From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Dec 14 00:50:28 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBE5oRj23444; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:50:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:50:28 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412140550.iBE5oRj23444@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 #596 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:50:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 596 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson USATODAY.com - Airborne Cell-Phone Ban Likely to Remain (Marcus Falco) $35 Billion Sprint-Nextel Merger May Close This Week (Telecom dailyLead) Telecom Lifecycle (jrefactors@hotmail.com) Cingular Migration (jrefactors@hotmail.com) What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? (Lisa Hancock) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (Rich Greenberg) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (T. Sean Weintz) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (Kenneth P. Stox) Re: Strange Wireless Problem (A User) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (DevilsPGD) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Tony P.) Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? (Barry Margolin) Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: (Celling Your Soul) (Steve Sobol) Re: Radar Detectors (DevilsPGD) Re: Radar Detectors (-mhd) Re: Calling Card Needed - Short Interaction Sequence (DevilsPGD) Re: Calling Card Needed - Short Interaction Sequence (Clark W. Griswold) Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India (Vishay) Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse (Flatus Ohlfahrt) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. 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, 13 Dec 2004 20:36:58 -0500 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: USATODAY.com - Airborne cell-phone ban likely to remain for now Which newspaper do you want to believe? http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-12-13-wireless-planes_x.htm WASHINGTON (Reuters) Hopes and worries that regulators will soon end the ban on using wireless phones during U.S. commercial flights are likely at least a year or two early, government officials and analysts say. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission Wednesday plans to seek public comment on whether to ease or lift its prohibition on the use of wireless phones and two-way communications devices such as Blackberrys while in the air. FCC officials stressed that it could take at least a year to lift the agency's ban. And there still is a prohibition by the Federal Aviation Administration, which could take another year to ease. The agencies are moving cautiously because of concerns the communications would interfere with operating a plane and could overwhelm wireless systems on the ground. There are also questions about whether it's technically feasible to support thousands of calls from the air. There are almost 173 million wireless phone subscribers, according to industry estimates. "We hope to complete our work as expeditiously as possible, but anything we do here at the FCC doesn't alter the rules at the FAA," FCC spokeswoman Lauren Patrich said. To guard aircraft safety, the FAA forbids the cabin use of devices that intentionally emit radio waves, like wireless phones and computers that can communicate with each other. A technical advisory group is to report back next year on whether these restrictions should be changed, FAA spokesman Paul Takemoto said. Other electronic devices, like music players and standard laptops, which can unintentionally cause interference, are permitted once the aircraft rises above 10,000 feet. Usually, flight attendants tell passengers once the plane reaches that altitude and those devices can be used. Gearing up for competition While the bans are debated, the FCC plans to push rules Wednesday aimed at boosting competition for air-to-ground telephone and high-speed Internet services with frequencies now used by phones embedded in plane seats, agency officials said. A Verizon Communications unit is the major provider of air-to-ground telephones on U.S. commercial flights. Others bowed out over the last few years because consumers, in part, balked at the high prices. Verizon's Airfone service typically costs $3.99 a minute plus a $3.99 connection fee per domestic voice call. It also offers some data services for a fee. Airlines, rival wireless companies and aircraft maker Boeing are salivating at the prospect of more in-flight communications services, including high-speed Internet, or broadband, to meet travelers' demands. The additional fees the airlines and providers could charge for those services would be a boon to the ailing airline industry, which is enduring fare wars and high fuel prices. "Today the high cost of wireless when flying has kept the users low," telecommunications analyst Jeff Kagan said. "But once the cost drops or once you can use your own phone on board, the quiet air cabin may be a thing of the past." Kagan, who does a lot of traveling, said he loves and hates the idea of making and receiving calls during a flight. "We should be very careful before opening this up," he said. "Just think how annoying it is to hear the person behind you shouting to his neighbor when you are trying to work or read or sleep." Boeing and a private company, AirCell, have urged the FCC to auction two air-to-ground wireless licenses and limit bidders to winning only one to ensure competition. The airlines want the FCC to ensure enough spectrum is sold so that a provider can meet the demand for airborne broadband. "Although the demand for voice services has declined over the past few years, the demand for data services continues