TELECOM Digest     Thu, 18 Aug 2005 02:12:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 373

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    AOL Employee Found Guilty, Sent to Prison in Spam Case (C. Kearney) 
    On Line Scammers Pose as Company Executives (Reuters News Wire)
    Computer Virus Writers at War, Security Firm Says (Reuters News Wire)
    Re: Broadband Competition Must Surely be Working (AES)
    Re: Broadband Competition Must Surely be Working (Gene S. Berkowitz)
    Re: Telephone Exchange Usage in Low-Volume States (bv124@aol.com)
    Re: Telephone Exchange Usage in Low-Volume States (John Levine)
    Re: Early Los Angeles Dialing and Network Management (Steven Lichter)
    Re: Not so Fast! 'xxx' Startup Put on Hold (Mark Crispin)
    Re: Stromberg Carlson Company? (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: Christine Kearney <reuters@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: AOL Employee Found Guilty, Send to Prison in Spam Case
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:28:54 -0500


By Christine Kearney

An America Online employee was sentenced to 15 months in prison on
Wednesday for stealing 92 million e-mail screen names from the
Internet company and selling them to a spammer.

Jason Smathers, 25, pleaded guilty in February in federal court in
Manhattan to charges including conspiracy and interstate trafficking
of stolen property. He was paid $28,000 by an Internet marketer for
the names, which were taken from AOL's database of 30 million
subscribers at the time.

Other defendants in spam cases have received tougher sentences. Last
year, a New York state man known as the "Buffalo Spammer" was
sentenced to 3-1/2 to 7 years in prison for violating state forgery
and identity-theft laws.

Smathers has been cooperating with the government and appeared
sorrowful in court on Wednesday, surrounded by family members. He
faced up to 24 months in prison under federal guidelines.

"I know I have done something very wrong," he told U.S. District
Judge Alvin Hellerstein.

Prosecutors said AOL, a unit of Time Warner Inc., suffered an
estimated loss of $300,000 from employee time spent dealing with the
issue, as well as hardware and software expenses.

Hellerstein said that while AOL's loss estimate was hard to prove,
the offense was still serious.

"People use e-mail as a primary measure of communication these days,"
he said. "Companies need to preserve the integrity of the information
they have."

In stealing the e-mail names of AOL customers, Smathers created "the
sale of a line of products customers had no need for," the judge said.

In a letter to the judge, Smathers pleaded for leniency. He
described himself as "an outlaw" in the "new frontier" of cyberspace.

Prosecutor David Siegal said he found Smathers' letter "moving," but
told the judge that "the Internet is not lawless." He estimated that
AOL suffered a loss of 10 cents for every 1,000 spam e-mails sent to
subscribers.

The judge did not impose a fine. He gave AOL 10 days to prove its
financial loss before deciding on restitution, but suggested a figure
of $84,000.

Smathers will surrender to a United States Marshall in Pensacola,  Florida
on September 19.


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:  NewsWire <reuters@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Online Scammers Pose as Company Executives in 'Spear-Phishing'
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:26:19 -0500


Online criminals trying to pry passwords and other sensitive
information out of companies have started using phony e-mails to pose as
powerful executives of the targeted organizations, experts said on
Wednesday.

Known as "spear phishing," the technique is an ingenious wrinkle on
the "phishing" e-mail scams that try to trick consumers into giving up
bank-account information and other sensitive details that can be used in
identity theft.

Businesses are typically reluctant to publicly disclose when they
are the target of online attacks but online security company MessageLabs
said in June that it has seen the tactic grow steadily during the year
to the point where it now sees one to two spear phishing campaigns a
week.

Rather than posing as a bank or other online business, spear phishers
send e-mail to employees at a company or government agency, making it
appear that the e-mail comes from a powerful person within the
organization, several security experts said.

"It works wonderfully if you're a bad guy," said Allan Paller, chief
executive of the SANS Institute, a nonprofit cybersecurity research
organization.

Unlike basic phishing attacks, which are sent out indiscriminately,
spear phishers target only one organization at a time. Once they trick
employees into giving up passwords, they can install "Trojan horses"
or other malicious software programs that ferret out corporate or
government secrets.

