From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Jul 1 16:43:54 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.3) id i61Khrg26909; Thu, 1 Jul 2004 16:43:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 16:43:54 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200407012043.i61Khrg26909@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 #312 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Jul 2004 16:44:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 312 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson NXTV Reaches 10,000 Hotel Rooms with IP-Based Entertainment (Monty Solomon) LG Mobile VX7000 Camera Phone (Monty Solomon) Verizon Wireless Launches Mobile Web 2.0 (Monty Solomon) The Weather Channel(R) Launches New Mobile Weather Service (Monty Solomon) Interception of E-Mail Raises Questions (Monty Solomon) Nextel Freqs, was Re: What Happened to the "2 Way" Craze? (Danny Burstein) Dialogic d21/h Board Driver Discs (Ace Ellis) MOS Calculation From Objective Data (Kalyan Sannedhi) Re: What Happened to the "2 Way" Craze? (Ron Chapman) Re: What Happened to the "2 Way" Craze? (Kalyan Sannedhi) Re: What Happens to Expired Wireless Numbers (Joseph) Re: Inet Domain Name, Help (Dave Garland) Re: Inet Domain Name, Help (SELLCOM Tech support) Re: Pizza; Can I Tell a Cell or Pay Phone Call From CallerID? (B Margolin) Re: Pizza; Can I Tell a Cell or Pay Phone Call From CallerID? (S Dorsey) Re: Domain Registration Recommendations (John Smith) Re: Domain Registration Recommendations (Steven J Sobol) Re: Domain Registration Recommendations (Richard Gozinia) 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: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:50:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: NXTV Reaches 10,000 Hotel Rooms with IP-Based Entertainment System NXTV Reaches 10,000 Hotel Rooms with IP-Based Entertainment System; Company Doubles Customer Base and Adds Orlando-Based Hotel Group LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 1, 2004--NXTV, Inc. the leading provider of digital IP-based entertainment solutions to the upscale hotel market announced today that it has reached a significant milestone of over 10,000 hotel rooms either installed or under contract. This major development comes as the company also announces the successful completion of an Agreement with Rosen Hotels & Resorts to install the NXTV digital entertainment system in all seven of its Orlando, Florida based hotels. NXTV, an IP-based interactive television system, delivers digital video-on-demand with PVR features such as fast-forward, pause, rewind and 24-hour save capability, high-speed Internet connectivity for both TV and Laptop, video games, branded hotel portal services, and satellite TV programming via DirecTV featuring an interactive TV guide. The company is also currently beta-testing its IPTV product which allows FTG to be digitally delivered to the guest-room over the same IP network as video-on-demand and other digital services. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=42282085 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:51:45 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: LG Mobile VX7000 Camera Phone Mobile Web 2.0(SM)-Enabled LG VX7000 Features Improved Graphics and Easier Navigation BEDMINSTER, N.J. and SAN DIEGO, July 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Wireless, operator of the nation's most reliable network, and LG Mobile Phones today announced the launch of the VX7000 camera phone. Available exclusively to Verizon Wireless customers, the VX7000 with its advanced features, such as a rotating lens, embedded flash and video messaging, helps capture all of life's moments as they happen. The VX7000's embedded VGA camera features bright LED flash, so mobile shutterbugs never miss a photo opportunity. With capability to capture video and still photography, the VX7000 gives users more freedom to record memories than ever before, and the rotating lens, flip image option and zoom control give photographers the chance to compose the perfect picture. Additional features like night mode, brightness adjustment, white balance adjustment, color effect adjustment and digital zoom capability, give customers the greatest flexibility with their photographs. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=42283836 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:53:04 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Verizon Wireless Launches Mobile Web 2.0 Enhanced Features and Improved Design Improves Customer Experience BEDMINSTER, N.J. June 30 /PRNewswire/ -- Verizon Wireless, the nation's leading wireless service provider, announced today the availability of Mobile Web 2.0 which allows customers to more easily access the latest news, tools and information content and read and send e-mail. Available for use on select phones, Verizon Wireless' Mobile Web 2.0 is packed with new features and enhancements, including new graphics, easier navigation, clickable headlines and premium content. The Mobile Web 2.0 home screen is VZW