TELECOM Digest     Mon, 19 Sep 2005 19:23:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 428

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cyber Cons, Not Hackers Now Behind Viruses (Michael Kahn)
    Mac Users Should Quit Deluding Themselves (Matthew Broersma)
    Microsoft Alleges Retailers Selling Counterfeit Software (Reuters Newswire)
    Sprint to Offer Rhapsody Radio Service (Reuters Newswire)
    The Front Lines - September 19, 2005 (Jonathan Marashlian)
    Verizon Wireless, Dell Ink Wireless Broadband (USTelecom dailyLead)
    Re: When it Rains, it Pours  .... (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: When it Rains, it Pours  .... (William Warren)
    Re: When it Rains, it Pours  .... (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Use of Bell Logo; Qwest? SBC? (Tony P.)
    Re: Roaming Charges (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.  

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

From: Michael Kahn <reuters@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Cyber Cons, Not Vandals Now Behind Viruses
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:10:25 -0500


By Michael Kahn

Computer hackers seeking financial gain rather than thrills or
notoriety are increasingly flooding the Internet with malicious
software code, according to a semi-annual report issued on Sunday.

Symantec Corp.'s Internet Security Threat Report said during the first
half of 2005 the number of new viruses targeting Microsoft Windows
users jumped 48 percent to nearly 11,000 compared to the previous six
months as hackers used new tools and a growing sophistication to
create malicious code.

The latest report by the world's biggest security software maker also
found that viruses exposing confidential information made up
three-quarters of the top 50 viruses, worms and Trojans, up from 54
percent in the last six months of 2004.

It also said an increasing amount of menacing software allowed spam to
be relayed automatically from computer to computer. These so-called
"Trojan" programs can download and install adware to display pop-up
ads in a user's Web browser.

More so-called robot, or "bot" networks, which are created when a
hacker illegally gains control of a large number of computers, are now
available for sale or rent in the underworld of the Internet, Symantec
said.

"As financial rewards increase, attackers will likely develop more
sophisticated and stealthier malicious code that will attempt to
disable antivirus, firewalls, and other security concerns," the report
said.

Vincent Weafer, a security expert at Symantec, said early generations
of cybervandals tended to unleash viruses as a way to bolster their
reputations in the murky hacker world but now the motivation has
turned to financial gain using more targeted malicious software.

The number of headline-grabbing viruses has slowed since the Blaster
worm outbreak in 2003, which targeted Microsoft software and
devastated hundreds of thousands of computers worldwide.

Instead, there is now a surge in people trying to gain control over a
network of computers to launch attacks as well as a growing number of
phishing scams that trick users into clicking onto a Web site that
contains infected code, he said.

"We are seeing a very significant change where we are seeing far fewer
large pandemics," Weafer said. "However we are seeing a large volume
increase in cyberattacks, viruses and variants."

Indeed, Symantec saw an average of 10,532 active bot network computers
per day, an increase of more than 140 percent over the prior six
months.

It also said phishing messages grew to an average 5.70 million
messages a day from 2.99 million.

"What we are saying is that attackers are increasingly targeting your
assets and your private information," Weafer 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: Matthew Broersma <techworld@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Mac Users Should Quit Deluding Themselves
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:12:01 -0500


By Matthew Broersma, Techworld.com MacCentral
Symantec: Mac users deluding themselves over security

Mac users are "operating under a false sense of security", according
to Symantec, and Firefox users will have to recognize that the
open-source browser is currently a greater security risk than Internet
Explorer.

Symantec's latest Internet Security Threat Report, published Monday,
found evidence that attackers are beginning to organize for attacks on
the Mac operating system. Researchers also found that over the past
six months, nearly twice as many vulnerabilities surfaced in Mozilla
browsers as in Explorer.

"It is now clear that the Mac OS is increasingly becoming a target for
the malicious activity, contrary to popular belief that the Mac OS is
immune to traditional security concerns," the report said.

Symantec said OS X -- based on BSD Unix -- now shares many of the
security concerns affecting Unix users. "As Mac OS X users demand more
features and implement more ports of popular UNIX applications,
vulnerabilities and exploits targeting this operating system and its
underlying code base are likely to increase," Symantec said in the
report.

The number of security bugs confirmed by Apple has remained about the
same over the past two six-month reporting periods, with no widespread
exploits, Symantec said. But an analysis of a rootkit called Mac OS
X/Weapox -- based on the AdoreBSD rootkit -- indicates the situation
might not last much longer. "While there have been no reports of
widespread infection to date, this Trojan serves to demonstrate that
as Mac OS X increases in popularity so too will the scrutiny it
receives from potential attackers," the report said. "Mac users are be
operating under a false sense of security, and deluding themselves."