Spear phishing has emerged as one of several kinds of "targeted
attacks" that experts say have grown more common in 2005.

Though such attacks are difficult to trace, many compromised machines
seem to be reporting back to Internet addresses in the Far East,
according to a report by the United Kingdom's National Infrastructure
Security Co-Ordination Center.

Spear phishing can be devastatingly effective even among employees who
are aware of online threats.

At the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, New York, several internal
tests found that cadets were all too willing to give sensitive
information to an attacker posing as a high-ranking officer, said Dr.
Aaron Ferguson, a visiting faculty member there.

"It's the colonel effect. Anyone with the rank of colonel or higher,
you execute the order first and ask questions later," he said.

Cadets in more recent tests have been somewhat more likely to report
the messages as suspicious as awareness has grown, he said.

Employee education helps counteract the threat but these attacks
will remain rampant until e-mail verification schemes come into
widespread use, said Dave Jevans, chairman of the Anti-Phishing Working
Group, a group of banks and online retailers formed to fight the
problem.

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: News Wire <reuters@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: Computer Virus Writers at War, Security Firm Says 
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:26:04 -0500


Computer worms that have brought down systems around the world in
recent days are starting to attack each other, Finnish software security
firm F-Secure said on Wednesday.

"We seem to have a botwar on our hands," said Mikko Hypponen, chief
research officer at F-Secure.

"There appear to be three different virus-writing gangs turning out
new worms at an alarming rate, as if they were competing to build the
biggest network of infected machines."

Hypponen said in a statement that varieties of three worms -- "Zotob,"
"Bozori" and "IRCbot" -- were still exploiting a gap in Microsoft
Corp.'s Windows 2000 operating system on computers that had not had
the flaw repaired and were not shielded by firewalls.

"The latest variants of Bozori even remove competing viruses like
Zotob from the infected machines," Hypponen said in a statement on the
company's Web site. (http://www.f-secure.com)

The worms were blamed for major system trouble at some media outlets
and companies in the United States on Tuesday, causing personal
computers to restart repeatedly and potentially making them vulnerable
to attack.

Microsoft and the top computer security companies, Symantec Corp.
and McAfee Inc, said damage to systems on Tuesday had been limited and
was unlikely to cause widespread havoc like that which resulted from
other malicious software such as "SQL Slammer" and "MyDoom."

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: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
Subject:  Re: Broadband Competition Must Surely be Working
Date:  Wed, 17 Aug 2005 14:21:24 -0700
Organization:  Stanford University


In article <telecom24.372.5@telecom-digest.org>, jmeissen@aracnet.com 
wrote:

> Verizon is aggressively deploying fiber-to-the-premises here. Because
> I use a local independent ISP there has been a lot of concern about
> the consequences of this action.

> What has now been confirmed by calls to Verizon is that
>  - Once the fiber connection is established all services, including
>    voice, are moved to the fiber and the copper wires are pulled,
>    making it impossible to return to standard DSL in spite of the
>    supposed 30-day trial period.
>  - The lowest cost package for the fiber connection is 30% more
>    expensive than their standard DSL offering
>  - They will absolutely NOT allow connections to other ISP's over 
>    the fiber connection, essentially limiting ISP's other than
>    MSN to dialup customers.
>  - The lowest-cost package from Verizon that will allow me to 
>    continue to run my own servers and host my own domain (something
>    my local independent ISP actively supports) will cost $99/mo.

> So, while the landscape today includes a diverse collection of local
> and national ISP's with a range of services and cost options, the
> future will be dialup at $10-15/month or Comcast or Verizon/MSN at
> ~$50/mo. No more local businesses, no more local customer service, no
> choice of services.

If accurately described here (and I have no reason to think it isn't) 
this is absolutely criminal -- and probably entirely typical of what 
most or all "broadband to the premises" types services (copper, cable, 
fiber or wireless will try to impose on us).

Has your local government no way to control what comes to your premises 
over the publicly owned rights of way?