Today, which is an up-to-the-minute look at the news and hot stories that Verizon Wireless subscribers need to know. It also features several innovations, including a toolbar that allows customers to easily access the search tool, their favorites and bookmarks, or easily return to the homepage. Updated throughout the day, VZW Headlines stay current, providing the latest news and information that is just clicks away. From VZW Today, users can enter into various content categories in one click, including: * News -- Top national, business, world or political news * Weather -- Local and national weather forecasts and satellite images * Sports -- News, scores, standings and stories from the top professional and college sports * Entertainment -- Information about movies, music, TV, food and astrology * Business -- Business headlines, news and stock updates * E-mail -- Web-based e-mail services from the top Internet e-mail providers * More -- Shopping, travel, health, jokes and much more In addition to Verizon Wireless' content offering, customers can also access content from many branded content providers. Verizon Wireless customers can also access premium content that is available at an additional charge. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=42284448 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:56:15 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Weather Channel(R) Launches New Mobile Weather Service The Weather Channel(R) Launches New Mobile Weather Service On Mobile Web 2.0 (SM) From Verizon Wireless BEDMINSTER, N.J. and ATLANTA, July 1 /PRNewswire/ -- Planning outdoor activities this summer? Want to know the weekend weather forecast? Look no further than the new service from The Weather Channel Interactive on Verizon Wireless' new Mobile Web 2.0-enabled phones. Verizon Wireless, the nation's leading wireless service, and The Weather Channel (TWC), the nation's premiere provider of trusted weather information, announced today that weather information from The Weather Channel is available to subscribers of the newly launched Mobile Web 2.0 service. Verizon Wireless' Mobile Web 2.0 customers can receive current conditions and exclusive extended forecasts from The Weather Channel for 98,000 locations around the world -- from wherever they are. In addition to these important reports, customers can also view weather-related, regional news articles for the U.S., detailing the weather's impact on cities throughout the nation. The new application from The Weather Channel Interactive features vibrant graphics that more closely resemble those found on TWC's popular Web site, weather.com(R), which currently ranks as the most popular source of online weather information, the top news and information site and the tenth largest site on the Web according to Nielsen//NetRatings. Additionally, the enhanced application makes it even easier for customers to search for their favorite locations. Simply enter a zip code or city name or quickly browse through 18 major cities -- which are also identified by airport codes, making the search extremely convenient for business travelers. Regular travelers can also save their favorite locations in order to easily retrieve timely reports for their hometown, frequent business destination, weekend vacation spot and other cities of interest. Mobile Web 2.0 is self provisioning, eliminating the need for customers to call customer service or visit a Verizon Wireless store to sign up for the service. Customers simply register for Mobile Web 2.0 content right from their Mobile Web 2.0-capable wireless handsets. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=42288929 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 00:23:33 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Interception of E-Mail Raises Questions By MARK JEWELL AP Business Writer BOSTON (AP) -- In an online eavesdropping case with potentially profound implications, a federal appeals court ruled it was acceptable for a company that offered e-mail service to surreptitiously track its subscribers' messages. A now-defunct online literary clearinghouse, Interloc Inc., made copies of the e-mails in 1998 so it could peruse messages sent to its subscribers by rival Amazon.com Inc. An Interloc executive was subsequently indicted on an illegal wiretapping charge. An advocacy group said Tuesday's ruling by the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals opens the door to further interpretations of the federal Wiretap Act that could erode personal privacy rights. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=42268927 ------------------------------ From: Danny Burstein Subject: Nextel Freqs, was Re: What Happened to the "2 Way" Craze? Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 04:44:03 UTC Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC In Keith writes: >>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Am I correct that the 'walkie-talkie two >>> way feature' was not a Walkie-Talkie in the 'traditional' sense of using >>> a two-way radio as such (RF or radio frequency) signals but was actually >>> a speed dial type thing for one number on the cell phone which in >>> addition to being speed dialed was put on a handsfree type 'loudspeaker' >>> type thing? How did that Nextel feature actually work? PAT] > This is absolutely true MOST of the time. Nextel has implemented > something which I witnessed first hand a couple years ago. > In the event you are close by (determined by the cell site), the tower > instructs the radios to switch to a simplex radio frequency and then > the two phones DO communicate directly via RF. This is done so that > you don't tie up a channel unnecessarily. > How do I know this? I saw two people communicate within the same room > (one up an escalator, one below) using Nextel's phones. My frequency > counter (which was strapped to my belt) didn't register normal cell > frequencies when they talked, but frequencies in the business band > neighborhood of 450mhz. I tuned my handheld radio to the frequency, > and heard them talking. It's barely possible you bumped into a Nextel test, but highly unlikely ... Keep in mind that Nextel does NOT use the "regular" cellular frequencies. The way they set up their network was that they went around the country and gobbled up ownership (or a lease) of all sorts of local "land mobile radio" channels. So, for example, they'd approach the owner of East Cupcake Trucking and Pizza and get permission to use, yes, his 464 mhz radio channel. They'd make a similar deal with North Cupcake Bar and Grill at 459 mhz. And dozens and hundreds and thousands of others. And not just in the 400 mhz range. They then took Motorola's iDen protocol and used it to let them put plenty of individual radio conversations on what had been a single use channel. The problem here is that their usable frequencies skipped all around the dial with lots of gaps in between. Which makes building the base stations a big pain (instead of a single design and single antenna arrangement, they have to customize each base), and causes lots and lots of other headaches. Many, many, headaches. Hence they've currently got a very big lobbying effort in front of the FCC to make a *major* change in huge amounts of frequenices, bumping plenty of current users, so as to give Nextel a contiguous nationwide swath of spectrum. (A related problem and complaint is that Nextel, since it's often right next to a police channel, causes interference with Public Safety Frequencies. There's a LOT more to that story, though). So yes indeed, you may have been picking up a valid Nextel radio<->base<->radio conversation. NOTE that in the near future they will, indeed, be marketing radios that have direct radio <-> radio capability. (Again, remember that at this point in time, ALL Nextel communication have to route back to a base station and be retransmitted). This is to meet the demands of the public safety folk who *need* the two people in the basement, for example -- out of range of a base station -- to converse with each other. These new models (some are out in test locations) have a very limited range when in direct radio <-> radio mode. As a side note: the purists (read nitpickers with too much spare time) claim that Nextel isn't a cellular phone system since they don't use cellular frequencies or standard cell phone protocols such as GSM. But to everyone who walks around in the real world, Nextel walks, waddles, quacks, and sh-ts like a duck. _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] ------------------------------ From: ace2@acesplaces.com (Ace Ellis) Subject: Dialogic d21/h Board Driver Discs Date: 1 Jul 2004 09:46:59 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Looking for the 3 set dos discs for Dialogic for msdos ver 4.02 Thanks if you can help. Ace Ellis ------------------------------ From: Kalyan Sannedhi Subject: MOS calculation from objective data Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 13:10:17 -0500 Dear all, Is there a way to calculate MOS from obejctive data such as delay, jitter, jitter standard deviation, packet loss, loss burst, etc? We would like like to get subjective scoring from the objective data for the voice quality. Any pointers in the right direction will be greatly appreciated. TIA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 07:32:35 -0400 From: Ron Chapman Subject: Re: What Happened to the "2 Way" Craze? In article , Keith wrote: > In the event you are close by (determined by the cell site), the tower > instructs the radios to switch to a simplex radio frequency and then > the two phones DO communicate directly via RF. This is done so that > you don't tie up a channel unnecessarily. > How do I know this? I saw two people communicate within the same room > (one up an escalator, one below) using Nextel's phones. My frequency > counter (which was strapped to my belt) didn't register normal cell > frequencies when they talked, but frequencies in the business band > neighborhood of 450mhz. I tuned my handheld radio to the frequency, > and heard them talking. > As soon as I heard the conversation, I of course realized this was illegal, Is it? You're thinking of cell phone conversations. I haven't read the law word for word, so my immediate question here would be, is it in fact illegal for you to listen in on a Nextel "Direct Connect" conversation? Especially if it's as you describe above, and not using any part of the cellular system? One wonders if there isn't a loophole there whereby the Nextel stuff doesn't fit into the law ... ------------------------------ From: Kalyan Sannedhi Subject: Re: What Happened to the "2 Way" Craze? Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 11:49:17 -0500 May be because almost every service provider is offering in-network calling for free. Proprclr wrote in message news:telecom23.308.8@telecom-digest.org: > Last year, it seemed like everybody was using the 2 way "walkie > talkie" feature on Nextel phones (probaly others as well), and I would > see a lot of "2 waying" going on on busses, in supermarkets, etc. For > the past few months, there seems to have been a sharp decrease in > people "2 waying", and I rarely see it anymore. I live in LA, > so I see plenty of people using cellphones, but nobody seems to use the > walkie talkie feature anymore. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Am I correct that the 'walkie-talkie > two way feature' was not a Walkie-Talkie in the 'traditional' sense of > using a two-way radio as such (RF or radio frequency) signals but was > actually a speed dial type thing for one number on the cell phone > which in addition to being speed dialed was put on a handsfree type > 'loudspeaker' type thing? How did that Nextel feature actually work? > PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: What Happens to Expired Wireless Numbers Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 07:49:05 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.NONOcom On 29 Jun 2004 08:29:15 -0700, internist9@yahoo.com (internist) wrote: > I was just curious to know what happens to the phone numbers once a > wireless plan expires or a customer terminates the contract. Are those > assigned to some other customers later? And most importantly how much > time does it take? This information will be useful to me as number > portability act doesn't work with the same carrier. If my plan with > Sprint expires and I have bought phones and numbers from another private > company for the same carrier (needs new activation); can I let the > current numbers expire and then maybe request them back? Once a number is disconnected the number goes back to the company that originally had that numbering space allotted to them. Depending on whether they are running into a lack of numbering space the old number could remain unassigned for 90 to 180 days before it was reassigned. As far as getting an old number back to use with the same service the company *might* or might not do it for you depending on their policies. TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > If you go to Sprint and say "I will sign this new contract for two > years with you *if and only if* you will give me my old number (from > earlier contract, etc)" I cannot imagine they would not accomodate > you. PAT] Then again it may make a difference *how* valuable the old customer was. Do they do over $100 a month in charges or are they a $20 a month customer. That may make a difference. remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply ------------------------------ From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: Inet Domain Name, Help Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 23:36:09 -0500 Organization: Wizard Information It was a dark and stormy night when Ron Reaugh wrote: > if one owns xyzabc.com then does one own automatically > all subdomains off xyzabc.com Yes. Most often they are used to differentiate between servers or services. ------------------------------ From: SELLCOM Tech support Subject: Re: Inet Domain Name, Help Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@sellcom.com Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 07:14:34 GMT Ron Reaugh posted on that vast internet thingie: > What exactly is a registerable Internet domain name and how does that > relate to subdomains? For instance if one owns or is renting > xyzabc.com then what exactly is jkl.xyzabc.com? I understand that the > jkl is known as a subdomain. But is the complete entity > jkl.xyzabc.com something that is independently registerable from > xzyabc.com? OR if one owns xyzabc.com then does one own automatically > all subdomains off xyzabc.com in Internet domain name space? I guess > the question boils down to whether '.' is a special and > non-registerable character below the TLD level and therefore the > registerable domain name is that entity in the right most portion of > the name including one and only one '.' which preceeds a valid TLD? Well if you own the domain then you can set up your dns how you want (assuming you have it hosted or parked etc). for example, I have wwwdomain.biz . Now it is generally automatic that a host will have www.wwwdomain.biz but I could add about any name I wanted. Say if I had