anna oliver

recent work

cv

text

contact

links

home

 

 

This essay was part of my coursework on the MA in Hypermedia I took at University of Westminster 1998-99.

In this essay I will be focusing on the history of the telephone, both the technology and the impact it has had on society. I will examine why technological leaps occur, then run through an outline history of the development of the telephone, concentrating on the British telephone system. I will then be looking at possible futures for telecommunications system with reference to the internet.

The Internet uses the telephone as one of its building blocks, both culturally and also physically: using the network of telephone cables and switches. The development of the telephone was similarly a further development of telegraph technology. The future development of the internet is affected by the future development of the telecommunications network.

What Prompts a Leap in Technological Development?
History of the Telephone
Telegraphy
Development of Telephone Technology
Development of the British Telephone System
Monopolies
The Effect of the Telephone on Society
The Effect of the Internet on Society
Possible Futures: History of Convergence or Divergence?
References
Bibliography

What Prompts a Leap in Technological Development?

It is debatable why technological leaps occur: there are several schools of thought on the matter, including Kondratieffs Wave theory 1(Nessman, Les, www-nmr.banffcentre.ab.ca/WPG/KonJob/html/kondratieff.html), technological determinism (the 'Wired Ideology'), and that believed by the Regulation School.

The Russian Economist, Nikolai Kondratieff, working in the 1920's and 1930's, proposed that modernity operates on long wave cycles, each cycle of which is characterised by a technological paradigm: the second wave being characterised by the telephone. Technological leaps are therefore seen as economically determined.

The Regulation School, a group of French economists which grew out of the radical protests of the sixties, proposes that technological leaps occur in response to social change and are arbitrary, not pre-determined as Kondratieff would posit.

Wired Ideology, as personified by Marshall McLuhan, follow the school of thought called Technological Determinism: that is, that the history of the development of society can be explained by a series of technologies. The technology changes our psychological relationship with the outside world, which in turn influences how we develop new technologies. Thus technological leaps are driven by the technology itself.

Technological innovation can be technology driven, but whether it is used or not will be determined by both economic and social factors and will have to survive in the marketplace.

For example, a psychologist is currently working at Hewlett Packard on researching how people interact with computers, how they use them and what for. He is specifically looking at how people use voice mail. HP 'techies' have to date been working on the assumption that people want to keep their voice mail records, (as with e-mail), and have therefore been developing database storage systems which would enable easy storage and retrieval of the huge amounts of information generated by voice mail. On research the psychologist discovered that people do not want to store. Thus if the product had gone into production, time and money would have been wasted on producing a product that performed tasks not required by the user. To some extent companies can influence what their customers want and need through efficient marketing (who would have expected a computer in every home ten years ago?), but a new technology also has to be acceptable culturally.

back to top

History of the Telephone

As stated previously, the Internet uses the technology of the telephone as one of its building blocks. Similarly, the development of the telephone built on the technology of telegraphy.

Telegraphy

Telegraphy was developed in the 1830's, and in 1844 there was the first public demonstration of Morse's electric telegraph, from Baltimore to Washington. Electrical pulses were sent down a wire in a binary code of 'dots and dashes' called Morse code. The worlds first telegraph line opened between Paddington and the City in 1839.

The need for communicating at long distance arose from Britain's' need to control its empire, Britain thus dominated world telegraphy networks.

Telegraphy revolutionised speed of communication: that which had previously been as fast as a horse was now almost instantaneous (providing you were in the right place: at a receiver!). To begin with messages travelled at 1.5 words/minute: a miracle at that time, slow compared to today's speeds of up to 150 million bits/sec.

Many technical problems beset the development of telegraphy, all of which were gradually overcome. Overland lines were prone to breaking and earthed if they got damaged and wet, undersea cables leaked, the signal was weak and needed booster stations at regular intervals for any great distance, there were also problems with induction: conversation 'leaking' from adjacent wires. These technical problems were overcome. With much money to be made for those providing the solutions, Lord Kelvin made his fortune out of developing a way of insulating undersea cables.

In 1858 the first Atlantic telegraph cable was completed but failed after 26 days due to the voltage being too high: not until 1866 was there permanent communication by wire from the United States to Europe with the completion of the second Atlantic cable.