to increase," Continental Airlines told the FCC in September. Copyright 2004 Reuters Limited. Copyright 2004 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance USA Today and Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:28:24 EST From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA Subject: 35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week Telecom dailyLead from USTA December 13, 2004 http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18081&l=2017006 TODAY'S HEADLINES NEWS OF THE DAY * $35 billion Sprint-Nextel merger may close this week BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH * Analysis: AOL pushes free content to the fore * Video a big part of SBC's future * Cable gears up for 2005 USTA SPOTLIGHT * USTA Webinar: USF & USAC, Funding Updates, Tuesday, Dec. 14, 2004, 1:30 p.m. EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES * Consumers cold on mobile multimedia REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE * Global Crossing former chair avoids SEC fine * FCC to vote on phone rules Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others. http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=18081&l=2017006 Legal and Privacy information at http://www.dailylead.com/about/privacy_legal.jsp SmartBrief, Inc. 1100 H ST NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 ------------------------------ From: jrefactors@hotmail.com Subject: Telecom Lifecycle Date: 13 Dec 2004 10:11:58 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com I want to ask the phases of telecom lifecyle is like this? I tried to find more info in the web but couldn't. sales->ordering->provisioning->billing? Please advise. Thanks!! ------------------------------ From: jrefactors@hotmail.com Subject: Cingular Migration Date: 13 Dec 2004 10:10:50 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Cingular and AT&T Wireless are migrated, does it mean they are one company? But how come there are advertisments saying current AT&T Wireless customers can migrate to Cingular? I am confused, and don't know how the telecom business works. Please advise. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: What Exactly Did "Telstar" Do? Date: 13 Dec 2004 11:12:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com In the 1960s, the Bell System launche d a pioneer communications satellite known as Telstar. The event had great fanfare. People would be told when and where to look for the tiny dot of light passing in the night sky, and go out to see it. Models of it appeared in museums. While there are generalities written about it, I was curious about some day to day technical details. I am curious as to what exactly did Telstar do, once they got it up and running. That is, did it handle domestic voice long distance calls? Overseas calls? Telegraph/ data signals? Television programs, either domestic or overseas? Did it have an orbit fixed above one point of the earth or its own moving orbit? How was Telstar controlled? That is, I presume any call handled via Telstar could also be handled by more conventional means, and backup was necessary in case Telstar wasn't working for some reason. Did engineers manually route transmissions and babysit them? Was Telstar a production unit, expected to be a workaday medium, or just an experiment to see how satellite communications would work? (During overseas calls of the 1930s, engineers did have to monitor every call in progress and adjust frequencies and even bands (shortwave or longwave) to compensate for atmospheric conditions affecting the radio. There were advantages and disadvantages for both shortwave and longwave and both were used. I don't think these were ever resolved until undersea cables came into use.) How long did Telstar stay in service? I recall a Telstar II replacing it, but then the mystiq of satellites waned. Thanks. [public replies please] ------------------------------ From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: 13 Dec 2004 13:36:47 -0500 Organization: Organized? Me? In article , Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! This is just a WAG, but the SMTP server may be set up to not accept incoming wireless connections, or to accept them only on a different port than the usual 25. Talk to the security admin at the server site. Rich Greenberg Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 770 321 6507 Eastern time zone. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red & Shasta (RIP),Red, husky Owner:Chinook-L Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/Asst Owner:Sibernet-L ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:00:43 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! > Thanks, > Matt B. > e-mail: moc.oohay@02091bttam <--Blocked ... reverse it Need more details. Considering that POP3 is not used to send mail, only to retrieve it from the mailbox, there is obviously more to the equation than what you have stated here. The problem lies with the SMTP server (the server used to send mail). it MAY be the same server as the pop3 server, may not be. But things to consider : #1) if the server is behind a firewall, is port25 (the smtp port) open to users from the wireless network? #2) DO not plan on being able to send mail via the server from non-work networks!!!!!! I cannot stress this enough! If you configure the server to allow this, then it will be what is known as an "open relay" and will be noticed by spammers very quickly. They will then proceed to use it to send spam. And then the anti spam folks will notice this, and will blacklist your server. ------------------------------ From: Kenneth P. Stox Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:21:06 GMT Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! You need to check your smtp settings, pop is inbound only. ------------------------------ From: A User Subject: Re: Strange Wireless Problem Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 06:43:23 +1000 Organization: Posted via Forte APN, http://www.forteinc.com/apn/index.php On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:29:11 -0500, Matt B. wrote: > Hello all, > I'm having a strange problem and I hope you can help ... A few > co-workers are using wireless-enabled laptops. They are able to > receive e-mail from the POP3 server, but are unable to send. They get > the error "The server has timed out ... might be server problems, > etc.." If they plug in to a wired connection, it works fine. > Everyone is using Outlook 2000 or 2003. It doesn't matter where they > are using the wireless connection -- at home, at the office, at > great-grandma Edna's ... it all does the same thing ... and we are at > a loss! Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! > Thanks, > Matt B. > e-mail: moc.oohay@02091bttam <--Blocked...reverse it You need to use the SMTP server of the the ISP you are on, or it will be blocked. This is normal antispam behaviour. ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:05:51 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Monty Solomon wrote: > Viewers would be able to record an episode with their DVR, but there > would be a time limit on how long it would be available for viewing. > The executive was pushing for an expiration date that coincided with > the premiere of the next episode. The consensus of the cable > executived was that it needed to be between 2-4 weeks. Interesting. Maybe it's just me, but the way I see if, if they're going to work so hard at making sure I can't watch their programming, maybe I should save them the trouble, honour their request up front and not watch it? For recreational use only. ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Organization: ATCC Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:05:49 -0500 In article , monty@roscom.com says: > Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? > Written By Rick Ellis, Monday, November 28th, 2004 > When HBO's "Six Feet Under" returns in 2005, it won't just be the end > of a long-running hit series. It may also be a turning point for TV > viewers who are in the habit of recording shows to watch weeks or even > months later. > Sources at two different cable companies have told AllYourTV.com that > discussions have begun which will may lead to a restriction of use for > fans of several popular television shows. > The discussions are reportedly in very early stages, and the details > are still very broad. But this is what I can confirm at this date. > A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable > companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of > customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record > several popular Time Warner TV programs. > The term being used by the executive is "transitional fair use," and > the scenerio laid out goes roughly along these lines: > Viewers would be able to record an episode with their DVR, but there > would be a time limit on how long it would be available for viewing. > The executive was pushing for an expiration date that coincided with > the premiere of the next episode. The consensus of the cable > executived was that it needed to be between 2-4 weeks. > http://www.allyourtv.com/0405season/news/november/11282004transitional.html If they succeed in doing so I vow not to buy a new television or any new AV gear. They have no right to infringe my right to time shift programs should I wish. As far as I'm concerned the media industry has made record profit over the last thirty years even when you factor in the VCR and outright piracy. Perhaps if Hollywood took a few risks I'd be willing to go to the movies more frequently. But everything now is just a re-hash, as evidenced by War of the Worlds and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Granted, the Hithchikers Guide to the Galaxy movie is coming so I might want to see that. But everything else is just contrived crap made by people who want to keep their career in the movies all comfy and safe. ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Is 'Transitional Fair Use' The Wave Of The Future? Organization: Symantec Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:26:40 -0500 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > A middle-level executive at Time Warner has approached several cable > companies and broached the idea of restricting the ability of > customers who use those company's Digital Video Recorders to record > several popular Time Warner TV programs. Sounds like another good reason to support standalone DVRs, like ReplayTV and TiVo, rather than cableco-supplied DVR services. Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Urban Legends Reference Pages: Politics (Celling Your Soul) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:17:28 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Tony P. wrote: > In article , dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org > says: >> One thing I've noticed lately, is a lot of telemarketing calls from >> Quebec. Note that Canadian telemarketers are not bound by US law. > I've noted the same thing. Is there some particular reason this occurs? Because they aren't bound by US law ... 