five machines I wanted to use with my domain, assuming I had the static IPs (anyone else remember when they would give you a class C when you signed up for your 64k ISDN?) You could make bill.wwwdomain.biz and george.wwwdomain.biz or houston.wwwdomain.biz etc and etc.... generally I would only do that if I had a separate computer for each one. Also, usually mail.wwwdomain.biz would be the MX for email if you were doing that. The big question here is what exactly do you wish to do? and why? (if that is not inappropriate for me to ask). Steve at SELLCOM www.wwwdomain.biz (I can't believe that domain was available and just sitting there for the taking!) http://www.sellcom.com Discount multihandset cordless phones by Siemens, AT&T, Panasonic, Motorola Vtech 5.8Ghz; TMC ET4000 4line Epic phone, OnHoldPlus, Beamer, Watchguard! Brick wall "non MOV" surge protection. Mini-Splitter log splitter! If you sit at a desk www.ergochair.biz you owe it to yourself. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Personally, Steve, I think you made a serious mistake getting a domain in the '.biz' area. Did you know for example, that Spam Assassin automatically gives a very bad, very high point score to any '.biz' name showing up anywhere in a text file? For example, my own Spam Assassin automatically will give me a negative score on this issue of the Digest when it goes out in the mail because of the references to '.biz' in your message, as incidental as the mention may have been. People whose mail otherwise runs close to falling in the spam bucket will lose this issue of the Digest as a result. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Pizza ... Can I Tell a Cell or Pay Phone Call From CallerID info? Organization: Looking for work Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 01:05:37 -0400 In article , Keith wrote: > BTW, Pizza Hut for a long time had one of the most comprehensive > reverse-lookup phone number databases in the world. They correlated > information from a number of public sources, past customer calls, etc. I thought it clever when I called one of my local taxi companies, and they knew the pick-up address without my having to tell them. They had a database of past customer calls, and correlated it with the CallerID. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Our taxicab company here in Independence does something similar. With caller-ID and a cross reference directory they match addresses and names on their customers (including me). PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Pizza ... Can I Tell a Cell or Pay Phone Call From CallerID info? Date: 1 Jul 2004 09:56:13 -0400 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Keith : >> Oh, and any time a call comes in with ID blocked have the phone >> company turn on 'privacy manager' so the call never even reaches you >> unless the person dials back with the ID unblocked. PAT] > Ummm. If I call a pizza shop from my blocked cell phone, like I did > last Friday, and they reject my call, I'm calling a different pizza > place. If you call a pizza shop through an 800 number with your blocked cell phone, they will not reject your call but get complete information about the source in spite of the blocking. Blocking caller ID does NOT DO ANYTHING about ANI. Since 800 service is billed to the receiver, the receiver needs to have detailed information for billing purposes anyway. Relying on caller-ID is foolish because it is so often blocked and is also often incorrect. Your chances of reliable data with ANI are much better although in the cases of calls from PBXes it may well give you the number of the outgoing PBX trunk rather than anything useful and your database may need to be set up to reflect this. --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ From: John Smith Subject: Re: Domain Registration Recommendations Date: 1 Jul 2004 02:08:32 -0500 Reply-To: None On 28 Jun 2004 13:14:04 -0700, rayta@msn.com (Ray Normandeau) wrote: > GoDaddy.com > Read their anti-spam policy. > They are serious. No they aren't. They're all talk and very little action. I've notified them of numerous major spammers (using domains registered through Go Daddy), using their proper reporting procedures. They have, in all cases, done exactly NOTHING. So, spammers can disregard all that marketing bullshit, and continue to get their cheap spamming domains at Go Daddy, without any serious fear that ANY action AT ALL will be taken. If someone is aware of a recent case where Go Daddy has actually taken action against one of their spamming registrants by canceling their domain, I'd like to hear about it. Secondly, since we're on the subject, Go Daddy has absolutely pathetic customer service. It wasn't always this way mind you, but their popularity and relentless pandering to the low-priced domain market has not been handled well by them internally. Bob Parsons may be a fine individual, but his company is now out of control, and infested with stupid loads and other incompetents. While they still DO answer the phone and their e-mails, resolving certain problems is another