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But what the cableco  will _claim_ is
that the 'right of way' is not publicly owned; and telco will claim
that municipal ownership of the right of way gives unfair competition
to them in providing ISP services.  Or so they will all claim.   PAT]

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

From: Gene S. Berkowitz <first.last@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Broadband Competition Must Surely be Working
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:43:29 -0400


In article <telecom24.372.5@telecom-digest.org>, jmeissen@aracnet.com 
says:

> Our government claims their actions are intended to encourage
> competition, expand deployment and lower cost of broadband Internet
> access. It must be working ...

> Verizon is aggressively deploying fiber-to-the-premises here. Because
> I use a local independent ISP there has been a lot of concern about
> the consequences of this action.

> What has now been confirmed by calls to Verizon is that
>  - Once the fiber connection is established all services, including
>    voice, are moved to the fiber and the copper wires are pulled,
>    making it impossible to return to standard DSL in spite of the
>    supposed 30-day trial period.
>  - The lowest cost package for the fiber connection is 30% more
>    expensive than their standard DSL offering
>  - They will absolutely NOT allow connections to other ISP's over 
>    the fiber connection, essentially limiting ISP's other than
>    MSN to dialup customers.
>  - The lowest-cost package from Verizon that will allow me to 
>    continue to run my own servers and host my own domain (something
>    my local independent ISP actively supports) will cost $99/mo.

> So, while the landscape today includes a diverse collection of local
> and national ISP's with a range of services and cost options, the
> future will be dialup at $10-15/month or Comcast or Verizon/MSN at
> ~$50/mo. No more local businesses, no more local customer service, no
> choice of services.

> Yes indeed, seems like a major improvement to me.

> John Meissen                                           jmeissen@aracnet.com

Verizon also REQUIRES that you use THEIR router after the fiber modem.

--Gene

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

Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:43:42 -0400
From: bv124@aol.com
Subject: Re: Telephone Exchange Usage in Low-Volume States


Neal McLain wrote:
 
> In order to accommodate inbound DDD, it was essential that every
> number have a 7-digit format. But SxS switches couldn't accommodate
> 7-digit dialing, so telcos faked 7-digit numbers by prepending dummy
> digits. Local calls continued to be dialable with only four or
> fivedigits; however, if a local caller actually dialed all seven
> digits, the prepended digits were absorbed by "absorbing selectors" --
> i.e. ignored.
 
I don't understand.  Below is the local dialing plan we had when I was
in school.
 
Carbondale, IL, (Jackson County) 1971 General Telephone
 
618-453           -           So. Il. Univ., Carbondale. IL
618-457           -           Carbondale, IL
618-549           -           Carbondale, IL
618-867           -           De Soto, IL
618-684           -           Murphysboro, IL
618-687           -           Murphysboro, IL
 
 From/to any Carbondale NXX (1, 2, or 3): 5-digits allowed, 7-digits
supported (618-453 required a ?9? to dial out from the university, but
5-digits allowed within the university PBX/Centrex/whatever)
 
 From Carbondale NXX (1, 2, 3) to De Soto (4): 7-digits required
 
 From Carbondale NXX (1, 2, 3) to Murphysboro, (5, 6): 7-digits required.
 
 From Murphysboro or De Soto to Carbondale, 7-digits required. 
 
(I believe that locally, only 5-digits were required in Murphysboro
and only 4-digits in De Soto.)
 
Outside of these 3 exchanges, but within the 618 NPA: 1+7-digits
required Outside the 618 NPA: 1+NPA+7-digits required
 
Carbondale had DDD in the 60's.  It did use '150' instead of just '1'
as a toll alert and the operator would come on the line and ask 'Your
Number Please?'
 
------------------------------

Date: 18 Aug 2005 02:26:35 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
Subject: Re: Telephone Exchange Usage in Low-Volume States
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Could you elaborate on the situation in "the most remote areas"?  Has
> it been cost effective to replace an isolated long loop shared party
> line with more modern carrier equipment?

Yes.  My relatives' telco in Vermont has some really long loops out to
remote farms, and they're all private lines.  The maintenance is a lot
easier, as is the toll billing.  They have a Paradyne DSL system that
works on long loops and they told me about one farmer who wanted DSL
so they took him off the SLC which didn't support DSL and gave him an
18k ft home run so the 60 hz hum on voice calls was deafening but the
DSL works fine.

