TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:32:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 281

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Adelphia Executives Get Sent to Prison (Lisa Minter)
    Think Small if You Want to Hack Big! (Lisa Minter)
    Don't Bet on Web Gambling Crackdown (Lisa Minter)
    Re: Bell Divestiture (Tony P.)
    Re: Bell Divestiture (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: ISP Hunting (J Kelly)
    Re: Ping Between PC Through PABX (Dave Garland)
    Re: Ping Between PC Through PABX (T. Sean Weintz)
    Re: Power Strips for Home Networks (John Levine)
    Re: Power Strips for Home Networks (Bob Vaughan)
    Re: Is it Possible to Buy a Cell Phone With no Plan? (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: '80' Country Code (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: DSL Speed (Choreboy)
    New Virus: Was _He_ Actually Guilty? $1000 For Opinion (Pat Townson)
    Last Laugh! Cruise Info With a Toll Free Number (Steven Lichter)

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: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Adelphia Executives Sent to Prison
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:33:20 -0500


Adelphia Head, Son Sentenced in Fraud Case
By ERIN McCLAM, Associated Press Writer

John Rigas, who turned a $300 investment a half-century ago into cable
behemoth Adelphia Communications Corp., was sentenced to 15 years in
prison Monday for his role in the looting and debt-hiding scandal that
pummeled the company into bankruptcy.

Rigas' son Timothy, 49, who like his father was convicted last year of
bank fraud, securities fraud and conspiracy, was sentenced to 20 years
in prison.  Sand could have sentenced both men to life.

The sentences are among the harshest handed down in any U.S. court
since the fall of Enron in 2001 touched off a rash of corporate
scandals that rocked the markets and have cost investors billions of
dollars.

Raising the possibility that the frail, 80-year-old Rigas could die
behind bars, U.S. District Judge Leonard Sand said the sentence might
be cut short if Rigas serves at least two years and prison doctors
believe he has less than three months to live.

"This is a tragedy lacking in heroes," the judge said.

Adelphia prosecutors had accused the Rigases of using complicated
cash-management systems to spread money around to various family-owned
entities and as a cover for stealing about $100 million for
themselves.

They were accused of spending the money on a lengthy list of personal
luxuries. Prosecutors said John Rigas had ordered two Christmas trees
flown to New York for his daughter at a cost of $6,000, ordered as
many as 17 company cars and had the company buy 3,600 acres of
timberland -- for $26 million -- to preserve the view outside his
Pennsylvania home.

Worse still for investors, the company collapsed into bankruptcy in
2002 after it disclosed a staggering $2.3 billion in off-balance-sheet
debt that prosecutors said was deliberately hid by the Rigases.

"Our intentions were good. The results were not," Timothy Rigas told
the judge.

Adelphia, founded by John Rigas in tiny Coudersport, Pa., and the
lifeblood of that town for 50 years, now operates under bankruptcy
protection in Greenwood Village, Colo. The nation's fifth-largest
cable company, Adelphia has more than 5 million customers in 31 states
and Puerto Rico.

Sand declined to force the two men to pay restitution, noting the
family has already agreed to forfeit more than $1.5 billion to settle
regulatory charges.

At the most dramatic moment of a hearing that stretched nearly three
hours Monday afternoon, John Rigas slowly rose from his chair just
before being sentenced, shuffled to a lectern and addressed the judge,
speaking slowly and softly.

"In my heart and in my conscience, I'll go to my grave really and
truly believing that I did nothing but try to improve the conditions
of my employees," he said.

He said repeatedly he had led a blessed life, and even thanked members
of the military "that fought for America and gave their lives because
they believed in America and what it stood for."

"If I did anything wrong, I apologize," he said.

Just after he was sentenced, the elder Rigas, hunched forward in his
seat, held his right hand over his mouth and dabbed at his eyes and
nose with a white tissue.

The judge, while expressing concern for Rigas' age and poor health,
made repeated reference to the investors who had placed their trust in
the Rigas family, many losing their retirement security.

At one point, Rigas' lawyer Peter Fleming tried to convince Sand that
his client believed deeply in philanthropy, loved the town of
Coudersport and was "obviously scared to death of prison."

The judge interjected: "Do you see what he did? What he did to
Coudersport, what he did with assets and by means which were not
appropriately his?"

"To be a great philanthropist with other people's money really is not
very persuasive," Sand said.

Both men were ordered to report to prison Sept. 19, but lawyers told
the judge they planned to file motions for their clients to stay out
of prison pending appeal.

One defense lawyer said he hoped the U.S. Bureau of Prisons would
assign John Rigas to the Federal Medical Center in Rochester, Minn.

The sentences come as some of the highest-profile white-collar fraud
cases in the post-Enron era lurch toward their conclusions in courts
around the country.