However, one of the key problems with telegraphy was that it was very expensive: capital equipment costs were high and skilled labour was needed to code and decode messages. No matter how many of the other technical problems of telegraphy had been solved, this problem was inherent in the technology itself and there needed to be a new leap in technology to solve this problem.

back to top

Development of Telephone Technology

The telephone was invented by Alexander Graham Bell, who was researching into ways of enabling deaf people to hear. The first words spoken on telephone were on March 10th in 1876, when Bell spoke the first complete sentence transmitted by variable resistance transmitter ... "Mr. Watson, come here. I want you!" 2 (Webb and Associates, http://www.webbconsult.com/timeline.html, 1998)

As Bell said himself, the great advantage that the telephone had over telegraphy was that it could be used by anyone, as "all other telegraphic machines produce signals which require to be translated by experts, and such instruments are therefore extremely limited in their application, but the telephone actually speaks, and for this reason it can be utilised for nearly every purpose for which speech is employed" 3 (Flammger, 1995)

The telephone itself suffered from problems which were overcome as the technology developed.

In 1879, telephone subscribers began to be designated by numbers rather than names - as a result of an epidemic of measles. A Lowell, Massachusetts doctor, concerned about the inability of replacement exchange operators to put calls through because they would not be familiar with the names associated with all the jacks on the switchboards, suggested the alpha-numeric system of identifying customers by a two- letter and five-digit system. Problems with the telephone also occurred when other applications of electricity flourished, especially trolley cars and street lamps. Lightning also interfered with the system, wreaking havoc on the lines. Long-distance service was established and grew in the 1880s using metallic circuits. A battery system developed by Hammond V. Hayes in 1888 allowed a central battery to supply all telephones on an exchange with power, rather than relying upon each unit's own battery.

The first telephone invented used one wire, from telephone to telephone. To establish networks, it was more efficient to have each phone connected to a central exchange where the caller could have their line connected to the receivers line, rather than having a wire going from each telephone in the network to each other telephone in the network. At first this process was done manually, by village switchboard operators. This obviously was more expensive than an automatic system would be, and was also subject to other problems that come with human operation of machinery. In fact, the electromechanical selector switch was invented in 1889 by Almon Strowger, a Kansas City undertaker, who was motivated by the fact that his business was suffering because the local telephone switchboard operator failed to put his calls through as she was a friend of a business competitor. The Strowger switch was a major advance in replacing the human switchboard operator. The switch was not widely used to begin with due to the expense of producing it.

back to top

Development of the British Telephone System

To begin with, the telephone was used primarily as a tool of government and business. Telephones enabled people to control others at a distance: Britain oversaw their colonies, and Industrialists were able to manage their factories and suppliers at a distance if necessary. Today the telephone is still used for those purposes, as is the Internet, but both are also used for personal communications. What started as a relatively expensive business tool has, through mass marketing and the consequent fall in price, become also a tool for personal use.

There were early experiments with using telephone for other purposes: in Hungary in the 1890's telephone was used as a radio is today: for mass broadcasts of music: it was dubbed 'the pleasurephone'. The problem this incurred was that the sound transmission was of poor quality. How technologies come to be used is affected both by their efficiency at the task and also by the surrounding culture. For example, radio transmission was originally developed to be used as long distance telegraphy, i.e. as one to one interactive communication, especially as ship to shore communication. It was only later used as one to many passive communication, developing through hobbyists building their own radio sets and then commercial stations being established by advertisers. Similarly early experiments such as the one above were made in different applications of the telephone. Today the internet is being used not only for interactive communications, both one to one and one to many, but it is also being used for real time broadcasting of sound and vision.

The telephone was used primarily for business purposes because that was seen as the most likely way that telephone companies could make a profit. In Britain in the 1890's and 1900's the telephone was seen as a 'business appliance'. Independent networks of telephones were being established by private companies all over Britain for business purposes: for example, in Glasgow there were separate telephone exchanges for doctors, lawyers, stockbrokers and tradesmen. Eventually these were interlinked forming The Douglas Exchange. In 1890 the total number of British subscribers was approx. 25,000, but most of them could not connect with each other as they were connected to different exchanges. It became apparent that the benefits of having a telephone were inherent in the network you had access to - the more people you could access, the greater benefit of the telephone. The cost of having a telephone at the turn of the century was £10, prohibitive to most people and unattractive to most subscribers because of the low connectivity. Today in Britain, the number of households with access to the Internet is 960,000 4 (as of June 1997, National Opinion Poll Research Group 1997). At present therefore there is little connectivity with other Britons, but there is great world connectivity, especially with North America. Internet use will become more widely spread in Britain as cost of linking up falls due to market competition.