> In many places the demand for exchanges is so high that the only way
> to create unique dialing is require TEN digits.  But in the states I
> mentioned perhaps there is enough 'space' in the exchange assignments
> that five digits could still be unique for a town.

Sure, but for policy reasons dialing is now all 7D or 10D or 1+10D.
There is exactly one prefix in my town, and we tell each other our
phone numbers with four digits, but the dialing is 7D nonetheless.
It's 7D within the area code, which may be local, intralata toll or
interlata toll, 1+10 to other area codes.

R's,

John

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

From: Steven Lichter <shlichter@diespammers.com>
Reply-To: Die@spammers.com
Organization: I Kill Spammers, Inc.  (c) 2005 A Rot in Hell Co.
Subject: Re: Early Los Angeles Dialing and Network Management
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:57:12 GMT


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> The Bell System history tells that they recognized the traffic of big
> cities would not fit on Step-by-Step switching because of the switch's
> limited decimal choices.  Panel switching was developed to give more
> flexibility and choices in city service.

> However, Los Angeles remained Step by step because the Bell System
> inherited existing exchanges.  The history says despite things like
> graded multiples network mgmt in LA proved difficult, but they did not
> elaborate.

> I know Bell Labs developed SxS add-ons in the 1960s and 1970s to
> improve SxS functionality, but that was much later.  An early short
> haul toll itemized message accounting system was developed for LA.

> As Los Angeles turned into a big city (1950s?), how did the Bell
> System handle inter-exchange traffic within the limits of an SxS
> switch?  Did they rely on tandems?  Did they have to overtrunk at high
> expense?  Did they put in No 5 Crossbar when it came out?

> Thanks.

> [public replies, please]

I believe they started using digit absorbing switches and directors
which did translations, so say you dialed a short hall number it would
drop back into the local switch, or to a trunk for another office, if
it were long distance it might go to a tandem.  They as GTE did would
rearrange trunking for what was called the busy season.

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.

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

From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject:  Re: Not so Fast! 'xxx' Startup Put on Hold
Date:  Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:59:05 -0700
Organization:  Networks & Distributed Computing


On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, the News Wire reported:

> That didn't sit well with conservative activists who worry that a .xxx
> domain will further legitimize the porn industry and won't make it
> easier to avoid sexual content online.

Leaving aside their motivations, they are correct in their overall
assessment of the undesirability of a .xxx TLD.

However, an .xxx TLD does not help the porn industry or its customers.
The proper analogy is not with a zoned red-light district, but rather
with a walled ghetto with no requirement that anyone live in the
ghetto.

The basic notion of a zoned red-light district is to create a safe
haven for the "entertainment" industry; if they stay in the district
and follow certain rules, they can ply their trade without harassment.
Another characteristic of the red-light district is that the customers
of the "entertainers" can come and go discreetly without harassment.

The basic notion of a walled ghetto is to lock an "undesirable" subset
of society into one area, and to track all comings and goings.  Not
only can't the inhabitants leave, but their visitors can't be
discreet.

An .xxx TLD combines the worst features of both.  The porn industry is
not required to use it; and it is likely that the level of filtering
applied to the .xxx TLD would block many of their customers.

We're not just talking about little Johnny not being allowed to look
at dirty pictures on the school computer.  We're also talking about
legitimate adult customers on their own computers being blocked from
their porn because some entity between customer and supplier chooses
to block the .xxx TLD.  It also makes it easier to track the
activities of these legitimate adult customers.

There may be no recourse if the only ISP in a small town is owned by
someone who chooses to interfere with his users' access to porn,
especially if the user does not want his consumption of porn to become
well-known.

An .xxx TLD does not help those who want to be in a "porn-free"
environment either.  There's no requirement for the porn industry to
use it.  There is abundant motivation for them *not* to use it.

It would be difficult, if not impossible, to create laws to force the
porn industry to use an .xxx TLD.  A red-light district or a ghetto
involves a single legal authority to make the determination of what
goes in and what does not.  The Internet does not have that luxury.
What is considered to be the vilest porn in Tehran or Mecca may be
normal public art (or even medical information) in Paris or San
Francisco.