Just Friday, former Tyco International Ltd. CEO L. Dennis Kozlowski
and former CFO Mark Swartz were convicted of looting that company of
$600 million. They are to be sentenced in August.

Next month, former WorldCom Inc. chief Bernard Ebbers faces sentencing
for orchestrating the $11 billion accounting scandal at that
company. Already 63, Ebbers could spend the rest of his life in
prison.

In October 2004, former Rite Aid Corp. attorney Franklin C. Brown, 76,
was sentenced to 10 years for his conviction on several crimes related
to the drugstore chain's accounting scandal. Five months earlier,
former Rite Aid CEO Martin L. Grass was sentenced to eight years in
prison.

A former finance executive of Dynegy Inc., Jamie Olis, was sentenced
in March 2004 to 24 years in prison for his role in a fraudulent
accounting scheme at the Houston-based energy company.

In Birmingham, Ala., jurors have deliberated for a month in the fraud
case against fired HealthSouth Corp. CEO Richard Scrushy. And three
top Enron executives will go on trial in Houston early next year.

In the Adelphia case, a second Rigas son, Michael, the company's
former executive vice president for operations, faces retrial in
October after jurors were deadlocked on securities fraud and bank
fraud charges against him.

Former Adelphia assistant treasurer Michael Mulcahey was tried with
the Rigases but was acquitted of all charges.

As he left the courthouse in Manhattan and faced a phalanx of
reporters and cameras, John Rigas was asked how it felt to watch his
son be sentenced to prison.

"It just crushes me," he said.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. 

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/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Think Small in Order to Hack Big 
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:35:45 -0500


Hackers score big by thinking small, experts say
By Andy Sullivan

A recent computer security breach that left 40 million credit cards
vulnerable to fraud shows how online criminals are scoring big by
thinking small, experts said on Monday.

Cybercriminals are increasingly crafting more focused attacks with a
potential for profit as they target one or two companies at a time,
rather than blasting out Internet virus attacks across the globe,
according to security experts.

The payoffs can be enormous. MasterCard International said on Friday
that an outsider gained access to as many as 40 million credit and
debit cards from CardSystems Solutions Inc., a payment processor. A
MasterCard spokeswoman said on Monday that the attacker had placed a
malicious computer script on CardSystems computers.

In Israel, police are investigating a massive case of industrial
espionage that used a "Trojan horse" computer program to copy
confidential information from some of the country's top businesses.

Security vendors say such attacks are increasingly common.

"We have seen several examples of targeted, manually crafted Trojans
that people write and implement for a very small number of companies,"
said Aladdin Security Vice President Shimon Gruper.

MessageLabs chief technical officer Mark Sunner said that since
January the company has seen a 150 percent increase in attacks that
only target one or two companies.

Experts said there are a number of reasons behind the shift. Playful
hackers looking for kicks could write viruses that plagued companies
and computers around the world but brought them no financial
return. They have been elbowed aside by organized criminals, often
based in Eastern Europe, who are motivated by profit and willing to
launch a sustained, sophisticated assault.

Targeted attacks have another key advantage: they are usually small
enough to stay off the radar of Internet security firms that are
looking for broader attacks. That gives the high-tech criminals the
time to research a company thoroughly before trying to penetrate it.

"You know there's specific technology, a piece of intellectual
property, how much money is in their accounts," said RSA Security
Inc. CEO Art Coviello. "That's the advantage -- you have a little bit
more knowledge."

Attackers can then send individual, personalized e-mails to the target
company's employees, or pose as an IT administrator who needs to
install a software update. Once in, they can use simple spyware
programs to pick up passwords, account numbers and other valuable
information.

"When you see a focused attack like this, this is kind of your
worst-case scenario. These are people who are going to actually do
something with those credit cards once they get them," said Mike
Gibbons, a Unisys Corp.  vice president and former FBI cybercrime
chief.

E-mail viruses have lost their teeth now that more people are using
antivirus software properly, said Alfred Huger, senior director of
engineering at the antivirus provider Symantec Corp.

While old viruses continue to circulate, "they're background noise,"
he said.

At the same time, Microsoft Corp. has patched the most gaping holes in
its Windows operating system and companies have learned to install
those patches quickly, said John Pescatore, a vice president at the
consulting firm Gartner Inc.

Identity thieves who used to go through trash bins to find credit-card
receipts have learned that it's more worthwhile to extract such
information from companies that collect it.

"Two years ago I would say one of the things you should do is shred
your trash. Now that is completely obsolete advice," said Bruce
Schneier, chief technical officer for Counterpane Internet Security Inc.

Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have said on a few occassions that
the phisher people would begin to grow impatient at the limited
success to be had by sending a piece of fraud email to someone asking
for bank account information, etc. Smart phisher people now get the
same files wholesale, from the source at the bank, wherever. I mean,
which makes more sense to you; typing in a jillion letters purporting
to be from one bank or another, hoping that an occassional fool will
respond with the details you need, or putting on a delivery man's
uniform and dealing with some disinterested fool of a clerk in a
bank somewhere? Which method will get the phisher person more and
better results?  Oh sure, they still send out those letters also, I
got six or eight requests today alone from 'Bank of America' and
'Pay Pal' which I promptly pitched out, but why not just go for the
full load all at once, as happened last week?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Don't Bet on Web Gambling Crackdown
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:37:04 -0500


By Andy Sullivan

Online-poker company PartyGaming has warned investors that the U.S.
government could interfere with its operations, but observers say
that's about as likely as drawing four aces in a game of five-card
stud.

U.S. law enforcers are unlikely to directly pursue PartyGaming --
which plans a public stock offering in London next week -- or any
other online-gambling company due to unresolved legal questions,
several industry experts said.

"It's so remote that the chances approach those of being hit by
lighting," said Joseph Kelly, a professor of business law at the
University of Buffalo law professor who has helped other countries
draft online-gambling rules.

The U.S. Justice Department says several laws that prohibit interstate
gambling apply to the Internet as well, and it intends to prosecute
violators.

Under pressure from the Justice Department, services like Visa and
PayPal have blocked payments to gambling sites, while media outlets
and search engines like Yahoo Inc. have declined to run their ads.

That hasn't stopped millions of U.S. citizens from placing bets on
offshore Web sites like PartyGaming's PartyPoker.com, which is based
in Gibraltar.

Online casinos like Bodog.com sponsor glitzy Las Vegas conferences,
and other payment services like e-gold have stepped in to handle the
business that Visa and eBay Inc.'s PayPal are leaving on the table.

PartyGaming plans to go public by June 27 in what promises to be the
London Stock Exchange's largest IPO in four years.

The company warned last week that anti-gambling efforts by the United
States could make it difficult to advertise and collect payments, and
could even result in jail time for company officials.

The Justice Department has so far prosecuted only one online gambling
operation, an Antiguan sports-betting Web site run by a U.S. citizen,
in 2000. Justice Department officials said that several other
companies have pleaded guilty before going to trial.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in November 2002 that the
1961 Wire Act, which forbids interstate telephone betting, only
applies to sports-betting operations, not online casinos or poker
rooms.

The World Trade Organization ruled last year that the United States's
anti-gambling stance violates international trade agreements, a
decision the U.S. government has appealed.

"I think the Department of Justice is just sending out all these
messages to avoid a confrontation where they might have to prove it in
a court of law," said Frank Catania, a former gambling regulator for
the state of New Jersey who now works as a consultant to the industry.

Justice Department officials said they haven't brought more cases
because of a lack of resources, not a shaky legal foundation. Even if
the Fifth Circuit's decision stands, two other 1960s-era anti-gambling
laws can be used against Internet gambling sites, they said.

Efforts to pass an anti-gambling law that applies specifically to the
Internet have stumbled in Congress since at least the late 1990s amid
a thicket of competing interests: horse racing, dog racing, state
lotteries, Indian casinos and anti-gambling crusaders.

Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl (news, bio, voting record) is expected
to introduce another anti-gambling bill soon. Though the bill will be
updated "to reflect the explosive growth of the industry,"
PartyGaming's upcoming IPO is not a factor, a Kyl spokesman said.

Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. 

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/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

------------------------------

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Bell Divestiture 
Organization: ATCC
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:39:42 -0400


In article <telecom24.279.17@telecom-digest.org>, 
kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net says:

> In article <telecom24.278.11@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest
> Editor noted in response: 

>> Chicago is where the BBS concept got started. Randy Seuss and Ward
>> Christianson started the very first one. (In yesterday's Digest,
>> Robert Bonomi mentioned how Randy had such hassles with Illinois Bell
>> getting the lines he needed). Bell and Howell computers _were_ Apple
>> ][+ machines except for the lable on the front of them, and many of
>> them, such as mine, had not only a 300 baud modem card on a slot
>> inside, but an 'expanded memory' card as well, to go in another slot
>> inside, and a 'clock card' plus a couple of floppy disk driver
>> cards. I would guess that by 1980 there were a dozen or more BBS's
>> operating, all in Chicago or nearby suburbs, and almost none anywhere
>> else in the world. 

