For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:28:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 127
Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
Find Routes to Get Free Directory Assistance Help (Jack Decker)
Level 3 CEO Comments on Withdrawal of VoIP Forbearance Petition (Decker)
Forbes Article on VoIP vs. Incumbent Telcos (Jack Decker)
Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick (Jack Decker)
Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem (Jack Decker)
Level 3 Withdraws Request For VoIP Ruling (Telecom dailyLead from USTA)
Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming (marcsanders2003@yahoo.com)
New Long Range Cordless Phones (Michael Quinn)
Re: Mobile IP Networks (Rick Lenhart)
Our Telephonic Primacy (Monty Solomon)
Re: Level 3 Withdraws Request For VOIP Programming (Devils PGD)
Re: What Happened To Channel 1 (Dave VanHorn)
Re: Tracking Down a Harassing Caller Number? (Lisa Hancock)
Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid (Al Dykes)
Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time? (Steve Sobol)
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:52:25 -0500
Subject: Find Routes to Get Free Directory Assistance Help
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/sns-yourmoney-0320spending,0,7646233.story?coll=sfla-business3
By Gregory Karp
Of The Morning Call
Convenience costs Americans big-time, from bagged salad at the grocery
store to automatic carwashes to house-cleaning services.
Another convenience is dialing directory assistance whenever you need
a phone number. It can be incredibly expensive for what you get. Some
directory-assistance services cost nearly $2.50 per request.
And many Americans are using the services, according to research firm
TNS Telecoms. A survey showed 41 percent of customers used some kind
of directory assistance on their home or wireless phone over the past
month. And, clearly, many of those lookups were not free.
The good news is that spending on directory assistance can be
virtually eliminated because there are so many other ways -- some old,
some very new -- to get phone numbers.
Here's the 411 on reducing directory-assistance calls on your home and
wireless phones:
[Comment: This article makes a number of good suggestions including a
few I didn't know about, and I can honestly say that in my entire
lifetime I have never once paid for a directory assistance call, so I
thought I already knew most of the ways to get free telephone number
lookups. At the same time, they do miss a fairly obvious way to get a
number when you are calling a company -- go to the company's web site
and look for a "Contact" or "About us" type of link. Very often there
will be one or more contact telephones posted right on the company's
web site. And if you don't need to make the call right away and have
an e-mail address for the person you want to call (or a friend or
business associate), using e-mail to request the number is another
option.]
Full story at:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/sns-yourmoney-0320spending,0,7646233.story?coll=sfla-business3
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One very inexpensive directory service
is a sponsor here at this Digest:
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 !
After you sign up with them, then your telephone number (or a few
different numbers under your control go on their records. Then you
dial an 800 number for directory assistance. ANI allows them to charge
that phone number for your call; after a few dollars in calls or at
least once per month, your credit card is charged at 65 cents per
one or two inquiries. No set up charges of any kind, and the 65 cent
rate is the least expensive rate for directory assistance
anywhere. Plus which, a portion of that 65 cents comes back to this
Digest as a donation. Please consider signing up; no set up fees and
no minimum use requirements. PAT]
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:37:19 -0500
Subject: Level 3 CEO Comments on Withdrawal of VoIP Forbearance Petition
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-21-2005/0003236950&STORY&EDATE=
James Crowe Comments on Withdrawal of Level 3 VoIP Forbearance Petition
http://www.level3.com
BROOMFIELD, Colo., March 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The following
statement can be attributed to James Q. Crowe, chief executive officer
of Level 3 Communications, Inc. (Nasdaq: LVLT):
"Today, Level 3 withdrew a forbearance petition the company had filed
in December 2003 with the Federal Communications Commission seeking to
clarify the regulatory status of Voice over IP. "In the petition, we
asked the FCC to reaffirm that legacy interconnection fees called
'access charges' do not apply to a certain class of VoIP traffic. By
statute, the agency was required to issue a decision in the matter by
March 22, 2005. "Level 3 has withdrawn the petition in deference to
the Commission. Given the appointment of new leadership only three
business days before the statutory deadline for ruling on the
petition, we determined it was inappropriate to ask the agency to
resolve this important issue in the timeframe required by law.
