Here are my comments on the Draft Austel Technical Standard 002 (97) which
need to be submitted by 18 February. Copies of the draft are available for
purchase from Standards Australia.

To: General Manager                     From: Arthur Marsh
TECHNICAL BRANCH                        2 Nicolle Avenue
AUSTEL                                  Hawthorndene SA 5051
PO Box 7443                             Ph (08) 8370 2365 (H)
St Kilda Road                           Ph (08) 8223 7522 (W)
Melbourne VIC 3004                      Fax (08) 8223 5082
                                        Email: arthur{at}dircsa.org.au
AUSTEL DR TS 002 (97)                   5 February, 1997

General Comment:

Austel Technical Standard 002 has been used by equipment
manufacturers and suppliers as the excuse for delays with
the release and lack of features in CPE, yet has not been
maintained in a fashion that gives end users much respect
for the standard. End users see TS 002 as not helping to
promote an environment where inter-working considerations
for CPE are addressed in an open fashion.

The explanation and listing of tones used by CPE and the
network is messy and incomplete.

Specific Comment:

Pages 102 to 104 inclusive were not included with the
artwork sent to Standards Australia, which caused me
considerable inconvenience and delayed my checking of the
references.

Page iii.

Under "General", there is the sentence "In this issue of
AUSTEL Technical Standard 0xy,". "0xy" should be replace
by "002".

I have not been able to obtain information on AUSTEL's
Technical Approval Guides from AUSTEL. If that paragraph
is to remain, AUSTEL should provide such information on
request.

Page 11.

4.1 Abbreviations.

"DUT" and "E&M" are included in the list of
abbreviations, yet are used in the document. I gather
that "DUT" stands for "Device Under Test", and that
"E&M"
stands for "Earth and Mid-point"?

SMA should appear on a new line.

Page 13.

4.2.13. Hardware Modules. Does this term include chips
that contain firmware for CPE? If so, should this be
included as an example?

Page 14.

4.2.22. Last sentence should end with "is specified in
ITU-T Recommendation G.223 [10]." and not "is adopted
by...".

Page 19.

5.1.7 (d) Where are Plug types 605 and 606, and socket
types 610, 611, and 612 defined? There is no reference
included for these plugs and sockets.

5.1.8.3 The second line should have "ITU-T Rec. 161 [8]."
replaced with "ITU-T Recommendation E.161 [8]."

Page 21.

5.1.9.2 Change the start of the sentence to read "Any
over voltage protection device fitted external to the
CE".

Page 24.

5.3.1.3 The start of the note should read "ITU-T
Recommendation E.164 provides guidance" and include a
reference to ITU-T Recommendation E.164 (4/91) Numbering
plan for the ISDN era.

Page 25.

5.3.4 There is no explanation given of supervisory tones.

5.3.4.1 The first sentence should read "Pre-answer
supervisory tones transmitted by the PSTN appearing at
the PSTN interface port (+3dBr) shall be as specified
below:"

Page 29.

5.3.6.3.2 (c) Gives too much leeway to the equipment
manufacturers, and will lead to end user confusion. The
Bell 212A 2225Hz answer tone as documented in ITU-T
Recommendation V.18 should be explicitly allowed with the
note that states that the use of the tone will not
necessarily have any effect on echo-control equipment
operating in the network accordance with ITU-T
Recommendation G.165. No other answer tones should be
allowed for unless required for by equipment operating in
accordance with ITU-T Recommendation V.18.

It would be good to encourage manufacturers of CPE that
is capable of unattended dial-out operation to implement
calling tones as described below, and to not make further
attempts to dial out to a number that responds with DTMF
tones. This would enable a human recipient of calls
intended for a fax machine or modem to respond by keying
in any number on a tone dial keypad and avoid further
disturbance.

5.3.6.5.3 This is a very dangerous paragraph in that it
discourages the use of calling tones which are summarised
in ITU-T Recommendation V.8 with references to ITU-T
Recommendations V.21, V.25 (1300 Hz, 0.6s on, 1.75s off),
and T.30 4.3.3.3 (1100 Hz, 0.5s on, 3s off). Answer tones
are a GOOD THING, reassuring human callers that a machine
and not a threatening caller made the call, and
facilitating inter working with multi-function CPE, that
may accept voice calls and data calls from fax machines,
modems and teletype devices for the deaf.

If anything, this paragraph should at least be modified
to have the start of the second sentence read "CE which
transmits information other than calling tones defined in
ITU-T Recommendation V.8 only after detecting the correct
identifying tones...".

Page 30.

5.4.1. There is no need for this restriction, and this
paragraph should be removed. If the note is to be
retained, it should have proper reference to ITU-T
Recommendations V.25 and G.165 and be consistent with the
requirements of those Recommendations for tones that
should not be interpreted as echo control tones.

Page 32.

5.4.5 (a) (i) The end of the sentence should read
"compliant with ITU-T Recommendation O.41 [12]; and". The
current edition of ITU-T Recommendation O.41 is dated
(10/94).

5.4.5 (c) use "Recommendation" rather than "Rec.".

5.5.1.1.1 Ring signals should be fully documented in one
place in this standard rather than in multiple locations,
and the tolerances for their generation and detection
should also be documented.

Page 36.

5.5.1.7.1 (a) use the full title and reference "ITU-T
Recommendation E.161 [8]".

Page 37.

5.5.1.9 (a) (i) use "Recommendation" instead of "Rec.".

Page 45.

5.7.3 "described in this Technical Standard" is too
vague. Quote the numbers of the relevant sections.

Page 65.

Appendix B, PSTN Service Tone Characteristics does not
fully document ring tones. It  includes some CPE tones,
but does not fully document the calling tones of ITU-T
Recommendations T.30 section 4.3.3.3 or V.8 nor does it
fully document the answer tones documented in ITU-T
Recommendations V.25 and G.165. Frequency and cadence
tolerances for these tones should be harmonised with the
quoted Recommendations.

Page 103 onwards.

If a reference is not available from Standards Australia,
the full contact details of the publisher should be
provided.

References should be provided for the plug types 605 and
606, and socket types 610, 611, and 612.

References to ITU-T Recommendations E.164, G.165, T.30,
V.8 and V.25 should be provided.

Standards Australia recently issued a February 1997
catalogue of ITU-T Recommendations and along with the
ITU's World Wide Web site, should be used for checking
the currency and accuracy of the references to ITU-T
Recommendations and Supplements.

ITU-T The current version Recommendation 0.41 is dated
(10/94).

Reference 15 should read "Supplement 2 (Series E) Various
tones used in national networks (1/94).

[end]

--- msgedsq 2.1