complain about echomail. I love it that I can send
|
|||
|
messages to Europe and Australia and everywhere in between at
|
|||
|
someone else's expense. But ECHOMAIL breeds by its very
|
|||
|
definition, sameness. And it is this sameness that makes
|
|||
|
modeming less *FUN*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Modeming turns into a routine, not a hobby. You call, you log
|
|||
|
on, you read the new messages, you check for new files, you log
|
|||
|
off. It takes no time, and eventually just becomes dull.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
This began long before Echomail, of course. The best example
|
|||
|
of the whole phenomenon is PC Board BBS software. The sysop
|
|||
|
can't change it even if he wants to! Everything looks the same --
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 32 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
the sysop can only be 'SYSOP', all the menus are the same, all
|
|||
|
the commands are the same, all the news files are the same, all
|
|||
|
the dates are the same, every PC Board in the country has a
|
|||
|
"Sysops" conference, and even the conferences look the same as
|
|||
|
the main message area, and there can only be 9 of those -- and
|
|||
|
sysops are cautioned against more than three! It's just plain
|
|||
|
*boring*! If PC Board had ECHOMAIL there'd only be one big PC
|
|||
|
Board!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
And Fido (v11, anyway) isn't much better. Opus is good, and
|
|||
|
TBBS is great if you have the money (which most people don't).
|
|||
|
But the bigger problem remains -- getting sysops to be
|
|||
|
individual.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
A while back, there was a message on one of the echos: "What
|
|||
|
should I call my BBS?" I don't have an actual copy of my reply,
|
|||
|
but here's the gist of it: be original. Project yourself. Do
|
|||
|
you have a hobby (besides computers)? Call it that. Do you have
|
|||
|
a particular reason for the board? Call it that. Do you have
|
|||
|
something you really care about? Call it that. I've never yet
|
|||
|
seen a board named after a person. Call it that. Whatever you
|
|||
|
do, don't put in "PC"; don't call it anything ending in "Board"
|
|||
|
or "Fido" or "Opus"; don't make the name of the name of any
|
|||
|
computer be the focus ("The Atari Palace," maybe, if you have the
|
|||
|
'trim' in the board be about palaces and not Ataris; "PC Land,"
|
|||
|
no). Be original, and remember your BBS is a projection of you,
|
|||
|
and of your users.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
And don't, don't stop at the name! Create a world in your BBS!
|
|||
|
If your BBS has a western name, do *EVERYTHING* western! If it's
|
|||
|
called "The Kingdom of XT", then do everything feudal!
|
|||
|
Improvise! Imagine! Create!
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
But there is the final question: getting it to happen. I
|
|||
|
guess I'd rather have a boring sysop than none at all. But I
|
|||
|
think many sysops get into the sysoping game for other reasons
|
|||
|
than wanting to invent a place of their own -- perhaps they want
|
|||
|
easier access for themselves, or they want to be *the boss*, or -
|
|||
|
- well who knows. But I hope some of the boring sysops out there
|
|||
|
find this note and listen to it, and even if they didn't have the
|
|||
|
users really in mind when they started sysoping, they will now.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
I have two sets of apologies to make: first, to the BBSs out
|
|||
|
there in Matrixland who already are as imaginative and creative
|
|||
|
as Baudville and whom I did not recognize; and another to my
|
|||
|
local sysops who do the best they can. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The last thing is that last May I tried to be a sysop for a
|
|||
|
short while, and failed; I quit for many reasons, but the last
|
|||
|
paragraph is in no small way directed at myself.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 33 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
FOR SALE
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
John Hamilton IFNA 143/8
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The special ALR 386/2 offer has been extremely successful. The
|
|||
|
offer now has the following terms: 1) California residents: one
|
|||
|
per sysop, need not be used for the bbs; 2) Non-California:
|
|||
|
unlimited quantity, need not be a sysop. Use the product numbers
|
|||
|
below to receive the discount. Prices listed are check, or money
|
|||
|
order. Inquire for VISA/MC.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Order from : EXECUTIVE COMPUTER TECHNOLOGIES
|
|||
|
1190 Coleman Avenue
|
|||
|
San Jose, CA 95110
|
|||
|
Phone: (408) 727-3000 Paul Darbo
|
|||
|
Product Cash
|
|||
|
Number Description Price
|
|||
|
--------- --------------------------------- -----------
|
|||
|
FIDO100 Advanced Logic Research 386/2 $1675
|
|||
|
Base unit w/ 1Mb 32bit ram
|
|||
|
(expandable to 2MB on board)
|
|||
|
PHOENIX bios (32 BIT)
|
|||
|
16Mhz 80386 (20Mhz optional)
|
|||
|
Support for both 80287, 80387
|
|||
|
1.2Mb floppy, serial, parallel, clock
|
|||
|
101-key 'board
|
|||
|
Slots: 2-8 bit, 4-16 bit,2-ALR 32 bit
|
|||
|
1 year parts/labor with dealer
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FIDO101 ALR 32 bit ram expansion card w/1MB $625
|
|||
|
(expandable to 4MB)
|
|||
|
FIDO102 1MB ram upgrade (chips) for above $300
|
|||
|
FIDO103 WD 1:1 interleave HD controller $225
|
|||
|
(this is a super fast controller!)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Additional items may be negotiated with the dealer. Describe on
|
|||
|
a seperate page if mailing order in. Terms: Check, money order.
|
|||
|
Call for VISA/MC orders. California residents add sales tax.