Twenty-five vulnerabilities were disclosed for Mozilla browsers,
including Firefox, in the first half of the year, compared with 13 for
Explorer, Symantec said. Eighteen of the Mozilla flaws were classified
as high severity, compared with eight high-severity Explorer flaws.

Symantec warned of other emerging threats, notably to increasingly
popular IP telephony systems, wireless networks and mobile
devices. Meanwhile, attack code is becoming more sophisticated, with
attackers deploying modular code that can avoid detection systems,
Symantec said.

Copyright 2005 Mac Central.

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.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, MacCentral and TechWorld.com 

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

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

From: Reuters News Wire  <reuters@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: Microsoft Alleges Retailers Selling Counterfeit Software
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:01:00 -0500


Microsoft Corp., the world's biggest software maker, on Monday said it
sued eight resellers, accusing them of distributing counterfeit copies
of its computer programs.

Many of the lawsuits, filed in Arizona, California, Illinois,
Minnesota and New York against privately held companies, allege that
the resellers sold counterfeit copies of software such as Office 2000
Professional and Windows XP, Microsoft said.

The companies named in the lawsuits are: BWT Industry Technology
Service Inc.; Data Day USA Inc.; MicroCity4Less.com; Winvtech
Solutions Inc.; Global Computing Inc.; Ion Technologies Corp.;
Compustar Co.; and Chips & Techs.

Microsoft said it previously filed suits against BWT Industry
Technology Service and Ion Technologies.

Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or
redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior
written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or
delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.

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.

For more news headlines, go to:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/newstoday.html

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

From: Reuters News Wire <reuters@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: Sprint to Offer Rhapsody Radio Service
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:00:01 -0500


Sprint Nextel Corp. on Monday said it will sell access to RealNetworks
Inc.'s Rhapsody radio service, allowing Sprint cellphone users to
listen to several radio stations and podcasts.

Rhapsody Radio will cost $6.95 a month on top of what Sprint users pay
for its Vision Multimedia Service, the wireless company's mobile
Internet package. It features stations devoted to alternative, pop,
country, R&B and hip hop.

It also allows users to watch music videos and listen to podcasts,
which are archived radio programs and audio features that users can
listen to on demand.

The new service comes at a time when wireless companies are leaning on
mobile Internet offerings to offset the competitive market for mobile
calls.  Wireless companies are betting music is ideal programming for
wireless data.

One of the more high profile music and wireless combinations is
Cingular's deal with Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes, which allows
Cingular users to download songs from iTunes to the new Motorola ROKR
phones.

The Sprint-Rhapsody venture currently offers no download
service. Instead, users listen to the stations or podcasts by
"streaming" them from the wireless network.

"Downloading is interesting, but a lot of times people want
convenience," said Kevin Nakao, general manager of RealNetworks'
mobile business. "If you travel a lot, for example, you don't have
time to upload your music to your player. With this service, the
podcasts are there when you want them."

Another feature of the new service is called "Beats N Breaks," which
are instrumental hip hop beats that allow users to create their own
raps over the beats.

Ovum consultant Roger Entner called the service "a good first
step. The important difference is that, unlike the ROKR, you do not
need to sync your telephone to a PC to get your music. It's there on
your phone and it's convenient."


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.

Listen to BBC on the net while scanning news stories at:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/BBC.html

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

From: Jonathan Marashlian <jsm@thlglaw.com>
Subject: The Front Lines - September 19, 2005
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:08:08 -0400
Organization: The Helein Law Group


http://www.thefrontlines-hlg.com/  The FRONT LINES

Advancing The Cause of Competition in the Telecommunications Industry 

NOTICE: FOURTH QUARTER 2005 UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND CONTRIBUTION FACTOR
UNCHANGED

The Wireline Competition Bureau of the FCC announced that the
Universal Service Fund contribution factor for the Fourth Quarter of
2005 will remain at the current 10.2% applicable to the Third
Quarter. The proposed 10.2% contribution factor will become effective
unless the FCC takes action in response to the proposed increase,
which is not anticipated.

Contributors are reminded that they may not mark up federal universal
service line-item amounts above the contribution factor.  Thus,
contributors may not, during the fourth quarter of 2005, recover from
end users through a federal universal service line item an amount that
exceeds the interstate telecommunications charges on a customer's bill
times 10.2%.