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: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:05:50 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Geoffrey Welsh wrote: >> A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled >> where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at >> to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. > Shouldn't that be the speed limit?!? Traffic light timing changes throughout the day (and in some cases, dynamically based on traffic) -- this is unique, since it effectively dynamically changes the speed limit (and this limit was not enforced). For recreational use only. ------------------------------ From: -mhd Subject: Re: Radar Detectors Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:36:12 -0500 Geoffrey Welsh wrote: > David Clayton wrote: >> A few years ago on a major road in my city, a system was trialled >> where computerised signs would advise drivers what speed to travel at >> to get the "green wave" of traffic lights. > Shouldn't that be the speed limit?!? > Geoffrey Welsh Sure, if you are maintaining a constant speed. However in the real world traffic conditions can momentarily upset your average speed and you may have had a standing start from a previous light. Anyone remember the Halda Speedpilot used by rallyists? http://www.geocities.com/haldaman.geo/halda3.html -mhd ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:05:50 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com In message Joseph wrote: >>> Then their billing arrangement is broken. The FCC regs are that the >>> pay phone operator gets their kickback of (usually about $0.30 [a]) >>> for _each_ call. If you (typically) hit the " * " button on the keypad >>> to tell your phonecard service to let you make a second call without >>> having to hangup and redial the whole kit and kaboodle, the FCC regs >>> treat that one as, yes, a second call, with an additional $0.30. >> Interesting, do you know what defines when a second call starts? > Why is this such a difficult question? You finish one call and begin > another one. When the second call answers the second call starts. Say I phone my girlfriend while I'm out of town, we chat, then she transfers the call to my parents. Is this the same phone call, or a different phone call? For recreational use only. ------------------------------ From: Clark W. Griswold, Jr. Subject: Re: Calling Card Needed -- Short Interaction Sequence Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:06:56 -0700 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Joseph wrote: > When the second call answers the second call starts. And the more technical response would be "when the call supervises". ------------------------------ From: vijay.vishy@gmail.com Subject: Re: Unlimited Calling Plan to India Date: 13 Dec 2004 12:26:44 -0800 India doesnt have Unlimited local or unlimited India-Longdistance. The city where my parents live doesnt have unlimited internet facility or even broadband. I can pay 150$ per month for unlimited india calling plan [even if it is unlimited only during night 12 hours / day] ------------------------------ From: Flatus Ohlfahrt Subject: Re: Vonage Voice Quality Getting Worse? Date: 13 Dec 2004 19:23:03 GMT Organization: USAF Ret On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:24:47 GMT, Mark Roberts wrote in news:telecom23.595.9@telecom-digest.org: > John R Levine had written: >> Have other people had voice quality problems with Vonage? > Usually, no. When it does happen, it seems to happen with > calls to certain rural areas (one in Missouri, in > particular). A second try at placing the calls usually > clears them up. > ATA-186 behind a Linksys router with QoS enabled. In August a kind soul reported that there is a problem with the stock firmware supplied with Vonage's ATA-186s. I emailed Vonage tech support and they flashed my ATA with an update that solved the problem. I also made sure that QoS was enabled for my ethernet cards, etc. Here is the message that was posted in August: On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:34:56 GMT, Cheetoh wrote in news:10idr89jr1ev410@corp.supernews.com: > So it turns out that the current firmware Vonage is using > on the Cisco ATA186's has a bug that puts a 0x0 > value in the IP Precedence field, so instead of sending > voip bearer packets with an IP Precendence 5 they > are sent with 0, like all data. I have worked with them > and they have loaded a test image and it works > like a champ now and my LLQ is working great in case any > one else is trying to do this... > LLQ-router# show voice queuing > Ethernet1 > Service-policy output: shape > Class-map: class-default (match-any) > 365625 packets, 66899306 bytes > 30 second offered rate 591000 bps, drop rate 0 bps > Match: any > Traffic Shaping > Target/Average Byte Sustain Excess > Interval > Increment > Rate Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) > (bytes) > 1100000/1100000 6600 26400 26400 24 > 3300 > Adapt Queue Packets Bytes Packets > Bytes > Shaping > Active Depth Delayed > Delayed > Active > - 3 361289 66615027 11338 > 13704219 yes > Service-policy : LLQ > Class-map: call-setup (match-all) > 5675 packets, 1804013 bytes > 30 second offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps > Match: ip precedence 3 > Queueing > Output Queue: Conversation 73 > Bandwidth 5 (%) > Bandwidth 55 (kbps) Max Threshold 64 (packets) > (pkts matched/bytes matched) 25/8990 > (depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0 > Class-map: voice (match-all) > 129981 packets, 18261798 bytes > 30 second offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps > Match: ip precedence 5 > Queueing > Strict Priority > Output Queue: Conversation 72 > Bandwidth 165 (kbps) Burst 4125 (Bytes) > (pkts matched/bytes matched) 1349/279958 > (total drops/bytes drops) 0/0 > Class-map: class-default (match-any) > 229969 packets, 46833495 bytes > 30 second offered rate 592000 bps, drop rate 0 > bps Match: any > Queueing > Flow Based Fair Queueing > Maximum Number of Hashed Queues 64 > (total queued/total drops/no-buffer drops) 3/0/0 ------------------------------ 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. 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 #596 ******************************