However, there remains a pressing need in the industry for clarity in
this area, and Level 3 may elect to refile the petition or take other
appropriate regulatory actions in the future. "Our decision to
withdraw the petition was made in consultation with industry
participants that share our views, including the VON Coalition and
CompTel/Ascent.
"Level 3 is committed to offering the industry's broadest suite of
wholesale VoIP services, and our decision, which in effect maintains
the regulatory status quo, will not have any material financial impact
on the company. Level 3 and other VoIP service providers continue to
maintain that voice calls between the legacy telephone network and the
Internet should be exchanged using reciprocal compensation rates,
which are lower than access charges and far closer to the network
provider's true cost. "We believe that VoIP stands to deliver
enormous benefits to business and residential end-users, and will help
drive broadband adoption nationwide. In our view, and in the view of
many of the companies who supported this petition, creating regulatory
clarity is the best way for the government to encourage investment in
this promising new technology. "The Commission's record is one of
strong support for Voice over IP, and we're confident it will resolve
these important issues in an appropriate and timely manner. There are
number of other avenues by which the Commission can address the issue
of VoIP and intercarrier compensation, and our hope is that it does so
quickly in order to provide the industry with clear ground rules. We
look forward to continuing to work with the FCC as it formulates
policies that will foster VoIP's continued development."
About Level 3 Communications
Level 3 (Nasdaq: LVLT) is an international communications and
information services company. The company operates one of the largest
Internet backbones in the world, is one of the largest providers of
wholesale dial-up service to ISPs in North America and is the primary
provider of Internet connectivity for millions of broadband
subscribers, through its cable and DSL partners. The company offers a
wide range of communications services over its 23,000-mile broadband
fiber optic network including Internet Protocol (IP) services,
broadband transport and infrastructure services, colocation services,
and patented softswitch managed modem and voice services. Its Web
address is http://www.Level3.com. The company offers information
services through its subsidiaries, Software Spectrum and (i)Structure.
For additional information, visit their respective Web sites at
http://www.softwarespectrum.com and http://www.i-structure.com. The
Level 3 logo is a registered service mark of Level 3 Communications,
Inc. in the United States and/or other countries.
SOURCE Level 3 Communications, Inc.
Web Site: http://www.level3.com
How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html
If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:32:47 -0500
Subject: Forbes Article on VoIP vs. Incumbent Telcos
http://www.forbes.com/home/free_forbes/2005/0328/066.html
OutFront
Threatening Calls
Scott Woolley, 03.28.05
Never friendly, the battle between the Internet calling companies and
the incumbent telcos has gotten downright ugly. Vonage, the biggest
Internet phone company, has taken 500,000 customers from giants such
as Verizon and SBC. Those customers had been worth $100 million in
annual operating income to the Bells. And the stakes are rising;
Vonage Chief Jeffrey Citron expects to double his customer base again
this year.
[.....]
So far Peter John's case is the only 911 snafu to draw much public
attention. And while John is now out of the hospital and on the way to
a full recovery, Citron, trying to keep the heat on the Bells, warns
that until the 911 systems are connected, there is the possibility of
a real tragedy: "If something really bad happens, I'd hate to be a
[Bell] chief executive testifying before Congress about why there have
been delays."
Full story at:
http://www.forbes.com/home/free_forbes/2005/0328/066.html
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:08:26 -0500
Subject: Dangling Broadband From the Phone Stick
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19phone.html
By MATT RICHTEL
SAN FRANCISCO, March 18 - To gauge the potential consumer impact of
the consolidation sweeping the telephone industry, look no further
than the silver-toned plastic phone gathering dust on the desk in
Justin Martikovic's studio apartment.
Mr. Martikovic, 30, a junior architect who relies on a cellphone for
his normal calling, says he never uses the desk phone -- but he pays
$360 a year to keep it hooked up.
"I have to pay for a service I'm never using," he said.