>> The Library had their BBS (BELmont 5-3200) based on Bill Blue's
>> *People's Message System* as did a guy in Downers Grove, IL. Rogers
>> Park ABBS (973-ABBS [2227]) used some other kind of software for
>> Apple as I did with my original BBS called 'First Choice'
>> (SHEldrake-3-0001). But I soon decided to work with a different BBS
>> 'skeleton' to make 'Lake Shore Modem Magazine' on my other phone
>> line SHEldrake-3-0002 instead, and Lake Shore Modem Magazine went on
>> line in July, 1981. Tim had his Tandy Model 4 operating "Think BBS"
>> (based on the old IBM slogan) and Randy Suess kept plugging along
>> with his CBBS, until he eventually decided to go 'multi-user' with
>> his Chinet system, which was when all the trouble with the telephone
>> company got started, in 1984 I think. Ward and Randy were not only
>> first with the BBS concept, I think they were first with the
>> multi-user concept also (regards home or residential service). There
>> was a guy in Oak Park, Illinois using his Tandy Model-4 to run a
>> FIDO multi-user node around that same time, but I never did much
>> care for the FIDO people; they all seemed so prissy and
>> authoritarian, IMO. I did maintain a user group out of his node for
>> six months or so, but the FIDO bosses decided to ex-communicate his
>> entire system, so that was good enough for me: I had been off and on
>> using Usenet (via Portal) for a couple years at that point and
>> decided to give up on FIDO and use Usenet exclusively instead, and I
>> did that mostly with my Zenith Z-19 terminal and modem. From Randy
>> Suess one day I got a bunch of other very good working terminals and
>> modems as well; that was around 1983. I finally shut down my BBS
>> (Lakeshore Modem Magazine) on December 31, 1985 for good.  PAT]

> Interesting about the TRS-80 Model 4 multi node. If I'm not mistaken 
> that was running SIDOS. 

> Here is the story behind SIDOS:

> In 1982 a friend of mine convinced me to spend hard earned money on a
> modem so I could connect the the NYBBLINK BBS here in Providence. A
> month after I'd gotten the modem NYBBLINK went down for good.

> So my friend Don Lambert decided to re-wire his Model III so that it
> had multiple RS-232 ports, and ISAM file system, as well as all sorts
> of communications enhancements to TRSDOS, enough so that it was a
> different O/S once he got through with it. After a few months of the
> two of us brainstorming and testing the crap out of the system Syslink
> was born.

> SIDOS was then run on two other BBS's in RI that spawned a major
> communications player. PowerNet and PowerCor both ran SIDOS. The
> operator of PowerCor then procured through some nefarious means a DEC
> MicroVax II and formed Intelecom Data Systems, or IDS.

> The assets of IDS were rolled up and became Conversent Communications. 

> All because I didn't want to be stuck with a modem and nothing to
> connect to locally.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very, very interesting. There are a lot 
> of good stories, mostly untold, from the early years of BBS'ing and
> networking. I'll bet an entire newsgroup could be started and maintained
> with just such accounts. But was SIDOS running on Model 4 as it came
> out of the factory?  My friend with the Think BBS and the guy in Oak
> Park who ran a FIDO node brought their boxes home from Radio Shack, 
> and plugged them in and started their sites within a day or two; no
> adaptation needed that I recall them saying.  PAT]

It's entirely possible that Don sold SIDOS to Tandy. I was out of the
loop at that point.

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Bell Divestiture
Date: 20 Jun 2005 13:36:29 -0700


Michael D. Sullivan wrote:

>  I used it starting in 1965, when my high school got a
> single TTY connected to it, either the only or one of a very few high
> schools connected to time sharing in the mid 1960s.

> By the late 1960s, time-sharing was much more widespread and was heavily
> used.  But not in the mid-60s.

Our school system got it in 1967.  Is that "mid" or is that "late"
1960s?

In any event, the point is that the demand data lines were growing and
the Bell System was responding to that demand.

Of course let's remember Teletype (a Bell unit) developed a faster
machine (the 33 and 35) that used the new ASCII code.

> The problem for regulators and regulated telcos comes when the
> services that are providing the subsidy for below-cost residential
> service are subject to competition.  ...

> ... in the old days, AT&T had an incentive
> to allocate costs to long-distance, to keep that price as high as
> possible within its rate of return and keep local residential
> service low ...

Many people have stated that long distance rates were higher to
cross-subsidize residential service.  But where is that documented as
to _original_ reliable source?

Further, what was the dollars/percentage impact of that cross-subsidy?
That is, how much more would residential service have cost and how
much less would long distance?  Does anyone have an authoritive
source?

I must note that accurate cost allocation between a "toll call" and a
"local call" would be extremely difficult in the old Bell System
because the infrastructure was so tightly integrated.  More distant
calls would get transferred to Long Lines for microwave or carrier
transmission, but even Long Lines used local Bell buildings.
Telephone operators handled local problems and toll connections.  And
of course there was the charge to handle to the last mile to the
destination.

More importantly, toll calls were charged by distance, not real cost.
As Pat noticed, it was dangerous work to maintain transmission units
in the Rocky Mountains and people were killed doing it.  I dare say
toll calls that passed over such locations didn't have to pay anywhere
near what it cost to make that possible.  Conversely, toll calls in
highly developed corridors could use high volume microwave or coax
circuits that were quite cheap on a per-call basis.

