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 Fri, 29 Apr 2005 11:16:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 188 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson What Search Sites Know About You (Monty Solomon) Nokia Draws Bead on iPod People (Monty Solomon) Your Money Under More Scrutiny (Monty Solomon) IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment (Monty Solomon) Rainbow Media to Launch VOOM 21 HD Originals (Monty Solomon) Re: A Phone That Takes Dictation Testing Voice-to-Text (Lisa Hancock) Re: VoIP (T. Sean Weintz) Re: VoIP (Robert Bonomi) Remembering the panix.com Hijacking (Lisa Minter) 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: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:34:32 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: What Search Sites Know About You By Joanna Glasner For most people who spend a lot of time online, impulsively typing queries into a search engine has become second nature. Got a nasty infection in an embarrassing spot? Look up a treatment on your favorite search site. Obsessing about an ex? Try Googling his or her name. Chances are the queries will unearth some enlightening information. But while search engines are quite upfront about sharing their knowledge on topics you enter in the query box, it's not so clear what they know about you. As operators of the most popular search engines roll out more services that require user registration, industry observers and privacy advocates say it's become more feasible to associate a particular query with an individual. "You should think about what you put in that search box, because it may not be as anonymous as you think," said Danny Sullivan, editor of SearchEngineWatch.com. It has long been standard practice, Sullivan noted, for search sites to employ cookies, which track activity on a computer's internet browser. But cookies don't identify a person by name. If two people access a site on the same browser, the cookie wouldn't distinguish between them. However, when people provide personal information to register for services offered by search engine companies, such as free e-mail accounts, news alerts or personalized homepages, they're no longer anonymous. http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,67062,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:19:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Nokia Draws Bead on iPod People Reuters 11:28 AM Apr. 28, 2005 PT Nokia expects to sell 25 million smartphones this year -- handsets offering limited PC-type functions like e-mail -- more than doubling the 12 million it sold in 2004, according to a forecast by company CEO Jorma Ollila. He also said at a company event in Amsterdam that the company expects to ship 100 million camera phones in 2005, and that Nokia would sell 40 million phones with MP3 digital music players this year, compared with 10 million in 2004. By comparison, Apple said it sold 5.3 million iPods in the first three months of 2005 while Canon was the top seller of digital cameras in 2004, with 17 percent of the global market of 74 million units, according to research firm IDC. Nokia unveiled its N91 multimedia phone, which will have a 4-gigabyte hard drive that can store thousands of music files. The phone, which will also run on high-speed 3G and wireless LAN networks, is due out by the end of the year. Nokia said its other new phones, the N90 and the N70, will have two-megapixel cameras with high-quality Carl Zeiss lenses. The N90 will be in shops in the second quarter at a price of around 600 euros ($784), while the N70, also a 3G phone, will hit the shelves in the third quarter. Apple's original iPod retails for about 319 euros in Europe while Canon's cameras start at less than half the cost of the N90. The company launched the new N-series sub-brand to make the new phone lineup stand out as luxuries specifically designed for high quality photos, video and music. http://www.wired.com/news/gizmos/0,1452,67380,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:21:28 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Your Money Under More Scrutiny By Manu Joseph Pressured by anti-terror laws, banks will be spending billions of dollars over the next few years on software to counter money laundering. The software will automatically track suspicious financial transactions, but it will also monitor millions of innocuous ones, and may make it harder to cheat on your taxes. Thanks to the stringent requirements of the Patriot Act, enacted after 9/11 to choke the supply of terror funds, and the unambiguous threats of steep fines and even imprisonment of bank directors if their organizations facilitate money laundering, U.S. financial institutions are very enthusiastic about installing anti-money-laundering software. Between 2005 and 2008, American banks are forecast to spend about $14.7 billion on anti-money-laundering software, hardware, maintenance and other compliance-related