He has no choice. His telephone company, SBC Communications, will not
sell him high-speed Internet access unless he buys the phone service,
too. That puts him in the same bind as many people around the country
who want high-speed, or broadband, Internet access but no longer need
a conventional telephone. Right now, their phone companies tend to
have a "take it or leave it" attitude.
Consumers "are not forced to go with SBC," said Michael Coe, a company
spokesman. "If they just want a broadband connection, I'd recommend
they look around for people who can provide just a broadband
connection."
The nation's other two largest phone companies, Verizon Communications
and BellSouth, have similar policies: broadband service is available
only as a bundle with phone service.
That means, even as high-speed Internet service has become one of the
most quickly adopted technologies of the computer era, there are few
options for the tens of millions of Americans trying to upgrade their
dial-up connections.
Some lawmakers and consumer advocates say the issue should be on the
agenda as the government considers the market impact of two proposed
big telecommunications deals: SBC's planned $16 billion acquisition of
AT&T, and Verizon's $6.75 billion offer for MCI, which is being
challenged by a rival offer from Qwest Communications.
For many consumers, the main alternative to broadband from the phone
company is the local cable company. But cable broadband prices tend to
be higher - as much as $60 a month for access, compared typically with
$40 or less for phone company broadband. And the cable companies
prefer to sell the service as a package with television that can
easily exceed $100 a month.
That is assuming cable is even available, which it is not in
Mr. Martikovic's apartment in the Nob Hill section of San Francisco -
or in 10 percent of the nation's households, for that matter. [.....]
Consumer advocacy groups, including Consumers Union, say they plan to
ask the F.C.C. to address the lack of "à la carte" broadband when the
agency reviews the proposed takeovers. [.....] Verizon has said it
is working to develop a stand-alone broadband offering that could be
available as soon as the end of the year. [.....] But the smallest
of the Bells, Qwest, which operates primarily in the Rocky Mountain
states and is struggling to grow, has been willing to offer à la carte
broadband for more than a year.
[Comment: As those of you who have been on this list for a while know,
it has long been my position that a customer should never be forced to
buy a service he doesn't want in order to get a service he does want.
My usual example would be a gas station that would not sell you gas
unless you also bought a case of pop, or vise versa. Gas stations
can't get away with that, not only because it's probably illegal in
most areas, but also because in most places there's another gas
station just down the street. Since phone companies don't have that
kind of competitive pressure, they tend to try to screw their
customers in ways that a normal business could never get away with.
I will always remember a time when I lived in a city in Michigan's
Upper Peninsula and my car stalled in the downtown area. I knew I
needed to pour some gasoline directly into the carburetor to get it
started, but fortunately (or so I thought) there was a gas station a
block away. The first problem was I didn't have a container to put
any gasoline in, but I only needed a little gas, and when I got to the
station I happened to look in the trash container and found where
someone had discarded a clean but empty plastic container of gas line
antifreeze. So, I thought, no problem, I'll get a dime's worth of gas
in this. Only problem then was, how to get the gas into the
container, which had a much smaller neck than the pump nozzle. I went
inside, explained my situation to the man inside, and asked if he
might have a funnel or even a piece of stiff paper I could make into a
cone.
And his reply was, "I won't sell you the gas unless you put it
directly into that container." I could not believe my ears. It was
obvious he wanted to sell more gas than just 10 or 20 cents worth, but in
doing so I would have wound up spilling a considerable amount of
gasoline on the ground deliberately (which, the last I heard, is
considered an environmental hazard) AND since I would have had to hold
the bottle while filling it, I would have very likely got gasoline all
over my hand as well. Bear in mind, this bottle wasn't an "approved"
container to begin with (it was not painted red or anything) so if his
concern has been about legalities he would have refused to sell me the
gas at all, but that wasn't his issue -- he just didn't want to be
bothered with selling such a small amount of gas, but would have sold
it to me had I been willing to spill enough on the pavement to make it
worth his while.
After some discussion with the man, who refused to budge on his
position, I told him I would never buy another drop of gasoline or
anything else at his station as long as I lived (and I never did!),
and walked six more blocks in below-freezing temperatures to the next
nearest station, which had no problem with offering me a funnel to get
the small amount of gas I needed to get the car started.
