From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Aug 16 15:05:09 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.3) id i7GJ58U23243; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:05:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:05:09 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200408161905.i7GJ58U23243@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 #382 TELECOM Digest Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:05:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 382 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #444, August 16, 2004 (Angus TeleManagement) Another Try at Inventing Superphone (Monty Solomon) Delete: Bathwater. Undelete: Baby. (Monty Solomon) Satellite TV Gains in Race Against Cable (Monty Solomon) Let the Web Games Begin (Monty Solomon) Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly (Steven J Sobol) Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly (DevilsPGD) Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly (John Levine) Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly (Fred Goldstein) Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly (Isaiah Beard) 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, 16 Aug 2004 10:14:49 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #444, August 16, 2004 ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE ************************************************************ published weekly by Angus TeleManagement Group http://www.angustel.ca Number 444: August 16, 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: ** MTS Reduces Allstream Income Forecast ** City Fido Boosts Microcell Revenue ** Nortel to Release Results This Week ** VoIP Interrogatory Responses Filed ** Bell Opens Wireless Research Centre ** MTS to Provide Ethernet Service for Competitors ** B.C. Cablecos Launch Internet Phone Service ** Cablecos Want R.O.W. in Kawartha Lakes Region ** VoiceIQ in Bankruptcy Protection ** BCS Global Buys VoIP Company ** Cisco Reports 41% Profit Jump ** Should VoIP Be Regulated? ============================================================ MTS REDUCES ALLSTREAM INCOME FORECAST: Manitoba Telecom has lowered its forecast for Allstream EBIDTA in 2004 by 12%, and has made corresponding reductions in Allstream's capital spending. MTS blames the "strong competitive environment" and "cost associated with workforce reduction." ** MTS had second quarter revenues of $314 million and a net loss of $6.7 million. The loss includes a $75 million payment to Bell Canada to settle a lawsuit related to the Allstream merger. (See Telecom Update #440) ** MTS says it will buy back $800 million worth of stock this year. CITY FIDO BOOSTS MICROCELL REVENUE: Microcell's City Fido wireline replacement program accounted for 42% of new postpaid subscribers in the second quarter, contributing to a net gain of 16,652 subscribers. Total revenues of $161 million were 16% higher than a year ago. The net loss was $11.2 million, including $2.2 million in costs related to Telus's purchase offer. ** CEO Andre Tremblay says that the Competition Bureau's review of the Telus offer may not be completed until October. NORTEL TO RELEASE RESULTS THIS WEEK: Nortel Networks says it will release preliminary results for the first two quarters of this year on August 19. Financial statements for these quarters and the year 2003 are to be filed by the end of September. ** Nortel has appointed a committee to investigate a suit by some shareholders claiming that the company issued false financial statements in 2003. (See Telecom Update #434) VoIP INTERROGATORY RESPONSES FILED: Last week, parties in the CRTC's VoIP proceeding (PN 2004-2) submitted replies to interrogatories posed to them by the Commission and by each other. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8663/c12_200402892.htm#5 BELL OPENS WIRELESS RESEARCH CENTRE: Bell Canada has launched a 5,000-square-foot Wireless Innovation Centre in Mississauga. During the last year, Bell has also opened research centres on IP/MPLS (Toronto), fibre optics (Montreal), and managed IP telephony (Ottawa). MTS TO PROVIDE ETHERNET SERVICE FOR COMPETITORS: The CRTC has given interim approval to an MTS Allstream tariff for Ethernet Access and Ethernet Transport Service, to be available to competitors as of August 26. www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Orders/2004/o2004-274.htm B.C. CABLECOS LAUNCH INTERNET PHONE SERVICE: Seven small cable TV companies in British Columbia owned by Mascon Communications have begun offering NetCall, a VoIP-based "second-line telephone service" developed by Vancouver-based Galaxy Telecom. CABLECOS WANT R.O.W. IN KAWARTHA LAKES REGION: Four small Ontario cablecos have asked the CRTC to order the City of Kawartha Lakes to allow them to build and operate a fiber optic line along the Victoria Rail Trail corridor between Fenelon Falls, Lindsay, and Bethany, on terms consistent with the principles in Decision 2001-23. www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2004/8690/8690_04.htm#200408353 VOICEIQ IN BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION: VoiceIQ, a Calgary-based developer of digital recording systems, has received creditor protection under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act. The company says it will transfer its assets to a subsidiary, then convert itself into a gas and oil production company to take advantage of $25 million in tax losses. BCS GLOBAL BUYS VoIP COMPANY: BCS Global Networks, a video conferencing supplier based in Richmond Hill, Ontario, has bought Toronto-based IPConvergence, which provides wholesale VoIP telephony. CISCO REPORTS 41% PROFIT JUMP: Cisco Systems had net income of US$1.38 