thing. In short, the Go Daddy of today sucks. I would stay way clear of them. Becoming a so-called "reseller" (JOKE) using Go Daddy's "Wild West Domains" would be a formula for misery. In the event of a problem, I would be put in between my customer and a non-responsive registrar. No thanks. > Domains start at $4.95 Price isn't everything. This will become clear to Go Daddy customers after the first time you have a problem there that needs resolution. My opinion only, based on personal experience ... John Smith ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Domain Registration Recommendations Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 00:00:43 -0500 John Smith wrote: > marketing bullshit, and continue to get their cheap spamming domains > at Go Daddy, without any serious fear that ANY action AT ALL will be > taken. If someone is aware of a recent case where Go Daddy has > actually taken action against one of their spamming registrants by > canceling their domain, I'd like to hear about it. Google Groups should have plenty of evidence. Ben, GoDaddy's abuse dude, posts to NANAE and probably also NANAU, you can check there. They don't always act as fast as they should, and I attribute that to them being busy -- they register tons of domains. But they do a hell of a lot more to help curb abuse than any other registrar I can think of. > Secondly, since we're on the subject, Go Daddy has absolutely pathetic > customer service. It wasn't always this way mind you, but their > popularity and relentless pandering to the low-priced domain market has > not been handled well by them internally. Look, I'm obviously biased since I am a WildWestDomains reseller (WWD is GoDaddy's wholesale division) -- but I WOULD NOT be a WWD reseller if I hadn't been a satisfied GoDaddy retail customer first. I've never had problems with either side of the company. Perhaps you could relate some of your negative experiences with them. I'd be very interested in hearing them since as a reseller, I need to know where their weak points lie. (I already have a good handle on what most of their strong points are.) > Becoming a so-called "reseller" (JOKE) using Go Daddy's "Wild West > Domains" would be a formula for misery. In the event of a problem, I > would be put in between my customer and a non-responsive registrar. No > thanks. Post examples of this, please. I don't have trouble getting hold of them. I do generally call, rather than send email. > My opinion only, based on personal experience. And I definitely want to hear about some of your experiences. I've had no problems with either the retail side of the company OR the wholesale side. There are definitely some improvements I could suggest making, but you want non-responsive? Try Joker.com. I used to be a regular customer. They refuse to answer emails, and you can't even contact them without filling out an asinine form on their website. Call? Sure. Go ahead, if you speak German. I don't, and their offices are in Duesseldorf, Germany, anyhow, which makes it impractical to call from here in the USA unless you have good per-minute rates on international phone calls. I guess I feel the same about Joker as you do about GoDaddy ... JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Richard Gozinia Subject: Re: Domain Registration Recommendations Date: 1 Jul 2004 14:25:49 -0500 Reply-To: No Address On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 18:07:12 GMT, SELLCOM Tech support wrote: > I have received so much spam from buydomains.com / domaindiscover.com > (delivered by their email server) after repeated notice to them that I > am now looking for another registrar. It is our policy never to > support spammers or spam enablers. You'll find that many spammers send e-mail to addresses obtained by illegally mining the domain registry. Your registrar has a limited ability to stop this sort of abuse, since the domain registrant information is necessarily public. Many registrars have implemented some sort of challenge/response scheme using non-machine readable characters for whois lookups, specifically to prevent spammers from using automated scripts to scrape whois info from the registry database. Obviously, spam originating from a registrar itself would be an indication of some sort of serious misconduct or downright incompetence. Most of us hate spamming and spammers (I would favor the death penalty), but expecting registrars to be the gate keeper for denial or cancellation of domains to spammers is fairly inappropriate and simply unworkable, and comes from a position of ignorance. The best way to minimize your spam problem for your registered domains is to get control of your e-mail. You simply cannot publish an e-mail address anywhere -- in the whois database, on a web site, or in a newsgroup like this one, without spammers eventually harvesting that address with automated tools for addition to a spammer's database. After that happens the incidence of spam mail sent to that address will grow geometrically, as the list is sold and shared and sold again amongst spam gangs. This is