I think this mileage rate was where the real "cream skimming" occured.
As noted, MCI did not offer operator or directory assistance or even
enough circuits to guarantee good quality.  They had the comfort of
AT&T there as a backup.  Under those conditions, it was very easy for
MCI to unfairly undercut AT&T on prices and make AT&T "look bad".

> Your one example is off.  AT&T introduced the picturephone at the NY
> World's Fair in 1964 and the Bell System never introduced it into
> service at all, as far as I can tell.  Does your phone show pictures?

I believe Picturephone was offered in public service as a trial in
some location, as typical Bell System practice of trying out something
new in a single location to see how it works.  It was also offered to
some govt agencies as a tryout.  A revised system had magnifiers to
allow transmittal of documents on a table rather than just people.
Obviously it failed to attract much attention.

I believe the Bell System then offered picture-conferencing service,
where a conference room was set up with cameras, microphones, and
monitors.  A whole group of people could meet this way.  I believe
this was moderately successful and still offered today by private
vendors.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In Chicago, PicturePhone service was
made available to businesses for a couple years, and at the Illinois
Bell Headquarters building downtown, they had a 'shopping mall' sort
of arrangement for the general public to use. You could go in these
little booths and use a picture phone with a speed dialer which had
all the stores around town who subscribed to picture phone service
in its repretoire. You could go into the little stall entitled 
'flowers' and press the button on the phone for the various florists
in town with picture phone. In a couple seconds, the screen would 
light up and the clerk in the store would be seen with all the flowers
for sale.  You could place your order via PicturePhone after you had
seen the various arrangement they had. You would then be asked by
the merchant to punch in your credit card number and hold the card
clearly in front of the camera (on your end) so the clerk could see
it as she rang up the sale. Or, go to the PicturePhone set up for the
'housewares department' or the 'clothing department' and do the same
thing. But it only lasted a few months (the 'shopping mall' at the
phone company offices) and then was closed. PAT]

------------------------------

From: J Kelly <jkelly@*newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: ISP Hunting
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:45:09 -0500
Organization: http://newsguy.com
Reply-To: jkelly@*newsguy.com


On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:47:15 -0600, DevilsPGD <spamsucks@crazyhat.net>
wrote:

> I'm eyeballing dialup access through ISP.COM which offers $8.95 - 56K
> Regular Dial-up -- any thoughts, good or bad?  Can I do better?

> Any thoughts?

I used ISP.com for a couple years, I dropped them last month when I
switched to using Newsguy.com (I already had been using Newsguy for
years for Newsgroup access) to save a few bucks.  I used ISP.com over
Newsguy at first due to the extra POPs available that Newsguy didn't
have.  I no longer need those extra POPs.

------------------------------

From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Subject: Re: Ping Between PC Through PABX
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:24:30 -0500
Organization: Wizard Information


It was a dark and stormy night when yuniarsetiawan@gmail.com wrote:

> Both computer has been connected to the pabx, but they just can't
> ping/communicate each other.

Does the PABX have modems of its own?  Or is it just providing a
connection between the two computers?  If the latter, when you run a
term program (such as hyperterm) do you see 'RING' at the recipient
computer?  Does it answer when given the appropriate AT command?
(Assuming it uses the Hayes command set.)  Do they establish a
connection?  (If you get garbage, make sure speed, parity, word length
settings are the same for both computers.)

Try setting a very low speed (e.g. 1200 bps) for a start.  Don't use a
speed >28.8K.

------------------------------

From: T. Sean Weintz <strap@hanh-ct.org>
Subject: Re: Ping Between PC Through PABX
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:43:55 -0400
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


yuniarsetiawan@gmail.com wrote:

> Hi there,

> I'm trying to connect two computer using PABX. So the PABX will be act
> like a hub. This is the diagram:

> [Computer 1] -> [Modem] -> [PABX] <- [Modem] <- [Computer 2]

> Both computer using Windows 2000 and both has sucessfully connected to
> the PABX after doing dial up. But why can't I ping between those
> computer?

> Both computer has been connected to the pabx, but they just can't
> ping/communicate each other. Is there anything wrong here? It is
> possible to do this, right?

> Thank you so much for the response.

Not clear exactly how you are doing this. I assume one computer is
dialing the other thru the PBX? And you are using RAS? How are IP
addresses being assigned?

------------------------------

Date: 20 Jun 2005 20:26:02 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Power Strips for Home Networks
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> By daisy chaining your power strips, you are causing the first ones
> in the chain to be overloaded and possibility the circuit it's
> plugged into.  And it is a fire waiting to happen.

Really?  Wall warts are pretty low power.  The big one for my laptop
is 150W, the little ones for the phone TA and the ethernet switch are
more like 20W.  Plug in 10 of them and you're unlikely to draw more
than 500W.  Every power strip I've seen is fused for at least 1000W.
Where's the overload?