activities, according to Neil Katkov, a Tokyo-based analyst with Celent Communications. Europe and Asia are expected to spend over $11.6 billion during that period. By 2006, 94 percent of large financial institutions in the United States will have installed anti-money-laundering, or AML, technologies, according to Celent. Already, the United States is the global driver of anti-laundering software. And the number of transactions reported to government agencies, like the United States' Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, is growing fast. In 2004, banks reported 14.8 million transactions to FinCEN. That's 600,000 reports more than in 2003, according to FinCEN's annual report for 2004 (.pdf). http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,67249,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:43:27 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment; SBC calls for 'light-touch' regulatory approach to ensure consumers receive new technology quickly 20 April 2005, 10:02am ET SAN ANTONIO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 20, 2005--IP-based television will change the way consumers watch TV while opening a new competitive choice for millions, said Lea Ann Champion, senior executive vice president of IP Operations and Services for SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) at a U.S. House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing about the future of new technology. Champion demonstrated the capabilities of IP-based video or IPTV for lawmakers and urged them to avoid imposing incumbent obligations on new entrants in the video services market that would discourage deployment of the new system. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200504201402_BWR__BW5581 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:45:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Rainbow Media to Launch VOOM 21 HD Originals Rainbow Media Holdings to Launch and Operate VOOM 21 HD Originals; Signs Major Distribution Agreement with EchoStar Communications Corporation JERICHO, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 29, 2005--Rainbow Media Holdings LLC: -- Greg Moyer and Nora Ryan Named Co-General Managers of VOOM 21 HD Originals -- VOOM HD originals will appear on DISH Network Rainbow Media Holdings LLC today announced that it will operate and launch the VOOM 21 HD Originals, an innovative suite of 21 high-definition channels, for distribution to cable operators and satellite TV providers. Rainbow also announced today that it has concluded its first major carriage agreement for the channels with EchoStar Communications Corporation, which will carry ten of the HD channels on its DISH Network, expanding to carry all 21 channels by 2006. The terms of the deal were not disclosed. http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200504291248_BWR__BW5229 ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: A Phone That Takes Dictation: Testing Voice-to-Text Function Date: 29 Apr 2005 07:21:57 -0700 Monty Solomon wrote: > This week, my assistant Katie Boehret and I tested a new phone that > attempts to solve the text-entry problem in a novel way that doesn't > involve typing, and can be used on a small, inexpensive phone with > just a numerical keypad. This new phone lets you dictate your text > messages by just speaking into the phone. > Unfortunately, it doesn't work very well. Voice recognition technology still has a long way to go before it works. I don't like automated answering systems, but I much prefer working with Touch-Tone signals than voice commands which seem to be often misunderstood and less precise. The English language is a horrible thing to automate. Remember English developed from TWO distinct sources and is a blend of syntax, sounds, etc. How do you deal with "their there they're"? Years ago the hospital I worked at had automated voice dictation recording equipment via the telephone system. One dialed into the system, then dialed various codes to start/stop/playback the tape. The tapes were sent out for transcription. Note this was controlled by rotary phones. I believe dictation systems was one of the few things the Bell System allowed to be interconnected with their network. The PBX seized the incoming extension line in order to get the dial pulses, and passed them onto to the dictation system. I presume supervision was passed too. (Music for the PA system was also provided by independent playback though the PA system itself was Bell and part of the PBX.) ------------------------------ From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org> Subject: Re: VoIP Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:24:52 -0400 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Choreboy wrote: > For several months I've been getting calls with spoofed Caller IDs. I > understand spoofing requires either VoIP or a PBX system with DSL. > Can anybody with cable internet access and suitable software make VoIP > calls? > The other day I received a wrong-number call from an exchange belonging > to Level 3 Communications. Among other services, they offer residential > VoIP services through wholesalers such as ISPs and cable operators. I'm > confused. Does a consumer need these services to use VoIP? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think either 'VOIP' or 'PBX system' > have anything to do with it. If I understand correctly what I have > read here in the Digest, it requires a 'PRI' type thing; that is, a > multi-channel set of lines going to DID, or Direct Inward Dialing, > which would, I guess, be similar to a PBX arrangement. Companies who > have those lines _can_ set the caller ID to be whatever is appropriate > in their instance. I suspect the fact that the ID shown was that > company may have been just coincidental. You do need either cable > internet or DSL to use VOIP; regular 'dialup' lines are just not wide > enough or fast enough to do VOIP. But other than having DSL or cable, > VOIP takes nothing especially fancy; just an adapter box from the > place where you get the VOIP service and any regular telephone > instrument will do the job. And if you planned on totally getting > rid of your landline phone taking VOIP instead, that is generally > not possible with DSL, since most telcos will not give stand-alone > DSL. PAT] Caller ID CAN be spoofed using VOIP. Apperently SIP allows for this, and some VOIP providers leave this feature open for customers to use/abuse. I know hackers were spoofing caller ID over VOIP using the ASTERISK open source PBX system which lets you set all the nitty gritty SIP parameters -- apparently including the CLID string. From what I understand, some providers filter this at their switch, some don't ... PRI's are a standard type of high cap ISDN line (as opposed to BRI, the low cap vesrion). I think caller ID can be spoofed from EITHER type of ISDN line, assuming one has the right type of equipment plugged into it (which usually means a PBX switch) ------------------------------ From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Subject: Re: VoIP Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:34:52 -0000 Organization: Widgets, Inc. In article <telecom24.186.17@telecom-digest.org>, Robert Bonomi <bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote: > In article <telecom24.185.17@telecom-digest.org>, Choreboy > <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote: >> For several months I've been getting calls with spoofed Caller IDs. I >> understand spoofing requires either VoIP or a PBX system with DSL. >> Can anybody with cable internet access and suitable software make VoIP >> calls? >> The other day I received a wrong-number call from an exchange belonging >> to Level 3 Communications. Among other services, they offer residential >> VoIP services through wholesalers such as ISPs and cable operators. I'm >> confused. Does a consumer need these services to use VoIP? >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think either 'VOIP' or 'PBX >> system' have anything to do with it. If I understand correctly what >> I have read here in the Digest, it requires a 'PRI' type thing; >> that is, a multi-channel set of lines going to DID, or Direct >> Inward Dialing, >> Would you believe "DOD" -- direct *OUTWARD* >> dial? >> "DID" trunks handle incoming calls only. "DOD" trunks >> handle outgoing calls only. >> "DID/DOD" trunks handle both. >> Caller-id data _origination_ occurs only for outgoing calls. >> which would, I guess, be similar to a PBX arrangement. >> Some sort of a 'switch', usually a PBX-equivalent, is required to >> handle DID / DOD trunks. >> Then there are the "big boys" -- who have SS7-compatible switches, >> which are a C.O.-equivalent, rather than PBX-equivalent, device. >> Companies who have those lines _can_ set the caller ID to be >> whatever is appropriate in their instance. >> Sometimes the telco 'filters' what CID data the >> company can send, sometimes not. When "not", an unscrupulous >> company can set the ID info to _anything_. >> Unfortunately, the "lowest-priced" PRI providers are the ones least >> likely to do filtering, *and* are the ones that said unscrupulous >> companies are most likely to use. TELECOM Digest Editor continued: >> I suspect the fact that the ID shown was >> that company may have been just coincidental. You do need either >> cable internet or DSL to use VOIP; regular 'dialup' lines are just >> not wide enough or fast enough to do VOIP. But other than having >> DSL or cable, VOIP takes nothing especially fancy; just an adapter >> box from the place where you get the VOIP service and any regular >> telephone instrument will do the job. And if you planned on >> totally getting rid of your landline phone taking VOIP instead, >> that is generally not possible with DSL, since most telcos will not >> give stand-alone DSL. Mr. Bonomi continued: >> Unless you buy SDSL service, which is >> _always_ delivered on it's own pair. >> Unless you get your DSL >> from MCI, Covad, or New Edge Networks -- or a >'reseller' of any of >> those carriers -- all of whom offer dedicated-pair ADSL. >> Unless Qwest is your ILEC. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I _defy you_ to pick up your >> phone right now and talk to the first service rep who answers and >> order SDSL service. They will not know what you are talking about; >> probably no one in the vicinity will know. I guess I just deal with a better class of service rep than you do. I've _never_ had any problem ordering SDSL. And I've only done it more than a dozen times. Providers in CA, WA, FL, NY, and IL. Never dealt with New Edge; _have_ dealt with MCI, Covad, and several other no-longer-existent physical-services providers, e.g. 'northlight'. TELECOM Digest Editor continued: > And if you _do_ order it satisfactorily > from MCI, Covad, New Edge or others, then God bless you; it will be > extraordinarily expensive and if your intent was to save money by > going with VOIP instead of landline, you've completely killed that > plan. *ANY* dedicated internet connection with VoIP will be more expensive than a simple POTS land-line, This is a given. SDSL is generally more expensive -- yes, even "much more expensive" -- because of the 'class of service' provided with that physical transport. It doesn't _have_ to be, SDSL head-end equipment is no more expensive than ADSL gear is. The higher price tag generally buys you: Pro-active monitoring of circuit and head-end equipment, with vendor- initiated maintenance _before_ problems reach 'noticeable' levels LESS oversubscription of the upstream link(s). This means that you have a _much_better_ chance of getting all the bandwidth you need/want, *WHEN* you need/want it. *immediate* contact with _knowledgeable_ tech-support staff. none of this 'wait 30 minutes on hold, while being told how 'important your call is to us', crap. No 'first-line' droids who don't know how to deal with anything that isn't in one of the 'scripts' they had to memorize. But actual _thinking_ people. The types who _don't_ suggest that you need to restart Windows when the problem is that traceroute is dieing two hops _upstream_ of the DSLAM. If ones own time has any significant value, the 'opportunity cost' of the time spent "waiting on hold", with the typical consumer ISP, reaches significant figures in very short order. Cable companies seem to be especially bad in _this_ respect. Dealing with *one* recent problem, where their cable internet service was totally out for almost a week, my folks spent nearly _twelve_hours_ "on hold", trying to get the problem fixed. As semi-retired professional business consultants, their time bills at only $80/hr. That's a 'cost' of nearly $1,000, above and beyond the amounts invoiced. If paying an _additional_ $75/month for service would have avoided the problem, they would have come out 'ahead' for the year. Unfortunately, they _don't_ have ANY choice for high-speed access. They're too far from the telco C.O. for DSL. And there is only the one cable company "in town". Well,"in town", sort-of. The customer support phones are answered in another state. "Business class" service costs more than bottom-of-the-bucket. If you grossly oversubscribe the uplink from the DSLAM -- and I've seen a full shelf of 24 ports (at 768k down) serviced by a _single_ T-1 -- your costs are relatively low. OTOH, 'business class' service often feeds four shelves of 768kbit ports with at 45mbit T-3. TELECOM Digest Editor continued: > In essence -- in real life practice and experience -- you cannot > get stand alone DSL (and pay your VOIP bill each month on top of that) > in any reasonable cost-effective way. After arguing with the service > reps for some period of time on the matter, you will decide cable is a > better and less expensive way to go. PAT] *THAT* depends on what your needs are. If you need _reliable_ amounts of bandwidth, especially uplink bandwidth, cable generally cannot deliver it. The sheer number of customers sharing the same limited capacity on the cable prevents it. Cable typically has several hundred -- up to a few _thousand_ -- customers sharing the circa 60mbit of cable capacity. And usually only a single T-3 feeding the head- end for that run. It doesn't take many 'bandwidth hogs' to saturate the upstream capacity. *Very*few* cable companies can provide you with more than a *single* IP address. Many cable companies _forbid_ running 'servers' of any sort in their contract. (Typical allocation of cable bandwidth is 10=15% for 'up' from the customer, and 85-90% for 'down' to the customer -- with servers usually generating much more outbound traffic than inbound, they chew up a disproportionate chunk of the 'up' bandwidth, adversely impacting all the other cable customers on the same run.) Virtually no cable company will give you more than a _single_ IP address. A fair number of cable companies do not offer the option of a true 'static' address. DHCP