a fact of life in today's Internet. Get used to it. The best defense against this problem is technological, not legal. You will not get relief by pestering your domain registrar, because that is not where the problem or the solution lies. Rather, if you have proper control of your e-mail server, mailboxes, and e-mail aliases, you need not suffer any significant spam problem. Believe it. Some Specific Suggestions: 1) Use a quality hosting company, where Spam Assassin or similar, possibly in combination with Real Time Block Listing, is incorporated into their mail server, and where you have complete and simple web-based control over aliases, mailboxes, and spam-thresholds for your domain(s). In most cases you cannot do this properly if you're relying on adjunct e-mail services provided by your domain registrar. 2) Use unique, disposable (but functional) e-mail addresses for your domain's public whois entries (the Registrant, Administrative, Technical and Billing Contacts). The first time, perhaps after a few months, you receive a spam sent to this unique address, e.g. "domains-admin@sellcom.com", login to your registrar's site and change the e-mail address of record for the domain to something else e.g. "domains-admininstrator@sellcom.com". Then, at your host's mail configuration webpage, set all mail sent to the original (now fouled) address ("domains-admin") to be bounced or discarded. My experience is that this only needs to be done every few months or so, as it takes awhile for the new whois e-mail address to be acquired and used by the spam gangs. 3) Use Javascript to obscure e-mail addresses displayed on your web pages. I just went to your site and I see that "support@sellcom.com" is placed on the home page in the clear (and you posted it in this group). I hope you're not blaming your registrar for spam you receive at that address, because I bet you're getting tons of it. That's because the spammers' robots will continue to harvest it as long as it's posted in the clear, as it is now. This is plainly unnecessary. Use simple Javascript techniques to prevent this, since spammers' harvesting robots can't (yet?) cope with Javascript. Check out these URLs for more info on obfuscating your addresses: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~trw/spam/index.htm http://www.december14.net/ways/js/nospam.shtml 4) Consider using cgi forms on your site for visitors to send you e-mail -- the web form accepts their mail and delivers it to you at a published, or an unpublished address. These scripts are freely available on the web. Do a Google search on "free web form scripts" and see what you end up with. 5) Avoid posting your real addresses in Usenet Newsgroups, unless they're munged. > After DAYS of reporting spam to them I get this garbage from them > wanting me to FAX them copies of any spam so they can build a case. > No one is *that* incompetent! Now *that* is ridiculous. It sounds like they're merely blowing you off because they think you've become an annoyance, and apparently you have :). They should simply be honest and say that, as a domain registrar, they are in no position to be the world's spam police. Frankly, you're barking up the wrong tree. They're probably jerks, however, so you probably should transfer your domains elsewhere (to another domain registrar). Just accept the fact that all e-mail addresses in use will eventually become spam-fouled. When the level of spam infestation exceeds your mail setup's filtering effectiveness, you invent another address, and route the polluted address to a blackhole, bounce it, or route it to an autoresponder which automatically generates a reply advising your correspondents that the address has changed to whatever. This is a basic advantage domain owners have over the unwashed masses suffering with ISP addresses, who cannot easily or conveniently change addresses. You can define a destination for mail without a specific alias (a catch-all) or just bounce or discard mail unless an alias IS specifically defined (this stops incoming spam of the increasingly common "dictionary" flavor [webmaster@, contact@, info@, john@, joe@, etc.]). > Does anyone have any recommendations for dependable domain registrars > that have stability, economy pricing etc, basic services, but do not > knowingly support spammers? I have quite a few domains registered. Blaming the average registrar for a spam problem is like blaming your dry cleaner because your paperboy can't "porch it." The connection is virtually non-existent. It's a non-productive waste of your energy to chew on your registrar over "the spam problem," and it belies a profound misunderstanding of the sources of spam and how spammers operate. They will always be able to get domains from someone, here or abroad, no matter what. Direct your energy where it belongs: get control of your e-mail service. When you do, your spam problem will disappear, as mine has. DG ------------------------------ 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. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #312 ******************************