There was little incentive for telephone companies to invest in the networks infrastructure or co-ordinate their networks, due to an Act of Parliament which was passed in 1869 giving the Postmaster General the exclusive right to set up and operate inland telegraphs. In 1890 the post office established that the telephone was a telegraph in the sense of the 1869 Act, thus ensuring that they had the right to seize the assets of private companies who did invest in telephones and telephone networks. The Post Office was also loathed to invest in the system as it had put a lot of investment in its telegraph systems.

The National Telephone Company was established in 1889 and made a 30% profit p.a., which it did not invest in infrastructure, and in 1889 announced that there were enough telephone lines in Britain. The telephone system in 1898 reached an all time low, with a parliamentary committee finding that: 'the telephone service was not of general benefit either in the United Kingdom at large or even in those limited portions of it where exchanges survived.' 5 (Zorkoczy, P and Campbell, D, 1977, p25)

Today there are similar problems with lack of investment in infrastructure through shortsightedness.

In 1898 state intervention was required, taking the development of the British telephone network out of the hands of private investors, who were failing to invest in infrastructure. The Post Office was therefore provided with £2 million to enable it to compete with private enterprise, private companies were not allowed to set up exchanges in new areas without the consent of the post office, and 13 local authorities set up their own telephone exchanges. one of these: Hull, remains today. In 1912 private telephone companies were taken over by the government.

In the 1920's private companies offered to take over the telephone system because it was failing. In 1929 manufacturers of telephone equipment were complaining that the GPO was living hand to mouth, being starved of capital with which to finance long term development, and by the 1950's it was obvious that the system needed to be funded on a long term and not year to year basis. The telephone network had gone from private ownership to state ownership but the problem of investment had still not been solved.

In 1961 the Post Office was given wider control of its finances, separating its' income from the Treasury. this improved business and other service but investment was still low. In the 1970's, the telephone network was used for social and political reasons which had nothing to do with the provision of an efficient telephone service: namely to subsidise British Industry by creating jobs in he electrical and manufacturing sectors, and to keep unemployment figures down. Britain has had problems in the past because the focus has been on ownership rather than service delivery: The debate has tended to focus on whether the telephone network should be state or privately owned, not what would deliver the best service.

'Government regulation of economic activity is very often justified by appeal to a lengthy series of non- economic arguments of spurious validity. Telecommunication regulation is no exception.'6 (Meyer, Wilson, Baughcum, Burton and Caouette, 1980,)

In 1981 British Telecom was privatised for the same reasons the telephone network was originally nationalised in 1912, i.e. poor services and lack of investment in the infrastructure. It was hoped that privatisation would result in competing telephone companies providing better services at lower prices for the consumer. The privatisation also had the side effect of releasing huge amounts of money from the sell off of BT which went to the treasury. In the last few years cable telephone has been introduced as well, providing some competition to BT. However, the cable companies still have to lease lines from BT.

Today, the British telecommunications industry is regulated by OFTEL, a non-ministerial Government department, which is 'independent of ministerial control' (Oftel, http://www.oftel.gov.uk/)7. OFTEL's purpose is to ensure fair competition between telecommunications providers and to deal with complaints about telecommunications services or apparatus. Their website states that OFTEL's goal is:

'for customers to get the best possible deal in terms of quality, choice and value for money. Our main means of achieving this is by promoting effective and sustainable competition. More competition will lead to real choice - three or more operators or service providers knocking at the door offering a full range of services at a price to suit the customer.'

It is hard to see how real competition can occur whilst all service providers are reliant on renting BT's infrastructure.

The telecommunication (especially cable and mobile phones) infrastructure in Britain is also being built by American and global corporations. Eva Pascoe in The Independent in October 1997 said:

'This is too haphazard, driven by commercial considerations without a thought for the implications of development of society as a whole. We need planners who can ensure equal (wiring) coverage of the countryside, city and less economically attractive areas....national and supra-national planning is needed to provide the best value solution...'