FCC RELEASES QWEST FROM SECTION 251 UNBUNDLING OBLIGATIONS IN OMAHA, NE

On September 16, 2005, the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC")
quietly took action on a Forbearance Petition filed by Qwest
Corporation ("Qwest") which is certain to have profound implications
for the future of ILEC network unbundling.

The FCC granted a Qwest Forbearance Petition in which Qwest requested
relief from Section 251 obligations that apply to it as the ILEC in
the Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Metropolitan Statistical Area ("Omaha
MSA").  The FCC granted the Forbearance Petition because the
particular market characteristics of the Omaha MSA, including the
substantial infrastructure investment made by Cox Communications,
supported the request to be relieved from legacy monopoly regulations.

With regard to section 251(c)(3) unbundling obligations for
transmission facilities, the FCC granted Qwest relief in targeted
areas where intermodal deployment is extensive.  Specifically, the FCC
relieved Qwest of the obligation to provide unbundled network elements
(UNEs) to competitors in 9 of Qwest's 24 wire center service areas in
the Omaha MSA.  The FCC left in place other section 251(c)
requirements, such as interconnection and interconnection-related
collocation obligations, as well as section 271 obligations to provide
wholesale access to local loops, local transport, and local switching
at "just and reasonable" prices.

For mass market telephone services, the Commission granted Qwest
relief from dominant carrier regulations that apply to it in the
entire Omaha MSA.  Specifically, the FCC granted Qwest's request to
forbear from applying price cap, rate of return, 15-day tariffing, and
60-day discontinuance regulations to Qwest for its provision of
interstate mass market exchange access services and broadband Internet
access services.

The Commission adopted a six-month transition period to permit
competing carriers that currently use UNEs in the 9 wire centers
receiving relief to migrate existing customers to alternative
facilities or arrangements, including self-provided facilities,
alternative facilities offered by other competitive carriers, or
services offered by Qwest.

The FCC's grant of Qwest's Forbearance Petition is likely to spawn
similar filings by RBOCs seeking similar relief in various markets
across the U.S.

UPDATE:  FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS EXCISE TAX REFUND OPPORTUNITY

In the July 28, 2005, edition of The Front Lines, we advised readers
of the opportunity to obtain refunds of federal excise taxes paid to
the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") for certain toll
telecommunications services.  The following is an update on the status
of the IRS' responses to the series of court cases that have held that
the toll telephone excise tax does not apply to long distance services
that are not based on distance.

1.  On August 5, 2005, the IRS lost its 8th straight court case, this
decision based on summary judgment by the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California for a $6,000,000 refund claim.

2.  According to information culled from earlier cases decided in
favor of taxpayers, the IRS has settled and made refunds for 100 cents
on the dollar, plus interest.

3.  The IRS has, however, recently reasserted its policy of suspending
other refund claims; meaning that it will not act on un-litigated
claims until the court cases that remain on appeal are decided.  The
IRS' strategy being to stonewall large refund claims in hopes of
winning one case on appeal and creating a conflict at the Appellate
court level, thus setting the stage for Supreme Court review.  All
intended to further delay its issuing refunds.

4.  There are currently four cases on appeal, three before the United
States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and one in the 6th
Circuit sitting in Ohio.

IRS STONEWALLING BACK IN PLAY

Contrary to indications made shortly after the United States Court of
Appeals for the 11th Circuit joined 6 other lower federal courts in
holding that the 3% federal excise tax does not apply to toll
telephone services the charges for which are not based on distance,
IRS has decided to reinstitute its policy of suspension of all FET
refund claims until (1) other court cases or appeals are decided or
(2) until Congress does something.  No timetable exists for how long
the IRS will wait for these court cases or appeals to be decided or
for Congress to address the issue with legislation.

IRS also claims to have heard "rumors" that Congress may repeal the
FET altogether, or may try and solve the problem by some form of
compromise based on the timing of FET payments or some other criteria.
We are not giving much credence to the "rumors" about Congress
becoming involved.  In our opinion, unless the IRS's hand is forced,
it will continue to stonewall dealing with the issue for as long as
possible because it knows that the court cases and their appeals could
take another two to five years or longer to be decided.

The IRS's position is indefensible.  Eight courts out of eight have
now ruled in favor of taxpayers.

The most recent case lost by the IRS is an August 5, 2005 decision out
of the Northern District of California where the court disposed of the
case, in favor of the taxpayer Hewlett-Packard, at the summary
judgment stage.  Notably, the refund at stake was the largest one yet
litigated -- over $6 million.