billion for the three months ended July 31, 41% higher than the same period in 2003. Revenue of $5.9 billion was 26% higher than a year earlier. ** CEO John Chambers commented that customer optimism had declined compared to three months earlier, and this sparked a 10.6% fall in the price of Cisco stock. SHOULD VoIP BE REGULATED? Next month, the CRTC will hold public hearings on a proposed regulatory framework for IP- based telephone services. In this month's Telemanagement, Lis Angus identifies the real issues at stake in a contentious debate. Also in this issue: ** Planning for High Availability Networking ** Why Has PBX Acquisition Become So Complex? ** Bell Unveils IP Centrex Telemanagement is available by subscription only. To become a Telemanagement subscriber -- including unlimited access to Telemanagement's extensive online content -- visit the Telemanagement website or call 800-263-4415 ext 500. ============================================================ 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. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:12:09 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Another Try at Inventing Superphone STATE OF THE ART By DAVID POGUE HOW'S your relationship going? Do you find yourself baffled by your partner's opaque and quirky personality? Does the object of your affection keep you waiting when you're in a hurry? And above all, how well do the two of you communicate? No, not your personal relationship -- that's easy stuff. How's your relationship with your cellphone? As with humans, it's not easy to find a cellular companion that does everything you ask, cheerfully and reliably, and never lets you down. That doesn't mean manufacturers aren't trying, though. This year, communicators are all the rage: hybrid palmtop-phones with tiny thumb-driven keyboards for tapping out quick messages. It's quickly becoming obvious, however, that nailing down a no-compromise design isn't easy. For example, the Treo 600 is slim and gorgeous, but its screen is very small, and its keys are the size of carbon molecules. Or, if body image isn't so important, you could get a Pocket PC phone or a BlackBerry -- but then you feel as if you're talking into a VHS cassette. Then there's the Sidekick II, announced yesterday by T-Mobile ($300) and available in the fall. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/05/technology/circuits/05stat.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:23:07 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Delete: Bathwater. Undelete: Baby. By KATIE HAFNER LIKE many people these days, Jason Kim and Linda Crasco rely heavily on e-mail for their work, running a small educational research and evaluation company in Norwood, Mass. And like many people, they get plenty of spam, some 400 pieces of unwanted e-mail daily. So when their company, Systemic Research, first installed a spam filter 18 months ago, they were impressed by the noticeable reduction in the amount of spam they received. Several months ago, Dr. Kim and Mrs. Crasco were at a meeting when they ran into a program director they knew from the American Association for the Advancement of Science. She greeted them coolly. Puzzled, Dr. Kim and Mrs. Crasco asked what they might have done to offend her. As it turned out, she had sent Dr. Kim and Mrs. Crasco an e-mail message suggesting that they work together on a grant application. The application deadline had since passed, and the acquaintance was more than a little miffed that she had gotten no response from them. The two entrepreneurs were flabbergasted. Not only did they have no idea the e-mail had been sent, they had no idea that it had been snuffed out as junk. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/05/technology/circuits/05filt.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is the reason why I at least give a cursory glance at everything in the spam bucket before dumping it out. There is that occassional item in the spam bucket which should not be there. (I wish it was true the other way around also, but it is not.) And for all the improvements and sophistication which have gone into mechanical message filtering in recent years, the English language (at least) is just to complex in its actual usage to build in all the filter rules as perfectly as we would like. No matter what you are attempting to filter out, from occassional obscene words which have a jillion ways to spell them incorrectly and parse them inappropriatly in order to avoid the filter, through entire messages or entire web sites; like the millions/billions variations on DNA, there just is no way to catch it all without catching 'too much' in the processs. Nothing will ever replace the human brain, an equally complex and sophisticated organ in combating (either pro or con) the filters put up by machines, since, after all, humans were the inventors of those machines and their filters anyway. Even my eyes, in their cursory examination of 'what is spam' misses some of it now and then. If anything, I would rather impose on myself a little to avoid cases such as in this message from Monty. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:17:03 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Satellite TV Gains in Race Against Cable By SANDY SHORE AP Business Writer DENVER (AP) -- Thousands of Americans have defected to satellite TV as the providers have reported hefty gains while the cable industry has declined. Consumers likely will see aggressive marketing promotions in the next six months as companies jockey for customers, analysts say. The battle comes down to service and price: Cable companies offer video-on-demand features, high-speed Internet and, in some cases, telephone service. Satellite providers have all-digital service and channel packages that can be cheaper and broader than digital cable. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=43124562 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:40:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Let the Web Games Begin By Ann Harrison Among the unplanned international sporting events at the 2004 Summer Olympics could be the dodging of regional Internet broadcast restrictions and the unsanctioned relay of live online Olympic broadcasts to Americans. The Summer Olympics, which began Friday in Athens, is the first Olympic Games to be broadcast from a collection of websites. The BBC and other European networks are offering live, on-demand Internet video streaming of Olympic events to broadband viewers. But the BBC and fellow members of the European Broadcasting Union are required by their Olympic broadcast contracts to block U.S. Internet users and others from outside their home counties. NBC paid $793 million for the exclusive U.S. Summer Olympic broadcast rights, and NBCOlympics.com is the only U.S. website licensed by the International Olympic Committee to broadcast video coverage of the games. The network is offering 1,210 hours of Olympic coverage -- live and tape-delayed -- on NBC, CNCB, MSNBC, Bravo, USA, Telemundo and a high-definition channel. Despite its contractual lock on Olympic footage, NBCOlympics.com is offering only highlights of selected events after they have been broadcast on one of the network's TV channels. U.S. customers of AT&T Wireless' mMode information service will also get video clips. By contrast, those online in the United Kingdom can watch live simulcast coverage from BBC TV's five video streams. American TV stations not affiliated with NBC can show up to three 2-minute Olympic video clips a day. But U.S.-based Internet news sites that are not backed by NBC are barred from showing any competition video and can only air news conferences with a 30-minute delay. http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,64562,00.html ------------------------------ From: Steven J Sobol Subject: Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:22:55 -0500 Tony P. wrote: > Seems this little co-op phone company is about to bring the cell > carriers to their knees. > Who knew that they didn't pay the interconnect charge when cell calls > land on wired switches. It could be argued that it's not the cellular carriers' fault that the telco didn't bill them. I think the cell carriers could probably successfully fight this. 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. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As a matter of fact, they did more than just successfully argue against it. In the article linked for us to read we see the cell carriers got am injuction against them being forced to pay or getting disconnected. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly Reply-To: bond-jamesbond@crazyhat.net Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:41:21 GMT In message Tony P. wrote: > Seems this little co-op phone company is about to bring the cell > carriers to their knees. > Who knew that they didn't pay the interconnect charge when cell calls > land on wired switches. > http://www.kcrg.com/article.aspx?art_id=87258&cat_id=123 What happens when there are multiple landline telcos, do they pay any interconnect charges? Just sit through this NRA meeting Marge, and if you still don't think guns are great then we'll argue some more. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Aug 2004 02:37:01 -0000 From: John Levine Subject: Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Seems this little co-op phone company is about to bring the cell > carriers to their knees. > Who knew that they didn't pay the interconnect charge when cell calls > land on wired switches. > http://www.kcrg.com/article.aspx?art_id=87258&cat_id=123 Seems that this little co-op is getting a wee bit too big for its britches. For one thing, I would be surprised if any cell carriers were interconnecting and not paying anything unless they had a negotiated bill-and-keep agreement with the LEC. They may not be paying as much as the co-op wants, but that's a different question. For another, this co-op offers GSM PCS service via an agreement with Iowa Wireless, including a plan for $35/mo that offers unlimited local calling. Gee, what did they expect people to do? And most importantly, this little co-op charges unbelievably low prices. Check them out at http://www.eastbuchanan.com. Their normal monthly rate for residence service is $9/month, including the subscriber line charge, which is pretty low. But since it's a co-op, at the end of the year, they rebate the profits to the members as a percentage of what they've paid. Is the rebate 2%? 5%? 10%? No, it's averaged 51%. That's right, half of what you pay, you get back, so the monthly rate is really only $4.50/mo and the unlimited cell phone rate is $17.50. I don't mind using USF money to provide affordable rural service, since that's what it's for. But this is ridiculous. Like it said in the article: "If the company doesn't get paid by cell phone users, then we don't get any revenue to get our dividend checks, either." Oh, no, then they'd have to pay the as much for phone service as everyone else in the country. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: John, I am curious about something. In an area where there is a predominant LEC (everywhere, I suppose) and it negotiates things regards its customers (such as 'bill and keep' as one example) what about the independent telcos in the same area? Are they obligated to go along with what the LEC 'negotiates'? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:20:43 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein Subject: Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly Tony P. wrote, > Seems this little co-op phone company is about to bring the cell > carriers to their knees. > Who knew that they didn't pay the interconnect charge when cell calls > land on wired switches. > http://www.kcrg.com/article.aspx?art_id=87258&cat_id=123 That article says, > The East Buchanan Telephone Company in Winthrop says it's lost half a > million dollars from cell phone companies not paying for use of its phone > lines over the last five years. So E.B.T.C. bought a machine that blocks > all incoming cell phone calls to land lines in town and plans to use it > starting Monday. Talk about a 'tude! These rules are a bit complex, but it sounds to me like East Buchanan Tel just doesn't like playing by the rules. > E.B.T.C. general manager Butch Rorabaugh said it won't block cell > phone users from calling other cell phones or from calling > 9-1-1. Rorabaugh says other long distance carriers like AT&T pay a > fee to use their line. But cellular phone carriers do not. He says > it's a huge nationwide problem that's tied up in the courts, but the > tiny town of Winthrop is actually trying to do something about > it. He told TV9, "We're using our facilities, our plant, our > investment to complete these calls, and we'd simply like to get paid > for that." Sure. But let's review the federal rules. (Note IANAL. This is just my understanding, not a legal opinion.) Way back when, when cellular first came out, it was really expensive, and the FCC allowed the cellular companies to interconnect to the local exchange carriers via the latters' *Access* tariffs. Access is the tariff used for interexchange carriers like AT&T and MCI to purchase the last mile from local carriers. It's generally expensive, carrying some subsidies above direct cost. Especially in small rural telephone companies. The Telecom Act of 1996 changed the rules. It redefined cellular (CMRS, to be precise -- that also includes paging, PCS, and Nextel-like ESMR carriers) carriers to be co-carriers of local calls, peers rather than monopoly ratepayers. So the CMRS carriers are expected to pay a cost-based rate for the calls that they send to the LEC, but the LEC is expected to pay the *same* rate to the CMRS carriers for calls made to the CMRS subscribers. In general, cellular-originated calls are more than twice the volume of cellular-received calls, so the local telco still comes out ahead. But not as far ahead as under Access, because that tariff charges the other carrier (like AT&T) for *both* directions. So calls to cell phones used to be charged to the cellular carrier but for most of a decade have been charged to the local carrier. And at lower rates. East Buchanan Tel apparently doesn't like this. As a cooperative, they're exempt from most of the competition rules -- they don't have to permit CLECs to operate in their territories at all! But while CMRS gets CLEC-like peer interconnection, CMRS gets it by right, in all places, to all carriers, with or without a contract. And now with number portability. And CMRS is to some slight extent competition; some people don't need wireline phones if they have a cell phone. Not many -- it's not real competition in the general sense -- but a few percent, maybe, can go that route. Not good to someone who expects to have 100.000% of the market share, and who is *not* happy with only 98%. East Buchanan can charge CMRS carriers for the use of their facilities. It might take some negotiation or even, at the extreme, FCC action, but they're entitled to be paid to deliver calls. But of course they then have to pay for calls that are delivered on the cellular carriers' networks. Cellular networks need to be paid too! But note that most small rural telephone companies collect only a small share of their expenses from their own subscribers. They collect a larger share from access charges (getting much more per minute that the Bells do) and from the FCC's Universal Service Fund, which is funded by a tax (its rate set by the FCC, not Congress, I think it's now around 8.9%) on interstate telecom services. I suppose they see CMRS peer interconnection as a risk end to its gravy train, of providing wireline phone service at low prices, with its very high costs funded by the rest of the country. ------------------------------ From: Isaiah Beard Subject: Re: Interconnect Fees Get Ugly Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:51:24 -0400 Tony P. wrote: > Seems this little co-op phone company is about to bring the cell > carriers to their knees. > Who knew that they didn't pay the interconnect charge when cell calls > land on wired switches. I always thought they had. At the very least, Verizon Wireless (back when it was Bell Atlantic Mobile) most certainly made me believe so, as back in '96 they used to tack on a "landline interconnect fee" to local calls that was in addition to any airtime allotment you had (and they were miniscule back then), or overage charges. In many areas it was $.10 per call regardless of duration, but in the New York Metro area (where I lived) the fee was 5 cents PER MINUTE. And this was just for the privilege of having Bell Atlantic, the landline phone company, carry your call from Bell Atlantic, the Cellular carrier. Of course I knew it was BS when PCS carriers came on the scene and I switched, only to discover that no other cellular or PCS carrier saw it necessary to assess this fee to connect calls over the same Verizon network. ------------------------------ 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 #382 ******************************