As Eva Pascoe says, there needs to be a co-ordinated and fair development of the telecommunications infrastructure. The following quote, written in 1973 in 'The British Telephone System' Open University, applies as much today as it did then:

'Our study of the development of the system suggests that an overall rather than piece meal approach is essential for building up an efficient and economically viable telephone service'. 8

(Zorkoczy, P and Campbell, D, 1977, p25)

back to top

Monopolies

A telephone network forms a natural monopoly - that is, when telephone networks were originally set up, such as in Glasgow, subscribers will gain the most benefits from joining the larger network. The benefits of a telephone are not all inherent in the hardware, but are primarily in the network that the hardware provides an access point to. The bigger the network, the greater the benefits. Thus, in Glasgow, the separate networks for doctors, lawyers etc. joined together forming the Douglas Exchange, which eventually will have joined the nationalised network of telephones.

As we saw above, Britain has moved from private ownership of separate telephone networks, to state ownership, back to 'private' ownership of one network with state regulation. All solutions have been wanting due to lack of investment in infrastructure and lack of foresight: the best solution has been Americas AT&T, which was a state regulated private monopoly, led by people with the foresight to realise that investment in the infrastructure was a prerequisite of success of the network and service as a whole.

In Britain, the system has been hamstrung through lack of vision and use of the telephone industry (as with other state owned industries) for solving economic and political problems which had little or nothing to do with the provision of a good telephone service.

The future of Internet access in Britain is dependent on the telephone network. With respect to hardware, there is a need for investment in infrastructure so that we can have broad bandwidth cables not only under our streets but from our streets to our homes, and price wise, if we are to compete on an international basis on the net we need free local calls as in America. This would benefit the country as a whole as it would enable us to compete for business on the web all over the world

The problem is who will pay for the investment this requires? Huge investment in infrastructure requires long term vision: longer than the 4 year term of government office. Private companies are unlikely to pour money into investing in something which will in the long term benefit the country as a whole but maybe not their company in particular.

The best solution so far appears to be that of AT&T in America which was a regulated private monopoly. AT&T foresaw that the benefits of a telephone were inherent in the network it was connected to: the bigger the network, the greater the benefits. In the early twentieth century America was the richest nation on earth, and also had the right to the Freedom of Speech in its constitution. This climate, together with the leadership of AT&T, enabled AT&T to realise that the telephone was not just a 'business appliance' but also had the potential to be a mass produced consumer good for personal use.

Today the telephone network today is an integral part not just of our economic but also of our social welfare. It's use has stretched far beyond that of what it was originally developed to do: serve business and allow people to talk to each other in different rooms of the same house! It affects our personal relationships just as much as it affects our economic activity. As such, I believe that the telephone network of Britain needs money invested in its infrastructure by a state which has a long term vision of the future. A government which is wanting to use the 'Internet' to fix problems such as a failing education system will itself fail. Britain is well placed to compete in the global web industry through its history of internationalism and through its skilled computer and web workforce, but this can only be achieved with the support of an efficient telecommunications infrastructure.

In the next section I will look briefly at how the telephone has affected society.

back to top

The Effect of the Telephone on Society

The telephone has had a huge impact on society: economically, politically, and socially.

One of the reasons for the enthusiasm for the telephone was that it facilitated

'the efficient organisation and operation of large-scale, integrated mass production manufacturing enterprises... No previous mode of communication was able to combine the latter's speed with its simplicity and economy of operation'. 9 Aronson, Sidney, 1971

It enabled industrialists at the turn of the century to control their suppliers and workforces at a distance, enabling mass production plants to be established. It has played an integral part in enabling the establishment multi- national and global corporations.

Patterns of population distribution have been affected by the telephone. The mass production centres of the manufacturing industry concentrated workforces around the factories: in cities. As cities have grown, the population working in them has moved outwards, to the suburbs.