pools *only*. If you can get a static address, forget about getting 'reverse DNS' that reflects _your_ information. With, generally, a choice of *one* cable company in any locale, you have only a 'take it or leave it' choice. Some DSL providers, particularly the lowest-price ones, do make similar engineering decisions, and impose similar restrictions on use of their service. Doing so is one way of being able to hold costs down, so that you _can_ offer service at a 'cheaper' price-point. Virtually all DSL providers, however, offer a _much_wider_ range of services, at a correspondingly wider range of price-points, than cable companies do. They can do this because, unlike cable companies, there is _only_one_ customer on any given run of wire exiting the head-end. And, therefore, they *can* connect different customers -- on a customer-by-customer basis -- to different head-end equipment, providing different levels of service. They can put the _sustained_ high-bandwidth users -- with minimal 'over-subscription' -- all together on gear that is engineered to handle the sustained loads, and priced accordingly, while still advertising high-speed service, albeit 'grossly oversubscribed' to the casual user at a bargain price. Cable service _is_ "absolutely great" for the 'early adopters'. As long as the number of customers sharing the same 'run' from the head-end is small, it works superbly. On the other hand, there are routine complaints from cable subscribers in Chicago proper, that the "high-speed" service is nearly unusable from around 3:30 in the afternoon till on towards 10:00PM. That they get throughput of a whopping 60-100k bits/second download speed on their "advertised as multi-megabit" connection. It seems directly attributable to all the school-kids coming home and getting online to play games. "Too many users, not enough bandwidth" No way to 'fix' it, either, short of physically *re-wiring* the territory (the 'outside physical plant'), so that there are fewer customers per run from the head-end. The architecture of DSL 'scales' better, because there is *no* 'sharing' of the data connection between the customer and the head end. Thus, one customer cannot adversely affect the 'last mile' bandwidth available to another customer. Cable Internet isn't necessarily "bad", but there are more places, and more ways, where the quality of service can, _as_delivered_to_the_ customer_, get clobbered. *ANY* assertation that any particular technology choice is alway "better" is patent nonsense. One has to consider: 1) what the customer _requirements_ are 2) what the available alternatives are *in*their*area* 3) what the advantages/disadvantages of _those_ offerings are. In _my_ situation, 'cable' was simply *not* a viable alternative. Firstly, because until quite recently, the cable company in my area *DID*NOT* *OFFER* internet service. This _is_ an 'insurmountable barrier' to choosing cable internet service. <grin> Now that they do, their only offering is STILL not compatible with my needs I need multiple public-network IP addresses (NAT is not a viable option for technical reasons -- d*mn those protocols that put IP addresses _inside_ the data part of the packet!) and the cable company will only provide _one_ such address. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 02:17:12 EDT From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> Subject: Remembering the panix.com Hijacking After we here, (telecom and Townson) accidentally lost the internet-history.org domain and the company in Geneva, CH grabbed it (and still have done nothing with it other than illegally squat on it to prevent _us_ from using it), we did hear from the guy who grabbed it, offering to return it for $800. At first, it sounded a lot like the panix.com hijacking, and it does bear some similarities, but the key distinction is that Panix ownership never "expired", so there was no legal validity whatsoever to any other person's claims. But if Panix hadn't had powerful and ugly friends helping them, no doubt they'd have heard things like "well, it'll take a month or two to resolve, but if we put our expert programmer on it, at $500/day, you'll have it back in 48 hours" Two articles worth reviewing to get more aquainted with the hijacking at Panix are these: There's a half hearted article over at: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1781860,00.asp and some more stuff at: http://www.icann.org/correspondence/cole-to-tonkin-14mar05.htm This is not any official statement from Panix management about what happened. But an official statement from me might be "The internet just is not fun to use any longer. The piles of shit through the barnyard have long since exceeded the green pastures of the commons I have heard through ancient tales used to be here instead." Lisa Minter ------------------------------ 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 ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #188 ****************************** | |