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
Add this Digest to your personal
or  
TELECOM Digest Tue, 5 Jul 2005 23:59:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 309 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cable TV vs. UHF (was RE: DSL Speed) (nmclain@annsgarden.com) Re: VoIP Phone Home? (Fred Atkinson) Re: IBM Lawsuit Against Microsoft (Lisa Hancock) Re: Supplemental Grounding Electrodes (John Hines) Re: DO NOT! DO NOT Use Cingular Go Phone (Steve Sobol) Re: Don't Let Data Theft Happen to You (Wesrock@aol.com) Re: Supplemental Grounding Electrodes (Neal McLain) Re: Mediacom (J Kelly) 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: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:28:34 -0600 From: nmclain@annsgarden.com Subject: Cable TV vs. UHF (was RE: DSL Speed) Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote: > In 1956 I moved to Rutland VT, in a valley. We had three floors above > the basement, and the peak of our slate roof may have been forty feet > above the ground. On the peak was a mast with guy wires. There were > three antennae on the mast, one pointed to Burlington 70 miles away, > on to Albany 90 miles away, and one to Boston 160 miles away. Three > cables led from the antennae to a switch on the back of the TV. > The snow was bad all year. Community cable, with an antenna mast on a > nearby mountain, was discussed. A year or so later, Lucky 13 started > in Albany. In spite of the distance and the mountains, it came in > without snow. I heard no more about community cable. > I don't know how much it cost to operate a small UHF station, but in > Rutland I think it could have been started and operated much cheaper > than cable. The audience would probably have needed something > besides a loop on their TV, and I suppose advertising would have had > to support it. Perhaps so, but that would have provided only one channel. So even if a small UHF station had been built in Rutland, somebody would have built a CATV system anyway. Even back in the 50s, CATV systems were offering "full network service": all three commercial networks. They supplemented these channels by adding nearby independent and NCE (non-commercial educational) stations. One UHF station obviously could not have provided anywhere near this level of service. And I can't imagine that three network-affiliate stations would have been able to survive financially. Of course, it might have been possible to build three translator stations to retransmit the signals of three distant network stations, provided that some financial-support mechanism could be established. Such an arrangement existed in Darlington, Wisconsin for several years during the 60s and 70s: three UHF translators retransmitted the signals of the three Madison commercial stations. The translators were supported by "memberships"; although there was no way to prevent non-members from tuning in, enough members apparently paid their dues to keep things running. But after the mid-70s, even membership-supported translators couldn't compete with cable TV. The company I was working for at the time built a cable system in Darlington in 1980, and the translators were shut down. AFAIK, they're are still sitting there up on the hill collecting cobwebs (although I once heard that the old transmitter shack made a good deer-hunting blind). Neal McLain ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> Subject: Re: VoIP Phone Home? Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 18:17:01 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 22:32:28 GMT, Marc Popek <LVMarc@att.net> wrote: > And some wish to have a VOIP and a PSTN local presence. Why into use > a PSTN /VOIP automatic switch so that you can mange both services > from a single handset, answering machine etc? Why not just get a two-line RJ-14 type telephone? Fred ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com Subject: Re: IBM Lawsuit Against Microsoft Date: 5 Jul 2005 11:52:49 -0700 Lisa Minter wrote: > BOSTON - IBM Corp. will get $775 million in cash and $75 million worth > of software from Microsoft Corp. to settle claims still lingering from > the federal government's antitrust case against Microsoft in the > 1990s, the companies announced Friday. How times have changed. Years ago it was IBM that got hit with anti-trust lawsuits. Tom Watson Jr admitted in his memoirs "Father Son & Co" that his rage at CDC coming out with a supercomputer before IBM may have encouraged some not so good practices in sales pressure and "paper" machines. IBM settled with CDC at tremendous cost. The govt kept up its case but lost, costing the taxpayer and IBM millions of wasted dollars. Bill Gates and his crew ought to read Watson's book. The Watsons (both father and son) felt extremely passionately that IBM was THEIR company and they could do as THEY WISHED with it. They felt they worked very hard to make the company so successful and done so honestly and fairly by being the best. That passion obscured their vision to some business realities and anti-trust law -- even if you did nothing wrong to get be #1, you are still in violation of the law by merely being #1. Undoubtedly Gates feels the same way toward Microsoft -- it's his company, he worked hard to build it up and should be able run his business without being second guessed by outsiders. Both Watsons were forced to change their business practices in response to government pressure. Watson Sr had to license out his patents and sell as well as rent his machines. Watson Jr