(The funny part about is was that the first gas station was in the
same block as, and almost next door to an insurance agency that I had
the misfortune of having some dealings with, and the guy who ran that
was in my opinion also a nutcase - now that I think back on it I
wonder if the gas station guy and the insurance agent were using the
same drugs, since they both shared the same customer-be-damned
attitude. I have to say, the Upper Peninsula has some of the
friendliest people in Michigan, but when they go into business there
is a small percentage of them that seem to turn into morons with bad
attitudes. I suppose that happens in lower Michigan also, but up
there people talk and compare notes more, I think, so when a person in
business is a real jerk, word tends to get around. But I digress.)
It seems to me that the phone companies are just like that gas station
owner when they refuse to sell unbundled DSL. They know there are
situations where the customer doesn't need their service, where the
traditional phone service will never be used, yet they require the
customer to take it anyway. It's just pure greed, just as it was with
that gas station owner. But since the phone companies are monopolies,
you don't have the option of walking six blocks down the road to the
next nearest DSL provider. That's why I've been in favor of any and
all alternative broadband technologies, including wireless and even
BPL if they can work out the interference problems.
At the same time, I think these proposed mergers do represent a golden
opportunity to get the SBC and Verizon to drop the forced bundling
requirement. That won't help the people served by companies like
CenturyTel, Alltel, BellSouth, etc. but it would make a big difference
here in Michigan where the vast majority of lines are owned by SBC or
Verizon. So, I hope Consumers Union is successful in their efforts in
that regard.]
Full story at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/19/technology/19phone.html
[New York Times - free registration required]
TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:
Also see http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html for the
story. PAT]
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:15:06 -0500
Subject: Texas Sues Vonage Over 911 Problem
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com
[Comment: Since this originates in Texas, I cannot help but wonder if
SBC had any involvement in this, even if only maybe by putting a bug
in someone's ear at the AG's office. We will probably never know, but
when I hear about something anti-VoIP coming out of Texas, that's just
the way my mind wanders.]
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5630118.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed
By Ben Charny, CNET News.com
The attorney general of Texas is suing Internet phone provider Vonage,
charging that the company isn't clear to its customers about
deficiencies in its 911 service.
Vonage 911 calls aren't routed in the traditional manner. Rather, most
end up at the administrative offices of the 6,000 emergency calls
centers rather than dispatchers. According to Abbott, the dangers of
the circuitous route were exposed in early March when a 17-year-old
Houston girl was unable to get through to police after dialing 911 on
a Vonage phone after both her parents were shot by intruders.
In the U.S. District Court suit, announced Tuesday, Attorney General
Greg Abbott alleges that Vonage doesn't "clearly disclose the lack of
traditional 911 access" nor adequately inform its customers they must
first sign up for the free 911 service. Such an omission violates
state law dealing with deceptive trade practices, the state attorney
general alleges. The state is asking for civil penalties of more than
$20,000 and an injunction requiring more conspicuous disclosure.
A Vonage spokeswoman said the company was surprised to hear of the
litigation and pointed out there are numerous references, both on the
Internet and material mailed to customers, explaining the 911
service's limitations and its proactive nature. Abbott's office
contacted New Jersey-based Vonage about a week ago asking for
marketing materials and other information; the company hadn't heard
anything since it replied with the materials two days ago, the
spokeswoman said.
Full story at:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5630118.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=307
Texas sues Vonage for lack of 911 call deficiency disclosure
-Posted by Russell Shaw @ 10:17 am
Earlier today, we reported that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott
said he's sued Vonage for not being clear about the limitations of
its 911 service.
[.....]
A somewhat different circumstance prompted the lawsuit, however. Early
this month, a 17 year-old Houston girl was unable to get through to
the police on the family's Vonage line to inform them that her
parents had been shot in a break-in.
