From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Apr 19 13:24:09 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p2/8.11.3) id i3JHO9c17461; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 13:24:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 13:24:09 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200404191724.i3JHO9c17461@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #193 TELECOM Digest Mon, 19 Apr 2004 13:24:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 193 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #429, April 19, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Getting Your Number Listed Deliberately (Fred Atkinson) Re: Getting Your Number Listed Deliberately (Tony P.) Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 (Tony P.) Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 (J Kelly) Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 (werner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu) Numbering Change for Mobile/Cellular in Israel April 20 (Joseph) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:42:05 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #429, April 19, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 429: April 19, 2004 Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by generous financial support from: ** ALLSTREAM: www.allstream.com ** BELL CANADA: www.bell.ca ** CISCO SYSTEMS CANADA: www.cisco.com/ca ** CYGCOM INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES: www.cygcom.com ** GROUP TELECOM: www.360.net ** JUNIPER NETWORKS: www.juniper.net ** PRIMUS CANADA: www.primustel.ca ** SPRINT CANADA: www.sprint.ca ** TELUS: www.telus.com ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Telcos Want More Time for VoIP Review ** Primus Buys Ottawa ISP ** Broadband Gap Reduced ** Quebec and Atlantic Centrex Rates Increase ** Aliant Workers Vote Strike Mandate ** Wireless Revenue Up, Wireline Down ** Nortel Faces Ontario Securities Probe ** Aliant Expands 1X Network ** Telcos File Deferral Account Projections ** Thermo Takes Over Globalstar ** More Spectrum for Wireless Broadband? ** U.S. Requires Label on Porn Spam ** Vancouver Wireless Developer Acquired ** MacCormack Joins Manitoba VoIP Provider ** Nominations Sought for CIPA Awards ** Look Revenues Slide ** Bell CEO and Cable Exec Debate Regulation ============================================================ TELCOS WANT MORE TIME FOR VoIP REVIEW: Aliant, Bell Canada, MTS, SaskTel, Telebec, and Telus have jointly asked the CRTC to allow more time-possibly until late June -- for the preparation and filing of evidence on how VoIP services should be treated by the regulator. (See Telecom Update #428) ** In a separate submission, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre says it needs more time to coordinate and present consumer views on VoIP issues. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8663/c12_200402892.htm#2a PRIMUS BUYS OTTAWA ISP: Primus Canada has agreed to buy Magma Communications, Ottawa's largest independent Internet services provider, in a cash and stock deal valued at $16 million. The acquisition gives Primus 30,000 new customers in Ottawa, Toronto, and Montreal. ** Last week Primus said that it had arranged a $42 million line of credit with an unnamed Canadian bank. BROADBAND GAP REDUCED: The Broadband for Rural and Northern Development (BRAND) pilot program's National Selection Committee has submitted its final report to the Minister of Industry. Projects funded through the $105 million BRAND program, together with other federal, provincial, and private sector initiatives, will reduce the number of communities without broadband access to about 1,700 by the end of 2005. ** The Committee strongly recommends a continued push to close the remaining gap and connect all Canadian communities by that date. http://broadband.gc.ca/pub/media/nsc/report/index.html ** The projects selected for implementation funding in Round 2 have now been announced. http://broadband.gc.ca/applications/applicants.html?round=4 QUEBEC AND ATLANTIC CENTREX RATES INCREASE: The CRTC has approved two proposals to increase Centrex rates: ** Telecom Order 2004-121 accepts Aliant's proposal to increase Centrex rates for customers wither fewer than 1,500 lines by $2/line/month. (See Telecom Update #424) www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-121.htm ** Telecom Order 2004-127 accepts Telus Quebec's restructuring of Centrex rates under a plan that will, on average, increase rates. The plan also adds term and volume discounts, and provides lower rates for customers who use Telus Quebec as their primary long distance carrier. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-127.htm ALIANT WORKERS VOTE STRIKE MANDATE: Members of two unions have voted for strike action against Aliant, and the 4,300 workers are now in a legal position to strike. Negotiations resume today. (See Telecom Update #425) WIRELESS REVENUE UP, WIRELINE DOWN: Statistics Canada reports that wireless revenue grew 13.6% to $8.2 billion in 2003, while wireline revenue fell 4.6% to $23.0 billion, on top of a 3.1% decline in 2002. Fourth quarter wireline revenue was down 9.3% from the same period in 2002. ** Total telecom industry revenue for 2003 was $32.6 billion, essentially the same as in 2002, but operating profits jumped 23.0% to $5.7 billion. NORTEL FACES ONTARIO SECURITIES PROBE: Nortel Networks faces yet another investigation into the past and pending restatements of its financial results. The latest agency to probe its financial statements is the Ontario Securities Commission. (See Telecom Update #428) ALIANT EXPANDS 1X NETWORK: Aliant Mobility says it now has 1X data technology throughout its digital service area. The company plans to spend $26 million this year to extend digital and 1X coverage to reach about 90% of the population of the four Atlantic provinces. TELCOS FILE DEFERRAL ACCOUNT PROJECTIONS: As instructed by the CRTC in PN 2004-1, the incumbent telephone companies have forecast the cumulative balances in their deferral accounts up to May 31, 2005. (See Telecom Update #426) ** Positive balances are projected by Bell Canada ($165 million), Telus ($52 million), MTS ($12 million), Telus Quebec ($1.6 million), and Aliant (just under $1 million). ** SaskTel projects a negative balance of nearly $12 million, and wants to be compensated by an adjustment to its price cap calculation. THERMO TAKES OVER GLOBALSTAR: Thermo Capital Partners has taken 81% control of Globalstar for US$43 million, and the satellite phone provider has emerged from bankruptcy protection. Globalstar now plans to launch spare satellites, set up a new earth station in Florida, and add fax capability. (See Telecom Update #410) MORE SPECTRUM FOR WIRELESS BROADBAND? The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has begun a proceeding on allowing wireless broadband services in the 3650-3700 MHz band, currently used by fixed satellite service earth stations. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246146A1.doc U.S. REQUIRES LABEL ON PORN SPAM: The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has ruled that pornographic spam e-mails must include the phrase "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT: " in the subject line, and that each message must include an "initially viewable" area that contains no sexually explicit text or images. The rule is effective May 19. VANCOUVER WIRELESS DEVELOPER ACQUIRED: MDSI, a supplier of mobile resource management software based in Richmond, B.C., is being purchased by @Road for US$86 million. MDSI's 350 employees will form a division of the California-based company. MacCORMACK JOINS MANITOBA VoIP PROVIDER: Bruce MacCormack, former President of CanWest Interactive and former President/COO of MTS Advanced, has been named Senior VP Corporate Development of Modern Digital Communications, a Winnipeg provider of IP-based long distance services. NOMINATIONS SOUGHT FOR CIPA AWARDS: Canadian Information Productivity Awards has opened its twelfth annual competition for innovative use of technology. Nominations are due May 31. www.cipa.com LOOK REVENUES SLIDE: Wireless carrier Look Communications says its 2003 revenue was $48.8 million, down from $56.5 million in 2002. The company had a net loss of $6.4 million, compared to a net loss of $2.7 million in 2002. BELL CEO AND CABLE EXEC DEBATE REGULATION: In the April Telemanagement, now available to online subscribers, BCE CEO Michael Sabia argues that government policy should recognize that consumers now use wireless and Internet services as substitutes for local phone service. Cable Association President Michael Hennessy disagrees, saying that regulatory changes should restrict the telcos' continuing monopoly power. ** Also in this issue: John Riddell on problems with implementation and support of IP-PBXs; Ian Angus on the arrival of next-generation wireless broadband; and Gerry Blackwell's report on tests of local IP phone services from Primus and Vonage. ** To read these exclusive reports, plus our extensive library of past issues, columns, editorials, and feature reports, subscribe now by calling 800-263-4415 x500 or go to http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-sub-online.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE) TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There are two formats available: 1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World Wide Web on the first business day of the week at www.angustel.ca 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to: join-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to: leave-telecom_update@nova.sparklist.com Sending e-mail to these addresses will automatically add or remove the sender's e-mail address from the list. Leave subject line and message area blank. We do not give Telecom Update subscribers' e-mail addresses to any third party. For more information, see www.angustel.ca/update/privacy.html. =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND CONDITIONS OF USE: All contents copyright 2004 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 500. The information and data included has been obtained from sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a competent professional should be obtained. ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Re: Getting Your Number Listed Deliberately Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 04:46:00 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net I had a voicemail number in Maryland several years ago. I was interested in getting the number for it listed in the book and called the local phone company (I was aware of a local group that was using a box on the same voice mail machine and had gotten it listed with directory assistance despite the fact the service was being offered by someone other than the local telco). I was told it could be done for about a three and a half dollar per month charge. I never actually did it, though. You should be calling the local telephone company business office in your area. You will likely get someone who doesn't understand what you are trying to do (demand to speak to a supervisor if this occurs). Find out what your local phone company would charge to do this. Anyone who looks into this should reply telling us what they found out. Good luck. Fred On 18 Apr 2004 16:03:18 -0700, _lr_@yahoo.com (Larry Rachman) wrote: > Yes, I know that usually the battle is to *keep* your number from > being listed, but that's not the case this time. > I have a phone number provided by an IP telephony provider, but it > does not come with a directory listing. Is there some way I can get > this number listed (as a business) by the various directory services > (both voice and 555-1212)? Surely, folks with blocks of DNIS lines > must have the same sort of issue. How is it done? > Thanks in advance, > Larry Rachman > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are correct; the 'default' on Bell > lines is be listed and pay extra for non-pub/non-listed numbers. On > toll-free 800, cell phones and VOIP the default is non-pub and they > do get a slight fortune to list someone. At one point I was going to > get an 800 number published; the service rep told me it could be done > but the cost was very prohibitive; I think $10 or $20 **per month** > on top of the cost for the service. Ask your service rep to set it up > for you if it really is worth it. I know Vonage does not make anything > off of it; it is strictly a 'pass through' (with Vonage as the agent) > to the 555-1212 and service bureaus. Outrageous? I thought so for my > puny, pitiful little thing; a seldom used 800 number. I've heard > someone at Vonage talk about an on-line directory of listed (Vonage) > numbers -- now about a quarter-million customers -- but I know nothing > about where it is going, if it is or not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Getting Your Number Listed Deliberately Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 05:16:43 GMT In article , _lr_@yahoo.com says: > Yes, I know that usually the battle is to *keep* your number from > being listed, but that's not the case this time. > I have a phone number provided by an IP telephony provider, but it > does not come with a directory listing. Is there some way I can get > this number listed (as a business) by the various directory services > (both voice and 555-1212)? Surely, folks with blocks of DNIS lines > must have the same sort of issue. How is it done? > Thanks in advance, > Larry Rachman > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are correct; the 'default' on Bell > lines is be listed and pay extra for non-pub/non-listed numbers. On > toll-free 800, cell phones and VOIP the default is non-pub and they > do get a slight fortune to list someone. At one point I was going to > get an 800 number published; the service rep told me it could be done > but the cost was very prohibitive; I think $10 or $20 **per month** > on top of the cost for the service. Ask your service rep to set it up > for you if it really is worth it. I know Vonage does not make anything > off of it; it is strictly a 'pass through' (with Vonage as the agent) > to the 555-1212 and service bureaus. Outrageous? I thought so for my > puny, pitiful little thing; a seldom used 800 number. I've heard > someone at Vonage talk about an on-line directory of listed (Vonage) > numbers -- now about a quarter-million customers -- but I know nothing > about where it is going, if it is or not. PAT] Somehow I'm not listed and I'm not paying for the privilege. My billing records with the RBOC have always been FUBAR, for the first year I had service when I got my place in Providence I never got a phone bill. Even to this day, even though I've changed the number, I'm still not listed. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Almost the same thing happened to me around 1976. Telco put a phone in for me, outside plant (installation) failed to pass the paperwork along to the accounting people who just assumed my number was still not assigned. Then about a year later, of no telephone bills for that number, some -- well, phreak -- making a long distance call dumped a fraud charge on me, on *that* number. The coin-rated charge came through to accounting, fell out of the system when accounting was unable to attach it to anyone. The charge went into a suspense ledger queue waiting to be investigated and some overworked fraud specialist eventually investigated it. Investigator dialed the number, fully expecting to receive a 'not in service or disconnected' message so they could charge it back to the originating telco and clear one more suspense item from the ledger of same. Instead the number rang. Number in service, but no accounting records. Fraud investigator called outside plant asking what happened to the paperwork. When the bill finally came it was for service for about *one year* from date of install to the present date, plus the usual month in advance, which at that point (in the billing cycle) was about two weeks into the billing period as usual. That stung ... I called the business office to make a sort of pseudo-complaint. My service rep, Miss Prissy agreed to remove the fraud charge which had gotten the whole thing started since it was not mine, but she would not remove the year of service for which I was obligated. "But, Mr. Townson, you *knew* what was happening, and did not correct it." I was not in a position to complain too loudly. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 05:13:52 GMT In article , jmayson@nyx.net says: >> Congress and the FCC, however, never determined exactly how to measure >> that 85%. FCC mass media bureau chief Ken Ferree said the plan is a >> way to make the switch as painless as possible but still get >> broadcasters to give up the analog frequencies. > The only way I can see this working is for the FCC to demand analog > sets stop being sold on a certain date, then a number of years later > demand TV stations drop their analog signals. > Today I have seen black and white portable sets for as low as $14.99! > We recently picked up some color 13" sets for under $100. There's no > mention anywhere that these sets will be useless before the end of the > decade. I wonder how many average consumers are aware of this? I can > see people buying analog TVs right up until the drop dead date. There'll still be plenty of TV's out there that are NTSC in 2009. Whatever replaces the bandwidth currently being used will be tuned by those sets. I've got a little 5" B&W unit with a variable tuner - I can pick up paging systems and public safety and interestingly, some cell traffic if I tune in just the right areas. Definitely a useful little device to have, if not just for watching television. The other thing to keep in mind about CRT based televisions is that over a period of about 5 years they're pretty much shot nowadays. I can already see my 5 year old set redding out. But then it gets heavy usage. Next set will in fact be a flat panel HDTV unit, I'm just waiting for the prices to bottom out, probably in another year or two as more content is offered. Put it this way, I can pull all the Providence and Boston stations no problem with a coat hanger antenna. Granted, the picture isn't always perfect but once we're talking a purely digital modulation with error correction I'll be able to pull probably 50% more stations with a basic antenna. The only thing that will be really nice about HDTV is the wide aspect ratio. But that will be for moot when Hollywood gets it's hooks in and decided what I can watch and where I can watch it. If it gets much worse I think I'm just going to toss the television entirely. I refuse to buy CD's until the RIAA stops it's warrantless war. If the MPAA gets any more power I just throw the finger to television and movies too. There are still books I haven't read. :) ------------------------------ From: J Kelly Subject: Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 11:10:49 -0500 Organization: http://newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@newsguy.com On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 18:33:59 GMT, jmayson@nyx.net wrote: >> Congress and the FCC, however, never determined exactly how to measure >> that 85%. FCC mass media bureau chief Ken Ferree said the plan is a >> way to make the switch as painless as possible but still get >> broadcasters to give up the analog frequencies. > The only way I can see this working is for the FCC to demand analog > sets stop being sold on a certain date, then a number of years later > demand TV stations drop their analog signals. > Today I have seen black and white portable sets for as low as $14.99! > We recently picked up some color 13" sets for under $100. There's no > mention anywhere that these sets will be useless