had to go further with sales and break out of bundling into a la carte sales. I think Gates should take a lesson from that and consider loosening up what is a near monopoly in his sales offerings and be more flexible in his licensing agreements. FWIW, IBM remains a strong company where Control Data is pretty much gone. I wonder what the Microsoft/Intel "Sloan" sales approach will lose favor. That is, very often they introduce new hardware and software that "obsoletes" what is exists, and people rush out to buy new stuff. Sloan did this at General Motors, coming out with a new model year to encourage people to buy new cars for style. Let's be honest -- the vast majority of users could get along just fine with a 486, Windows 3.1, and comparable versions of Word and Excel, and not need any more horsepower and function. ------------------------------ From: John Hines <jbhines@newsguy.com> Subject: Re: Supplemental Grounding Electrodes Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:33:03 -0500 Organization: www.jhines.org Reply-To: john@jhines.org Don_Shoemaker@HotMail.com wrote: > John Hines wrote: >> The NEC does get revised periodically, 2002 the most recent. > The 2005 version has been out for several months. They must review it more often than I (and others) are expecting. The electrician I hired over the winter was interested in the 2002 code book I had. The biggest effect on building grounding systems has been the decrease in reliance on metal plumbing, due to the usage of plastic piping. I got my books from http://codecheck.com which are more user friendly than the actual code books, which are more like legalese. ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> Subject: Re: DO NOT! DO NOT Use Cingular Go Phone Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:29:47 -0700 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > I have heard problems from people using pre-paid phones, such as > "Trac" phone (believe it's offered by Verizon). Yes, the service > offices were international and no help at all. Tracfone is NOT Verizon. Tracfone is not owned, and the service is not offered, by any major carrier. In fact, Tracfones sold in different areas use different networks. Net10 Wireless, the 10c/minute prepay service just launched by Tracfone, exclusively uses Cingular GSM. But Tracfone is separate from Cingular and all of the major carriers. > I don't understand either why the wireless companies treat these > ad-hoc customers so poorly. Maybe because they really want the > guaranteed $40/month customers and hope they'll spend money on premium > services to generate even more profit. A friend who owns an ISP here made an interesting point. Cingular, Verizon Wireless, Sprint PCS, Alltel ... all of those wireless services are owned by wireline companies (in Verizon's case, only 55% because the company that owns the other 45% is not a wireline carrier). And you know the kind of service the wireline providers offer. :) > Do cell phone plans still charge per call? Not that I know of. JustThe.net - Steve Sobol / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Coming to you from Southern California's High Desert, where the temperatures are as high as the gas prices! / 888.480.4NET (4638) "Life's like an hourglass glued to the table" --Anna Nalick, "Breathe" ------------------------------ From: Wesrock@aol.com Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:47:58 EDT Subject: Re: Don't Let Data Theft Happen to You In a message dated Tue, 5 Jul 2005 11:28:36 -0500, Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> writes: > By M.P. DUNLEAVEY > -- Avoid letting your cards out of your sight. Do not let store > clerks take your card away on the pretext that there's a "problem." Apparently you would not be able to use your credit or debit card in a restaurant then, since they require you give them the card to swipe at a location out of your sight. (An exception is Sonic fast-food restaurants, where the card swipe device is right on the ordering post.) > -- Restrict the access to your personal data by signing up for the > National Do Not Call Registry (www.donotcall.gov); remove your name > and address from the phone book and reverse directories -- and, most > important, from the marketing lists of the credit bureaus to reduce > credit card solicitations. The site www.optoutprescreen.com can help. While some people have a need or consider it a status symbol to have an unlisted number, others are not willing to give up contact with many desirable contacts in the outside world who would have no other way to reach them by phone or snail mail. Wes Leatherock wesrock@aol.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only Sonic, but McDonalds here at least also has a card swiper right by each register. If you have your card in hand, while you are placing your order (or when the clerk turns around to fill it) you can swipe your debit/credit card and have it back in your pocket by the time the clerk asks for the money. They don't care either way; when the register says the order is paid for, that is all they care. Ditto Marvin's Supermarket here: you dump all your groceries on the conveyor belt, the kid starts ringing it up and in the meantime you can swipe your card. The card swiper then seems to 'lock up ' until the clerk does something to tally it on the register; then the card swiper clicks into action (and if you had already swiped your card) it gets busy getting the approval and printing the receipt. If you want 'cash back', the clerk over-rings the total by that same amount. If your order comes to twenty dollars and you want twenty cash back, the clerk rings it on the register as 'amount tendered' forty dollars, 'change returned' twenty dollars. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 18:54:45 -0500 From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> Reply-To: nmclain@annsgarden.com Subject: Re: Supplemental Grounding Electrodes Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com> wrote: > Article 250.54 of the NEC says local supplemental grounding > electrodes (such as the one for phone service) must be > bonded to the primary electrode. Where does the NEC apply? > According to what the telco man admitted seven years ago, I > assume our county code says the same thing. As other readers have noted, NEC applies in any jurisdiction that adopts it by reference. The adopting law or ordinance identifies the edition of the code, and sometimes includes modifying clauses to clarify certain requirements, create additional requirements, or omit certain requirements. Some state governments adopt it (e.g. Wisconsin); most counties and municipalities also adopt it. In your case, I'd guess that if you live in the City of Rutland, the Building & Zoning Department enforces it. If you live in one of the surrounding towns, either the town government or the Rutland County government enforces it. > Is this a recent addition to the NEC? It certainly existed in 1987, according to "The National Electrical Code 1987 Handbook" (published by NFPA as a companion to the code itself; includes the complete text of the 1987 code, plus numerous drawings and annotations to clarify the text). The annotation at Article 250-71(b) states: The Code requires that separate systems be bonded together to reduce differences of potential between them, which can result from lightning or power contacts. Interconnection is required for lightning rod systems (Section 250-46), communications systems [Sections 800-31(b)(5)], and CATV systems [Section 820-22(f)]. Lack of interconnection can result in severe shock and fire hazard. "Communications systems" includes telephone. > How is a citizen supposed to find out local code > requirements? Contact the city, town, or county building inspection department. > How is a citizen supposed to know his electrodes are not bonded or > that it's necessary? The average citizen is not expected to know; the contractors who install the stuff are supposed to know. And the city/town/county building inspector is supposed to make sure that it's done correctly. The problem, of course, is that inspectors only inspect when a contractor pulls a permit and then calls for an inspection. If work is done without a permit, there's usually no inspection. Telephone and CATV companies rarely, if ever, pull permits for residential installs; from what I've seen, even electricians don't pull permits for branch-circuit work. Building inspection departments probably don't approve of this arrangement, but in my experience they're usually too overworked and underfunded to do much about it. > If the telco assures a customer that there is nothing wrong with > grounding which in fact is a code violation, does the telco have any > liability? I can't speak for the telco industry, but in the CATV industry (where I used to work), we certainly assumed that we'd be liable for faulty work done by our own employees. Our contracts with subcontractors included insurance and hold-harmless clauses to protect the customer, the CATV company, and franchising authority, and all property owners where CATV facilities were located. Of course, if I were a personal injury lawyer, I'd be keeping a close eye on that telephone company ... Neal McLain ------------------------------ From: J Kelly <jkelly@*newsguy.com> Subject: Re: Mediacom Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 19:51:45 -0500 Organization: http://newsguy.com Reply-To: jkelly@*newsguy.com Maybe. I've heard (from a reliable source in the corporate office) that it various from time to time and place to place which ports/services are blocked. They DO specifically forbid servers on residential packages in their TOS and they DO terminate anyone's account that is caught running a server. My understanding that the termination is final and there is no second chance. That said, I've run services on all those ports at some point and it worked, and most recently on port 22 (SSH). The last time I tried 20 and 21 I couldn't make it work, whether it was a firewall problem or Mediacom blocking the ports, I'm not sure, I didn't spend any time trying to troubleshoot the problem since it was just a quick temporary thing I was trying to run. My advice is to use a real host rather than try to host on a mediacom account. The upload speed is pitifully slow anyway. I moved my servers to real hosts almost 3 years ago, about three months after switching from a municipal broadband system (who also forbids servers but made an exception for me) to Mediacom. My host costs me less than $5 a month and gives 5GB of space. It is pretty reliable and has loads of bandwidth. On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 03:03:13 GMT, Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com> wrote: > Does anyone know if Mediacom blocks ports 80, 20, 21, 23, 25, > and/or other signficant ports? > Fred Atkinson ------------------------------ 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 ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #309 ****************************** | |