Full story at:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=307
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:22:32 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Level 3 Withdraws Request For VoIP Ruling
Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 22, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20236&l=2017006
TODAY'S HEADLINES
NEWS OF THE DAY
* Level 3 withdraws request for VoIP ruling
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Texas to sue Vonage over 911 call
* Verizon, Qwest exchange barbs via letters
* Symbian, Microsoft team up
* Wireless security a challenge for companies
USTA SPOTLIGHT
* USTA Applauds Withdrawal of Level 3 Petition
* Announcing Phone Facts Plus 2005
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* EarthLink announces VPN plans
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Former WorldCom chairman settles shareholder lawsuits
Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20236&l=2017006
------------------------------
From: marcsanders2003@yahoo.com
Subject: Intertel Eclipse Telephone Programming
Date: 22 Mar 2005 12:04:33 -0800
Anybody with technical knowledge of the InterTel Eclipse telephone
system? Here's what I'm trying to do:
I'm trying to set up a shared mailbox. In other words, I've added a
new extension, 262, and I want it to use the voice mailbox of 214. So
both extensions will be using mailbox 214. I would also like
notification of messages to go to 262.
It seems fairly simple, but so far nothing seems to work.
Any help would be appreciated.
------------------------------
Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:10:07 -0500
From: Michael Quinn <quinnm@bah.com>
Dave,
I'm pretty sure these are illegal in the US&P(ossessions). One of the
issues was interference with Air Traffic Control communications
systems, as I recall. Someone on the list may be able to cite chapter
and verse from US Code, or FCC regs. I may have saved a Navy
Department spectrum management brief on the subject; if so, I'll
forward off net.
Regards,
Mike
From: Dave <newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g>
Subject: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:46:17 -0900
I saw a link earlier for this on Slash Dot. Its a cordless phone that
supposedly works 100km from the base station (under ideal conditions).
http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm
Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
have any thoughts?
I found a link to the Navy brief of which I was thinking, from about
three years ago.
Mike
http://www.see.asso.fr/ICTSR1Newsletter/No007/LONG%20DISTANCES%20Garmisc
h.pdf
------------------------------
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: New Long Range Cordless Phones?
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:27:58 -0600
Organization: Wizard Information
It was a dark and stormy night when Dave
<newsgroups@dave!!!christense!!n.o!!!r!!!g> wrote:
> a cordless phone that supposedly works 100km from the base station
> (under ideal conditions).
> http://www.goodbyelongdistance.com/catalog/item/1441280/975984.htm
> Other then the obvious potential for grief from the FCC, anyone else
> have any thoughts?
It is true that highly directional antennas (which none of those
pictured in the ad are) can provide ranges such as they describe.
Think satellite dishes and clear line-of-sight paths (or even better,
put one side in orbit). But highly directional antennas are not going
to let you "walk or drive around for a radius of around 30 miles"
without stopping to carefully align *both* antennas every time you
want to use the phone. With the antennas shown, even 30 miles over
unimpeded water seems like it would be pushing it.
They offer only manufacturer's warranty (and it's not even clear what
country the vendor is in). I don't know what Samsung model that is,
but I'd bet that Samsung doesn't specify performance anything like
that described. Don't do it without a full money-back guarantee.
------------------------------
From: rick.lenhart@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Mobile IP Networks
Date: 22 Mar 2005 13:47:33 -0800
I can help, I have a great Cisco based solution for you.
rlenhart@icinetworks.net www.miptac.com
007 wrote:
> I need to investigate some solutions for a true mobile wireless
> networks and I'm looking for anyone's input.
> The situation is as follows: I need to design a network that will
> supporting IP traffic on a public bus transport system. Wireless
> terminals on each bus will communicate through a router onboard each
> bus (ie each bus is a mobile wireless LAN). At the bus depot there is
> a gateway for internet and telephony. The range of each LAN on each
> bus is limited to no more than 3km and there are no more than 10
> busses within the network.
> What are some considerations for the planning, design and architecture
> of such a network?
> Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 17:13:41 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Our Telephonic Primacy
By William F. S. Miles | March 21, 2005
"WE'RE NUMBER One!"