Today's global demands for computer networking, entertainment and communication means that global networks are being developed which are rapidly transcending national boundaries. The quote below was written in 1945, about telephones, but is could just as well have been written today about the internet:

'I may analogise the present situation in the communication field to that in ocean transportation in the past. there was a time when the master of a vessel was in effect the diplomatic representative of his country in contact with the governments in the foreign ports where he touched. That situation is not unlike our present situation in which the management's of international communications companies are in a position to shape our international communications policy through their ability to negotiate and make arrangements with the representatives of foreign governments. Managers of communications companies may at times be in the position of serving interests other than their own national interest.10 (Sampson, Anthony 1973)

The telephone has made a huge impact on our social interactions and our family relationships. Hubert Casson told only half the story when he said:

"Who could have foreseen what the telephone bells have done to ring out the old ways and to ring in the new; to ring out delay and isolation and to ring in the efficiency and friendliness of a truly united people?11 (Casson, H,1910)

The telephone has in some instances lessened isolation and in others created it, through enabling people to live apart, multi-generational living patterns becoming a thing of the past, now that people can leave their families but still retain some contact wherever they are in the world.

The telephone brings its own form of communication: you can hear emotion, but you cannot see the person's body language, it is easier to lie in a letter than on the telephone, easier to lie on the telephone than face to face, and easiest of all to lie on a website or in e-mail!

Here, Colin Cherry writes about the difference between telephone conversations and writing letters:

'Technically speaking, the two are closely alike, but socially they are utterly different... The telephone... is not only personal, in the sense that private letters are, but it has far greater significance, for the simple reason that human conversations are possible. Conversation is an essential human relationship. When you speak to someone on the phone, even a stranger, you hear far more than factual premeditated messages; you respond to tones of voice, to moods; you may interject a remark; it is a person you are involved with, not a machine.

Though unseen, you continue to gesture, to smile or frown, and move your hands; you are conversing, linked, 'involved' and 'committed'. You can discuss, persuade, enquire, argue and perhaps reach agreement in a few minutes, in a personal way. Rapid converse, enquiry, resolution are the powers offered by telephones to organisations.' 12 (Cherry, Colin, 1974)

People answer the telephone because it rings, not because they actually want human contact at that moment. A telephone call in the middle of the night induces anxiety and fear. It has been noted that older generations experience anxiety when the telephone rings, as they dread it bringing bad news. As J.Brooks said:

" The telephone's actual ring---- more, perhaps, that any other sound in our daily lives--- evokes hope, relief, fear, anxiety, joy, according to our expectations. The telephone is our nerve-end to society." 13(Brooks, J., 1976)

Here is an example of how far the telephone can intrude into our lives:

'Some years ago in New Jersey, a mad sniper killed thirteen people then barricaded himself in a house while he shot it out with the police. An enterprising reporter found out the phone number of the house and called. The killer put down his rifle and answered the phone. 'What is it?' he asked. 'I'm very busy.'14 (Carpenter, Edmund, 1976)

back to top

The Effect of the Internet on Society

The internet extends the impact of telecommunications, not just for sound but also data transmission and visual information. Whereas the telephone only enables one to one communication, the internet extends this to one to many. E-mail is the cheapest way to communicate on the internet, but video conferencing and real-time broadcasts also use the internet. The cheapness and availability of access is growing all the time, and the Internet has the potential of enabling even very small businesses to reach a global market.

The internet enables fast and efficient communication anywhere on earth, so enables the new 'information workers' created by the internet to work from virtually anywhere. The telephone was a key point in the shift from 20th century craftwork/artisanship to factory work, as it supported creation of centralised workplaces. The internet in its turn may reverse this pattern, where people choose to live in places not because of how close to work they are, but for other reasons. The new information workers will have a freedom of movement never seen before.

Today's global demands for computer networking, entertainment and communication means that global networks are being developed which are rapidly transcending national boundaries. In transcending national boundaries the internet challenges the legal, political and business systems all over the world.

The internet brings about entirely new ways of communication. The most frequent use of the Internet is e-mail, which has developed its own etiquette and ways of communicating emotions, and has brought about new ways of communicating with strangers.

E-mail lists are a good example of new ways of communicating being made possible via the Internet. Recently, on an e-mail list of multimedia workers in Bristol15(Underscore), a group of 6 people on the list sent each other (and, unfortunately, everyone else on the list) e-mail about a particular website, resulting in everyone on the list receiving 32 e-mails in one day. The list was thus being used as a forum for conversation, but a conversation which involved only 6 people but which 40 or so people are forced to overhear. Although there is a difference between having a verbal conversation and a written one, with all the potential misunderstanding lack of visual signals can lead to, parallels can be drawn between old forms of communication and new: this example being remarkably similar to being forced to listen to rowdy lads in the pub.

back to top

Possible Futures: History of Convergence or Divergence?