------------------------------

From: techie@tantivy.tantivy.net (Bob Vaughan)
Subject: Re: Power Strips for Home Networks
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 21:03:28 UTC
Organization: Tantivy Associates


In article <telecom24.280.16@telecom-digest.org>,
Howard S. Wharton <yhshowie@acsu.buffalo.edu> wrote:

> Pat,

> By daisy chaining your power strips, you are causing the first ones in
> the chain to be overloaded and possibility the circuit it's plugged into.
> And it is a fire waiting to happen. 

> Howard S. Wharton
> Fire Safety Technician
> Occupational and Environmental Safety Services
> State University of New York at Buffalo

If the first power strip has a circuit breaker, then everything
downstream of that strip is limited to the current available on that
single power strip.  It dosen't matter how many strips are plugged
together, the current limitation will stay the same, unless there are
smaller circuit breakers downstream, in which case the limitation will
decrease at that point.

I do note your concern about overloading, and I will note that it's
not so much that the circuit will be overloaded, as it is that the
single outlet on either the first power strip, or the wall may become
overloaded.

What matters most is the condition of the wiring, including the power
strips, and it is for that reason that I suggest using quality power
strips, from a known vendor, and avoiding the generic plastic strips
made in the third world.

Keep your power strips in good condition, and dispose of them when
they show signs of abuse or wear.  Strips that have broken ground pins
should be disposed of, or have the plugs replaced.

Large loads such as laser printers or copiers, should be plugged into
wall circuits if at all possible.

Wall outlets that are worn, or otherwise abused, should be replaced by
a electrician, or other qualified person.

I prefer not to daisy chain strips together, but instead pick a high
quality strip to be the master, and use that to feed the other strips,
thus distributing the load across multiple outlets on the power strip.

It would also be a good idea to mount your power strips to a board,
desk, wall, or other fixed object to keep the wiring from becoming a
tangled mess.

Try to keep your wall warts separated enough so that cooling does not
become a problem. Do not pile stuff on top of power strips. Do not let
wall warts get buried in the carpet.

Your typical wall wart is going to draw between .1amp and 2amps,
although some may draw more, check the nameplate rating.

A quick sampling of the wall warts in my office comes up with the
following: radio charger 24w(0.2amp), ethernet switch 18w(0.15amp),
cellphone charger 6w(0.05amp), wireless bridge 30w(0.25amp), dsl
bridge 18w(0.15amp), Palm charger 18w(0.15amp), etc ... Total load of
the 6 wall warts in this example = 108w = 0.9a

A generic power strip is normally protected with a 15amp circuit
breaker.  Since many of the power strips available today are cheap
plastic junk, I would advise that those be derated even further, to no
more than 10amps.

Your normal wall circuit is going to be either 15 or 20amps.

A circuit should not be loaded to more than 80% of it's rated capacity
under normal usage, which says that the maximum load on a 15amp power
strip should be no more than 12 amps, assuming that nothing else is
plugged into the same circuit. In a house, there may be 1-12 (or more)
outlets on a single circuit depending on when the home was built, how
cheap the builder was, and if the homeowner/handyman/etc has added
outlets without proper capacity planning.

P(watts) = I(current)*E(voltage), so:
2400w	@120v	=	20a
1800w	@120v	=	15a
1440w	@120v	=	12a
1200w	@120v	=	10a
600w	@120v	=	5a
120w	@120v	=	1a
12w	@120v	=	0.1a

As you can see, it takes a lot of your typical wall warts to overload
a normal household circuit, or even a cheap generic power strip.


               -- Welcome My Son, Welcome To The Machine --
Bob Vaughan  | techie @ tantivy.net 		  |
	     | P.O. Box 19792, Stanford, Ca 94309 |
-- I am Me, I am only Me, And no one else is Me, What could be simpler? --



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I changed my setup today to use the
three outlets on the back of a UPS to connect the three power
strips each separately. Then I used the two newly gained outlets on
the power strips (where strip 2 was fed from 1 and where strip 3
was fed from strip 2) to plug in the two devices which lost their
home when the plugs on the back of the UPS were taken over.  It 
seems to have balanced the load a little better.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Is it Possible to Buy a Cell Phone With no Plan?
Date: 20 Jun 2005 10:45:06 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


FrankBooth wrote:

> I'm trying to buy a cell phone WITHOUT A PLAN. I am sending it to a
> relative in another country where they will activate it.

Cingular is presently advertising a plan that costs 10c per minute of
use plus $1/day of any use.  I don't know what the phone will cost or
added fees.  For very occassional users this might work out better
than a contract.

Note that some providers do offer cheaper plans (ie $20/month) but
don't push them and you must ask firmly about them.

Radio Shack had some phones for sale that came with a pay-as-you
go plan.