If the real intent is to set up a red-light district, a better means
of doing this would be through the means of content tagging.  The
tagging must be of a form by which local jurisdictions (and
individuals!) can make their own determination of "porn" or "not porn"
and by doing so create a red-light district customized for their own
needs.  For example, Tehran and Mecca would probably rate content with
the "uncovered woman's face" tag as going in their red-light district.

The other necessary part -- and much more difficult to achieve --
would be to have an international body of law (with local versions in
place at all countries with Internet access) which protects content
providers from prosecution if they accurately label their content
according to the content tagging standards.

It must be understood that protection from prosecution is a vital part
of any red-light district.

Finally, it is the responsibility of the authority defining the
red-light district to block content that is prohibited even in the
red-light district.  It is not the responsibility of the content
provider; the content provider's responsibility ends with accurate
tagging.

None of this is simple; and none of this is accomplished by an .xxx TLD.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I want to just respond to one point
which was stated by Mark ...

Mark said "It would be difficult if not impossible to force the porn
industry to be part of 'xxx'." 

Why would that be difficult, Mark? In many communities now, those
places are required (just like taverns) to post notices that persons
of minority age cannot be on the premises. It is not considered a
free-association issue, but rather a matter of public policy and any
challenges to the 'minors stay away' rule are always defeated.  Why
would it be a free-speech issue to impose on porn sites in the same
way, with 'xxx' being the equivilent of a 'minors not allowed' sign?
I have never yet seen a tavern, or a gay mens 'bathhouse', or an adult
bookstore for example, which got anywhere trying to argue that that
signs on the wall ordering minors to leave the premises were somehow
an imposition on the establishment (or the patrons therein) rights of
free speech or free association. Or, for that matter, a movie theatre
(adult or otherwise) which attempted to enfore an 'X' or 'PG' rating
making free speech claims, etc. So why would an internet establishment
suddenly have that problem (assuming the law said that public policy
dictated the protection of minors?  

Mark also notes that the presence of 'xxx' would mean that snoopers or
other busy bodies could easily spy to see who had been where. While
that is true and it is easier to audit the behavior of others on a
computer screen rather than standing on the sidewalk around a business
place, don't you suppose conservative Christians (not to single them
out but use them as a good example) couldn't observe the patrons of an
'adult' business place by watching from the sidewalk if they were so
inclined?  And yes, 'xxx' does not keep detirmined children (nor
conservative Christians for that matter) away from such an Internet
establishment if they wish to sneak inside, neither does a 'we do not
sell cigarattes under 18 nor alcohol under 21' sign prevent kids from
trying to purchase or use or peek, etc. Those signs merely serve as a
reminder of society's stated purposes, and warn of society's intent to
punish offenders. 

One thing that 'xxx' _would_ do is provide a good screening and
filtering mechanism for 'adult' purveyors who did _not_ want to be
bothered by kids coming around, etc (when combined with their other
validation techniques such as credit card proof of age, etc.). People
who were so inclined could filter out 'xxx' in the same way they can
filter out other spam and trash. What's your objection to that?  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: Re: Stromberg Carlson Company?
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:59:42 GMT


Carl Navarro wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 23:37:27 GMT, John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
> wrote:

>> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 04:10:43 +0000, Steven Lichter wrote:

>>> I believe the equipment manufacturing division moved to Florida and is
>>> part of General Dynamics.  

>> They are in Florida, and I think part of Siemens, or they were a while
>> back. They were a fairly big supplier to independent telcos, and one
>> of the few to make the transition to digital switching. Their DCO
>> competed quite well with Northern Telecom's DMS-10 and smaller
>> DMS-100s.

> Back in 1982, General Dynamics sold off all of the telecommunications
> divisons.  The "Stromberg Carlson" telephone manufacturing and ATC,
> decorator phones, went to Comdial.  The CO switch manufacturing part
> was in Lake Mary, FL and it was not part of the sale as I remember,
> but GDCC did not retain it.

> Rolm bought Stromberg and later Siemens and now it's called
> Siemens-Stromberg.

> Carl Navarro

General Dynamics still has a full service COEI Installation division,  I 
get calls from their recruters a couple times a year.  I know that GD 
had bought Stromberg Carlson.

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 to telecomm-
unications 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 #373
******************************