The telephone, radio, television, computer and video games industries are converging: 'coming together', 'uniting', and forming the blood supply of the new information society. They are bringing together people and their ideas and their money, as has never been possible before. A group of anarchists in England can converse with Sandanistas in Mexico, a student in America can converse with a Russian hacker, but all these people have one thing in common: access to the hardware and software and knowledge required.

There is a danger that human society could become fractured, that the history of the Internet is not one of convergence of society but of divergence, where the information society is accessible to the few rich developed nations, and that other nations are left out in the cold. Global Corporations will have the power to make decisions affecting millions of people lives, surpassing laws of individual countries.

The other possibility is that developing nations, such as India, where there is a burgeoning software industry, become involved in new technology and the whole balance of power shifts focus to countries where labour is cheap i.e. the developing world. The new ease of communication will enable the world to become a global marketplace.

To finish, below are two sides of an argument used in a Seminar at the ICA with Shirley Williams and Christopher Price in 1982. Since then, information technology has struggled between the two sides of the argument, and will continue to do so. The growth of IT is beyond any nations control, we can only act to ensure that our nations benefit from the IT revolution through employment, benefit and privacy laws.

'IT will bring greater decentralisation, a reallocation of power from the hands of the few to the terminals of the many, more flexible working patterns and increased leisure.'

IT will bring more state control, a new class system based on access to information, invasion of privacy on an unprecedented scale, mass unemployment and social disintegration.'16

(Sieghart, Paul, 1982)

back to top

References

1. Nessman, Les, www-nmr.banffcentre.ab.ca/WPG/KonJob/html/kondratieff.html

2. Webb and Associates, http://www.webbconsult.com/timeline.html, 1998
3. Flammger, Dawne, 1995, A History of the Telephone,

http://cinemedia.net/SFCV-RMIT-Annex/rnaughton/TELEPHONE_FLAMMGER.html

From an address Bell made in 1878, as cited in Young,P, Person to Person: The International Impact of the Telephone. Cambridge: Granta Editions. 1991

4. National Opinion Poll Research Group, www.nopres.co.uk/, 1998

5. Zorkoczy, P and Campbell, D, The British Telephone System, Open University, 1977, p25

6. Meyer, Wilson, Baughcum, Burton and Caouette, Economics of Competition in the Telecommunications Industry, Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hain Publishers Inc1980
7. Oftel, www.oftel.gov.uk/about/oftguide.htm

8. Zorkoczy, P and Campbell, D, The British Telephone System, Open University, 1977, p25

9. Aronson, Sidney, The Sociology of the Telephone, International Journal of Comparative Sociology 12: 153-67, 1971

10. Paul Porter, Chairman of Federal Communications Commission, 1945 as cited in Sampson, Anthony, The Sovereign State, The Secret History of IT, Hodder and Stoughton, 1973

11. Casson, H., The History of the Telephone, Chicago: A. C. McClurg. 1910

12. Cherry, Colin, On Communication, Ancient and Modern', David Potter & Philip Sarre: Dimensions of Society: A Reader. London: University of London Press/Open University 1974

13. Brooks, J., Telephone: The First Hundred Years. New York: Harper & Row, 1976

14.Carpenter, Edmund, Oh, What a Blow that Phantom Gave me! St Albans: Paladin, 1976

15 Underscore, www.bristol.net/underscore/

16 Ed. by Sieghart, Paul, Micro-Chips With Everything, 1982, Comedia Publishing Group, P21

Bibliography

AT&T Home Page http://www.att.com/


Baldner, Joshua Graham
The Telephone: Impact and Expansion

http://www.beloit.edu/~amerdem/students/baldner.html

Chandler, Daniel

Using the Telephone
http://www.aber.ac.uk/~dgc/phone.html#A

Eby, Chuck

http://www.cybercomm.net/~chuck/phones.html

The Longwave and Social Cycles Resource Centre

http://www.1-888.com/longwave/

Media Communications Studies, Aberdeen

http://www.aber.ac.uk/~dgc/media.html

The Media History Project

http://www.mediahistory.com/

Suda, Hirokazu

Kondratieff Waves after 1970
http://www.sfc.keio.ac.jp/~s94246hs/study/sec2.html

Telstra Corporation
http://www.telstra.com.au/prod-ser/educdocs/educdocs/linknat.html

back to top