------------------------------

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: '80' Country Code
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:23:24 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.279.11@telecom-digest.org>,
Joseph  <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 09:11:42 -0000, bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com
> (Robert Bonomi) wrote:

>> In article <telecom24.277.1@telecom-digest.org>, Geoff
>> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>>> I was looking at my call logs and have an international call from
>>> Spain and another country.  The number for the other country starts
>>> with '803' but there is no country with an '80' and '803' dialing
>>> code.  Any ideas where the call came from?

>> Best guess:  somewhere around Helsinki, Finland.

> That is a pretty wild guess considering that country codes beginning
> with an 8 are usually in the far east.

> Finland's country code is 358!

No shit, sherlock.

Now, how many digits are displayed on the caller ID?

How many digits does Finland use for local numbeers?

What is the 'city code' for Helsinki?

Can you *GUESS* what happens when you take an 8-digit local number,
prefix it with the Helsinki city code ('0'), prefix that with country
code 358, and show only the last 10 digits?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Or maybe it was _area code_ 803,
> which I think is somewhere in the Carolinas?   PAT]

Correct, NPA 803 is the Columbia SC vicinity.

OP said, however, it was an international call.  If we assume he
_didn't_ know what he was talking about, there is no reason to assume
that the digits were reported accurately either, and thus, the call
could have come from (literally) _anywhere_.  *grin*


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And what if we assume that _you_
don't know what you are talking about either, Sherlock. Then does
anything mean anything at all?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: Re: DSL Speed
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:18:33 -0400
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


Robert Bonomi wrote:

> In article <telecom24.278.13@telecom-digest.org>,
> Choreboy  <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote:

>> On dialup, the farm couldn't negotiate modem speeds quite as fast as I
>> could in town.  I assumed the limitation was in the wire.

> It is, and it isn't.

> How far can you yell, and be heard?  How far can you talk on a radio,
> and be heard?

It seems to me that dialup and DSL would be analagous to two ways of
yelling across a field; like two ways of yelling, DSL and dialup use
the same medium.

Naturally, Walter Winchell could speak faster on the radio than FDR
could address a crowd outdoors without loutspeakers because FDR's high
frequencies wouldn't reach the audience.  If Winchell had a way of
yelling by which he could stand without a microphone and read the
audience a newspaper article in the time it took FDR to say, "We have
nothing to fear..."  that sounds like saying DSL can be 50 times
faster than dialup simply because it "yells" differently.  I wish I
knew more about it.  

>> That's why I was amazed to see that DSL seems to use the wire in the
>> same way as dialup.  Was I wrong to think the reason dialup data
>> rates were slower at the farm was that the wire to the CO is
>> longer? 

> "Sort-of".  It wasn't the actual _length_ of the wire. If you build 
> the wire differently, you will get different effects
> over the same length of wire.

Think what would have happened if RG-59 hadn't been invented.
Everybody would have used RG-6, which looks nearly the same but
attenuates uhf much less.  With better reception there would have been
more uhf stations and less demand for cable.

> One of the things that goes on, when you run a _pair_ of wires for any
> distance is that there is a capacitance between the two wires. this is
> proportional to the length of the run, inversely proportional to the
> distance between the wires, the thickness of the insulation, and a
> number of other factors.  Capacitance between the signal-carrying
> leads has the effect of 'blurring' the signal. which puts a limit on
> how fast you can "effectively" change signal levels, to pass
> information from one end to the other.

> The _methodology_ used to accomplish the signalling determines where,
> and to what extent, that 'blurring' degrades the transmission.

> DSL _does_ suffer degradation with distance, just as analog POTS
> modems do.  If you have 15-18,000 feet of wire between you and the
> C.O., you will get much slower maximum rates than if you are less than
> a thousand feet from the C.O.

> DSL uses a differnt _kind_ of signalling -- which calls for
> differently designed transmitters and receivers -- to get the higher
> data rate on the bare wires.

>>> This is how DSL works, it bypasses the _voice_ switching gear.  It
>>> uses just the 'bare wire' between the telco C.O. and the customer
>>> premises.  The special eqipment in the C.O. puts a *different*kind*
>>> of signal on the wires, that the "DSL modem" at the customer
>>> premises understands, and the 'modem' at the customer location does
>>> 'something similar', to communicate back to that special equimpent
>>> at the Telco offices.

Between the CO and the customer, isn't voice service just bare wire?
Are there inline amps?  If so, they could preemphasize high
frequencies.

I don't understand what kind of signal dsl uses to carry so much more
data than dialup without needing broadband cable.

>> What's the downside for the telco?  With the right pricing, I think
>> they could tap a huge market for increased bandwidth.

> Connected to _what_?  "Multi-megabit bandwidth" to the C.O. is
> -useless-, unless there is "something interesting" to connect to.

> Who needs the capability for a dozen or two (or more) simultaneous
> voice telephone calls from their house?  For anything other than
> voice, you have to have that 'something else' available for access at
> the point that that high-capacity circuit from the customer premises
> terminates.