Americans often make this jingoistic boast in bouts of competitive
patriotism. But on what basis? When it comes to the standard
international ranking of countries in terms of human development (life
expectancy, literacy, and purchasing power, as compiled by the United
Nations Development Program), the United States comes in a
respectable, but hardly chest thumping, number 7 (bested by Belgium,
for goodness sake!) Even when it comes to the kind of measure with
which UN-suspicious free marketeers are more comfortable --
straightforward GDP per capita -- we're still outdone by the likes of
Norway and, Lord help us, Luxembourg.
There is one incontrovertible standard by which we are first, though:
international telephone ranking. I am not referring to cellphone use:
In this respect we are laggards, trailing 34 other countries
(including Estonia). I don't even mean the extent of regular
landlines, where we are again 7th, squeaking ahead of those loquacious
Icelanders.
No, the one measure by which we are literally Number 1 is our
International Country Code. When you call home from overseas, you need
merely hit (after dialing the international circuit) the number 1.
Disappointed? Don't be. There is much we can learn about the world,
and America's place in it, by examining the international telephone
code chart.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/03/21/our_telephonic_primacy/
-------------------------------
From: DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Level 3 Withdraws Request for VoIP Fee Ruling
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:34:30 -0700
In message <telecom24.126.8@telecom-digest.org> Jack Decker
<jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request> wrote:
> But because FCC Chairman Michael Powell had left last week, the timing
> was no longer right for a ruling, Level 3 CEO James Crowe said in a
> statement. "The appointment of new leadership only three business days
> before the statutory deadline for ruling on the petition" made it
> "inappropriate to ask the agency to resolve this important issue in
> the timeframe required by law," Crowe said.
To translate from PR-speak to English, they didn't think that the new
overlords would give a favourable ruling.
------------------------------
Reply-To: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@dvanhorn.org>
Subject: Re: What Happened To Channel 1
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 14:18:08 -0500
> There was such a huge amount of misinformation running around
> among the CBers. I couldn't believe some of the things they would say
> and I can't imagine where they were getting information like that.
Whenever I need some comic releif, I check out the CB section of the
local truck stop.
BTW: Did anyone notice the latest trend in antennas? You angle them
forward about 45 degrees. These are the rigid ones that might bend
back five degrees in the wind, if that much.
I haven't yet figured out what they think they are accomplishing.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I have heard that horizonal
polarization (that is, when an antenna is at a 90 degree angle) offers
better transmission and reception. The stuff transmitted 'vertically'
(which is how most antennas are mounted) does not get in the way as
'interference' that much. I think there is a difference if you are
radiating a 'full wave' or a 'half-wave' also. It has been a _long time_
since I studied much about citizen's band radio, but I do know that
the exact length and placement of a _transmitting_ antenna is very
critical in getting out a good signal. I do know that radio waves
travel at approximatly the speed of light (186,000 miles per second)
and the antenna has to be 'cut' in such a way as to accomodate that
formula. An 'eleven meter' band transmission (CB radio) therefore has
to have ideally an antenna about 14 feet long for a 'full wave' or
about 8 feet long for a 5/8 wave, which is considered acceptable. When
the amount of space is not sufficient, then the radio can be 'tricked'
by loading the antenna with coils. I have forgotten so much of that
stuff, it really pains me. Anyway, horizonal polarization is supposed
to have its good points. PAT]
------------------------------
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Tracking Down a Harassing Caller Number?
Date: 22 Mar 2005 11:21:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
AES wrote:
> Are there any official procedures or unofficial ways of tracking
> down the source of repeated harassing calls coming from a set of
> apparently related numbers in a distant area code?
Call your telephone company business office.
You didn't describe the call content -- if there is no one there,
it may be from a fax machine. Your business might help with that.
There is a call trace feature available in some areas that can trace
most calls, even blocked. There is usually a fee. The number is
given to the phone company's investigative unit. Check your telephone
directory if Call Trace (*70) is available and its terms and
procedures.
I don't know why they don't publicize Call Trace, though it is
in the phone book.
{TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think *57 is call trace and *70
is 'suspend call waiting for the remainder of this call'. *57 is
not publicized, maybe because of the huge fees they charge for what
they used to do for free (investigate people causing trouble for
others on the phone.) Telco does not like to admit that subscribers
are entitled to the peaceful, unmolested use of their phones. As
often as not, using *57 gets you a ten or fifteen dollar charge on
your phone bill and a letter in the mail a couple days later saying
they cannot do anything to help you. PAT]
------------------------------
From: adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes)
Subject: Re: Hackers Target U.S. Power Grid
Date: 22 Mar 2005 14:44:55 -0500
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
In article <telecom24.126.15@telecom-digest.org>,
Daniel J McDonald <djmcdona@fnord.io.com> wrote:
> In article <telecom24.114.13@telecom-digest.org>,
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> Power grids existed long before networked-computers came out. Why
>> would the grid be so vulnerable now?
> Because it is more efficient to control a grid froma central location,
> rather than sending men out to substations to throw breakers.
>> Shouldn't those critical networks be isolated from outside access
>> altogether?
> Information sharing can be gathered for non-control systems from the
> intelligent devices at grid control points. Meters are not only
> useful for determining load and deciding when to switch to a different
> circuit, but for billing as well. information about voltage and
> frequency support is used to demonstrate "more stability" and thus
> gain a higher retail price, in addition to giving the control board
> operators information on what they need to do to support the grid.
> Also, the grid has become more complicated, with "distributed
> generation". With people looking for alternative sources of power,
> there are many additional complexities. For example, in my city,
> Austin Texas, there are solar, fuel-cell, and small-package combined
> chiller/generators distributed around the city that feed into the
> grid, along with a couple of methane burners at the dumps.
> Coordinating all of those small generators takes extensive
> instrumentation that wasn't necessary 20 years ago, and wouldn't be
> possible without networks.
>> Secondly, they should be more worried about grid overloads from all the
>> power source shifting done today. The grids were not designed to
>> handle that kind of loads and problems like the recent NYC-NE blackout
>> will occur again.
> Yup. The real solution, assuming we can't upgrade the grid, is to
> build more powerplants closer to the load (that is, closer to
> population centers). Of course, that is very popular and people are
> overjoyed to welcome new jobs into their neighborhoods. ;-)
> Daniel J McDonald CCIE # 2495, CNX
> Visit my website: http://www.austinnetworkdesign.com
These little gas-fired plants (100MW ?) seem to be solving the problem
for the NYC area. They take about an acre and generate no perceptable
smells/noise/etc and pass zoning review if the proposed location isn't
a residential area.
The downside it seems is that we may have "overcomitted" our supply of
natural gas. Greenspan made a statement to this effect a year or so
ago.
--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
------------------------------
From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: VoIP and Bell DSL: Is it Ready For Prime Time?
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:16:13 -0800
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Lisa, what do you do in a case
>> like Brooklyn, New York where by the dispatcher's own admission,
>> "we do not answer this phone after 10 PM"?
> I don't understand the context of your statement. You mean they say
> in NYC they don't answer 911 calls after 10PM? I don't know the story,
> but I suspect perhaps the call was routed to a business office instead
> of an emergency line where such calls wouldn't be answered after hours.
Or, in a case like we have out here ...
There are 300,000 people in the Victor Valley region of San Bernardino
County, California, spread out over a significantly large chunk of
desert.
There are no municipal police departments in this particular area; the
patrol cars say Apple Valley Police, Hesperia Police, Adelanto Police,
etc., but the police officers are all actually county sherriff's
deputies. There is an outpost in each incorporated city.
You can call the Apple Valley police department number after hours,
but your call won't go to Apple Valley; it'll get routed to the
sherriff's outpost in Victorville. I am not sure whether the other
numbers get routed to Victorville after hours, but they probably do.
(When I say "call the Apple Valley number", I mean the local number,
not 911. Again, I'm not sure how things work out here but 911 is
probably routed to a regional PSAP.)
--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We have a similar situation here. The
town of Cherryvale, Kansas (population about two thousand) has a
police department, but during overnight hours, the *single* police
officer on duty is dispatched from here in Independence, and I
think their 911 lines overnight are routed here. PAT]
------------------------------
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 !
************************
Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.
The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum. Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.
Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu
************************
In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order
telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 V24 #127
******************************
| |