before the end of the > decade. I wonder how many average consumers are aware of this? I can > see people buying analog TVs right up until the drop dead date. > John Mayson > Austin, Texas, USA > PS: > My message to the digest about digital TV might not have made sense. > I mentioned the low prices for televisions. My point was my family > and others I know are buying up these dirt cheap TVs. One for every > room! Why not? They're cheap. But in less than three years they're > going to be overpriced paperweights. I cannot believe the FCC is > allowing analog TVs to be sold today when their current plan to render > them useless in a little over 30 months. > John Very few people realize that there is a sunset on analog tv. Of those, very few actually believe it will happen. Congress forgets that the people that will be forced to buy a bunch of new tv's and convertors are the same people that elect them to office. I have never believed the Dec 31, 2006 sunset date for NTSC. Cellular still hasn't gone 100% digital, it seems odd to me that analog cellular seems to be getting a longer sunset period than analog television is getting (based on when digital cellular service first became available vs. when DTV became available). And people have more tv's than cellphones, I have two cellphones in my household, but have seven televisions. ------------------------------ From: werner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu () Subject: Re: Feds: No Analog TV by '09 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 16:26:41 UTC Organization: Hoeland quoting jmayson@nyx.net : >> Congress and the FCC never determined exactly how to measure that 85%. >> the plan is to make the switch as painless as possible but still get >> broadcasters to give up the analog frequencies. > The only way I can see this working is for the FCC to demand analog sets > stop being sold on a certain date, then a number of years later demand > TV stations drop their analog signals. (I'll interpreted this as "the only way this seems acceptable" rather than " ... this seems workable" -- and join you in "finding a hair in this soup" getting dished out, the way it appears here ...) > We recently picked up some color 13" sets for under $100. Heck, I've picked some up at that price with a built-in VCR capable of working at 220/110v AC and 12v DC ... and have one in the van and two on the boat now! :) > There's no mention anywhere that these sets will be useless before the end > of the decade. I wonder how many average consumers are aware of this? Hell no, (not to the extent that you-and-I were, at least ... and I refuse to believe that it will go over quite like that, as seems you do, too) > I can see people buying analog TVs right up until the drop dead date. Sure. And there will be an after-market market for gadgets to keep'em useful, converting the digital signal arriving on cable or over the air into an analog one ... plus there are all those VCRs and DVDs that "talk" to those TV's also ... ;-) > ...I cannot believe the FCC is allowing analog TVs to be sold today when > their current plan to render them useless in a little over 30 months. You want them to dictate that they be sold with some kind of sticker attached, alerting to that fact, right? Not "disallow" it (not that they could, I don't believe) ... I'd been wondering about that, too, and support that idea -- but guess who would like it *very little* ... ! :-) /"\ ASCII... ._. ||"We the sheeple...Don't Mess With Penguins!" \ / on Usenet /v\ || OPT-OUT is *E*V*I*L* X ANYTHING ELSE /( )\ || I KILL-file top-posters / ignore posts with / \ IS BLOAT !! ^^ ^^ || only quoted text in the first screen... ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Numbering Change For Mobile/Cellular in Israel April 20 Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 19:44:45 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom As of April 20, 2004 Israel's mobile telephone numbering will change. All mobile numbers will change from a three digit area code followed by six digits to a three digit area code followed by seven numbers. Also all the mobile operators, Cellcom, Pelephone and Orange will have a single code for each operator changing from the multiple codes presently in use. Basically the new 7 digit number will be composed of the last number of the old area code added to the old number to make the new number. The new code layout will officially go into affect on 1 November 2004, but up til that time there will be permissive to use either the old or new numbering. Pelephone is the exception (since their area code is 050.) http://www.wtng.info/wtng-ii.html#Israel remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. If you donate at least fifty dollars per year we will send you our two-CD set of the entire Telecom Archives; this is every word published in this Digest since our beginning in 1981. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #193 ******************************