So many people have more than one phone line that I must dial ten
digits to call across the street.  At times, a family might benefit by
being able to talk on several channels while keeping others open.

> Getting _to_ the C.O. from the customer premises is the 'cheap' part.
> Whether it is POTS, or DSL, or whatever.  Amortizing the equipment
> over, say, 5 years, you're talking about circa $3-5 dollars/month.
> The 'wire' cost, amortized over the useful life (50 years+) of the
> wire pair, is of the same order, maybe a bit lower.

> All the rest of the money goes towards "what to do with it, _after_ it
> arrives at the C.O."  For voice, to calls to a number in a different
> C.O, you have to have inter-connects to get the call _to_ that C.O.
> If there isn't a direct trunk circuit, you have to go through another
> layer of switches (called "tandems") -- at least one, possibly several
>  -- to get to the destination 'local' switch.  7 figure price-tags, per
> unit.

> Same thing connecting to the 'internet' -- you generally have to 'pay
> somebody' to pass your traffic on to the rest of the world, Costs for
> that depend on "how much" traffic you have.  More traffic, more
> cost. and bigger, more expensive equipment.

At one time, automobiles were for wealthy people who lived near
factory-operated dealerships.  Going sixty was sport.  The ability to
go twenty would have made a big difference at farms, where distances
were great and public transportation not available.  Price and repair
obstacles kept farmers out of the market.  Henry Ford spent years
developing a vehicle suited to rural budgets, roads, and mechanics.
Once it was available, it became so useful that it revolutionized
rural America.  I think at one point Ford was selling more vehicles
than all the other brands in the world.

If you have a second phone line for your modem, a $25 ISP, Direct TV,
and perhaps other Bellsouth services, they will give you a price where
going to DSL will lower your costs.  However, for somebody whose only
cost is $100 a year for an ISP, DSL would add $500 to his annual
budget.  Many feel they can't afford it, just as farmers before the
Model T felt that they had no choice but to stick with slow,
inconvenient horses and wagons.

You say internet costs depend on how much traffic you have.  With DSL
the customer can download about 150 kB/s.  Suppose budget DSL were 10%
as fast.  That would still be three times faster than dialup, and the
phone would be available.  Budget customers would add much less to
peak use, and they would probably download less in the course of a
week; with one-tenth the speed, you're less likely to download big
files you don't need.

I think there's a big untapped market for DSL, and it could be
profitable at a low price.  Cadillac did not introduce the Model T,
and I guess Bellsouth doesn't want to offer existing customers
something cheaper.

------------------------------

Date: 19 Jun 2005 18:37:06 -0400
From: Patrick Townson <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: New Virus: Was He Actually Guilty? 



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Poor Michael Jackson. For a couple
weeks, viruses were being circulated via a bogus press release
which claimed he 'committed suicide'. Now a new virus is making
the rounds purporting to be a questionairre on his guilt or
innocence, and offering prizes to the people who venture their
opinions on same. PAT]
        
         ======================
 
Michael Jackson Not Guilty! Do You Agree?
	
*************************************************
Michael Jackson is NOT Guilty on all accounts!
Do you agree with the Jury's decision?

Give us your opinion and get a free* $1,000 gift card. 
http://onlinerewardsnews.com/c/93482/mjyprrwwwwr2(deleted)
             
    -------------NEW Exclusive Offers!!!------------

Get FREE Movie Tickets for One Year! A $500 value–yours FREE!
http://onlinerewardsnews.com/c/93483/mjyprrwwwwr2(deleted)

Claim your FREE* $500 Costco, Sam Club or Smart & Final gift Card.
http://onlinerewardsnews.com/c/93484/mjyprrwwwwr2(deleted)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And lots of other 'valuable prizes' 
deleted here in the interest of preventing viruses from spreading
around.  The (deleteds) above all take you to a nasty thing. I think
these guys are going to milk that Michael Jackson debacle for all 
its worth; there are always some greedy fools who will click on
anything they see if they think they can get a prize.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Steven Lichter <shlichter@diespammers.com>
Reply-To: Die@spammers.com
Organization: I Kill Spammers, Inc.  (c) 2005 A Rot in Hell Co.
Subject: Last Laugh! Cruise Info With a Toll Free Number
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:20:23 GMT


Thought the Digest readers might be interested in the following; I
found the best way to contact them is via a payphone:

> Are you still interested? If so you must call toll free 1.866.702.0972
> to reserve before the promotion ends. The packages are open dated so
> you can use a few days at a time or all at once. You do not even need
> to know when you are going to go since you have up to two full years
> to select travel dates.

The only good spammer is a dead one!!  Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2005  I Kill Spammers, Inc.  A Rot in Hell Co.

------------------------------


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)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308
    and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   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 #281
******************************