|
|||
|
Add $30 shipping / insurance to total.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Name:____________________________________ Net/Node:_________
|
|||
|
Total Price:_________ +tax:________+$30 s/h = $_____________
|
|||
|
Payment: ( )check ( )money order ( ) VISA ( ) MasterCard
|
|||
|
VISA/MC Number:_________________________ Exp.Date __________
|
|||
|
Signature:_________________________
|
|||
|
Shipping Address:_________________________________
|
|||
|
_________________________________
|
|||
|
_________________________________
|
|||
|
Voice phone: ( ) -
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 34 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
NOTICES
|
|||
|
=================================================================
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The Interrupt Stack
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7 Dec 1987
|
|||
|
Start of the Digital Equipment Users Society meeting in
|
|||
|
Anaheim, CA. Contact Mark Buda at 1:132/777 for details.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
14 Nov 1987
|
|||
|
The First New England Sysop Conference, to be held at the
|
|||
|
Lederle Graduate Research Center, 16 Floor University of
|
|||
|
Massachusetts, Amherst. Contact Mort Sternheim at 1:321/109
|
|||
|
for details.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
24 Aug 1989
|
|||
|
Voyager 2 passes Neptune.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If you have something which you would like to see on this
|
|||
|
calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Latest Software Versions
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
BBS Systems Node List Other
|
|||
|
& Mailers Version Utilities Version Utilities Version
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Dutchie 2.51 EditNL 3.3 ARC 5.21
|
|||
|
Fido 12* MakeNL 1.10* ARCmail 1.0
|
|||
|
Opus 1.03a Prune 1.40 ConfMail 3.10*
|
|||
|
SEAdog 4.10* XlatList 2.84* EchoMail 1.31
|
|||
|
TBBS 2.0M MGM 1.0
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
* Recently changed
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Utility authors: Please help keep this list up to date by
|
|||
|
reporting new versions to 1:1/1. It is not our intent to list
|
|||
|
all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 35 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
INTERNATIONAL FIDONET ASSOCIATION
|
|||
|
ORDER FORM
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Publications
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The IFNA publications can be obtained by downloading from Fido
|
|||
|
1/10 or other FidoNet compatible systems, or by purchasing them
|
|||
|
directly from IFNA. We ask that all our IFNA Committee Chairmen
|
|||
|
provide us with the latest versions of each publication, but we
|
|||
|
can make no written guarantees.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
IFNA Fido BBS listing $15.00 _____
|
|||
|
IFNA Administrative Policy DOCs $10.00 _____
|
|||
|
IFNA FidoNet Standards Committee DOCs $10.00 _____
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Special offers for IFNA members ONLY:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
System Enhancement Associates SEAdog $60.00 _____
|
|||
|
ONLY 1 copy SEAdog per IFNA Member.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Fido Software's Fido/FidoNet $65.00 _____
|
|||
|
ONLY 1 copy Fido/FidoNet per IFNA Member.
|
|||
|
As of November 1, 1987 price will increase to
|
|||
|
$100. Orders including checks for $65 will be
|
|||
|
returned after October 31, 1987.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
SUBTOTAL _____
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Missouri Residents add 5.725 % Sales tax _____
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
International orders include $5.00 for
|
|||
|
surface shipping or $15.00 for air shipping _____
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
TOTAL _____
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
SEND CHECK OR MONEY ORDER TO:
|
|||
|
IFNA
|
|||
|
P.O. Box 41143
|
|||
|
St. Louis, Missouri 63141 USA
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Name________________________________
|
|||
|
Net/Node____/____
|
|||
|
Company_____________________________
|
|||
|
Address_____________________________
|
|||
|
City____________________ State____________ Zip_____
|
|||
|
Voice Phone_________________________
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Signature___________________________
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
FidoNews 4-36 Page 36 21 Sep 1987
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
__
|
|||
|
The World's First / \
|
|||
|
BBS Network /|oo \
|
|||
|
* FidoNet * (_| /_)
|
|||
|
_`@/_ \ _
|
|||
|
| | \ \\
|
|||
|
| (*) | \ ))
|
|||
|
______ |__U__| / \//
|
|||
|
/ Fido \ _//|| _\ /
|
|||
|
(________) (_/(_|(____/ (jm)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Membership for the International FidoNet Association
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Membership in IFNA is open to any individual or organization that
|
|||
|
pays an annual specified membership fee. IFNA serves the
|
|||
|
international FidoNet-compatible electronic mail community to
|
|||
|
increase worldwide communications. **
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Name _________________________________ Date ________
|
|||
|
Address ______________________________
|
|||
|
City & State _________________________
|
|||
|
Country_______________________________
|
|||
|
Phone (Voice) ________________________
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Net/Node Number ______________________
|
|||
|
Board Name____________________________
|
|||
|
Phone (Data) _________________________
|
|||
|
Baud Rate Supported___________________
|
|||
|
Board Restrictions____________________
|
|||
|
Special Interests_____________________
|
|||
|
______________________________________
|
|||
|
______________________________________
|
|||
|
Is there some area where you would be
|
|||
|
willing to help out in FidoNet?_______
|
|||
|
______________________________________
|
|||
|
______________________________________
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Send your membership form and a check or money order for $25 to:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
International FidoNet Association
|
|||
|
P. O. Box 41143
|
|||
|
St Louis, Missouri 63141
|
|||
|
USA
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Thank you for your membership! Your participation will help to
|
|||
|
insure the future of FidoNet.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
** Please NOTE that IFNA is a general not-for-profit organization
|
|||
|
and Articles of Association and By-Laws were adopted by the
|
|||
|
membership in January 1987. The first elected Board of
|
|||
|
Directors was filled in August 1987. The IFNA Echomail
|
|||
|
Conference has been established on FidoNet to assist the
|
|||
|
Board. We welcome your input on this Conference.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|