Presently, there are four appeals pending before the United States
Court of Appeals:

* National R.R. Passenger Corp. (Amtrak) v. United States..  Amtrak
filed its brief on June 1, 2005; there is no information on whether or
not oral argument has been scheduled yet.

* AOL v. United States.  IRS filed its appeal with the D.C. Circuit on
June 27, 2005.

* Honeywell International v. United States.  IRS filed its appeal with
the D.C. Circuit on July 12, 2005.

* Office Max v. United States.  Appeal pending before the 6th Circuit
sitting in Ohio.

We fully expect the appeals before the D.C. Circuit and the 6th
Circuit to have the same pro-taxpayer outcome as in the May 2005
decision by the 11th Circuit.  The bases for the pro-taxpayer rulings
are matters of applying basic principles of statutory construction and
the lack of IRS authority to change the statutory provision by its own
decisions or interpretations.  In other words, these cases do not
present a "close question" on which reasonable minds could differ as
to the result.  The result reached, now by eight courts, in favor of
taxpayers is unquestionably the right one in our opinion.  The recent
decision in California decided on summary judgment and for an amount
of over $6 million supports our optimism.

The IRS' position is unfortunate and can be challenged.  For example,
once a United States Court of Appeals denies IRS's appeal, as was done
for the first time in May of this year by the 11th Circuit, and the
IRS fails to seek review by the Supreme Court, the ruling in favor of
the taxpayer becomes "the law" of that Circuit.  Such is the case in
the 11th Circuit.  In short, the toll telephone excise tax does not
apply any longer in the three states that are located in the 11th
Circuit -- Alabama, Georgia and Florida.

For both carriers and customers in these states, IRS's stonewalling
through its suspension policy is untenable.  Carriers have no legal
basis to bill and collect the excise tax any longer in these three
states and open themselves up to suits if they continue to bill and
collect the taxes from their customers.  Customers, unaware of the
law, would surely continue to pay the excise tax if billed for it.

Hence, in the 11th Circuit, it is now possible to explore the use of
the doctrine of mandamus to force the IRS to do that which the law
requires as decided by the 11th Circuit.  The mandamus doctrine
permits courts to issue orders instructing the IRS to conduct itself
(e.g., make refunds) in accordance with law.  When an agency is
required by law to do something that is not discretionary, it may be
compelled by court order (mandamus) to do it.  Taxpayers in the 11th
Circuit therefore are in position to seek mandamus against the IRS.

SEEK ADVICE OF COUNSEL

If you seek professional advice regarding the application of FET to
your business, we advise you to contact your legal counsel.  If you do
not have legal counsel or seek specific counsel on this issue, please
contact Charles H. Helein at 703-714-1301 or by e-mail:
chh@thlglaw.com.  Our firm has developed various strategies in
response to the legal developments affecting the FET and looks forward
to working with clients to implement the most appropriate strategy
given each client's unique circumstances.

                =======================

The Front Lines is a free publication of The Helein Law Group,
providing clients and interested parties with valuable information,
news, and updates regarding regulatory and legal developments
primarily impacting companies engaged in the competitive
telecommunications industry.

The Front Lines does not purport to offer legal advice nor does it
establish a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. If you have
questions about a particular article, general concerns, or wish to
seek legal counsel regarding a specific regulatory or legal matter
affecting your company, please contact our firm at 703-714-1313 or
visit our website:

http://www.thlglaw.com/ www.THLGlaw.com

The Helein Law Group
8180 Greensboro Drive, Suite 700
McLean, Virginia 22102

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

Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 13:17:50 EDT
From: USTelecom dailyLead <ustelecom@dailylead.com>
Subject: Verizon Wireless, Dell Ink Wireless Broadband


USTelecom dailyLead
September 19, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=24715&l=2017006

		TODAY'S HEADLINES
	
NEWS OF THE DAY
* Verizon Wireless, Dell ink wireless broadband deal
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* P2P startup may buy Grokster
* Is wireless the next frontier for porn?
* Telos wins Pentagon deal
* Japan's experience with mobile music could hold clues
* The new Web
USTELECOM SPOTLIGHT 
* Presented by ILC:  Broadband Services: Network Provisioning Across Multiple Technologies
HOT TOPICS
* Fiber on the comeback trail
* EBay buys Skype for $2.6 billion
* Report: TV's future is IPTV
* Ethernet not ready for primetime
* Broadband bill addresses advanced services
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Cisco offers new IP networking products
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Can Wi-Fi master disaster?

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=24715&l=2017006

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

From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: When it Rains, it Pours  ....
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:34:39 UTC
Organization: Organized?  Me?


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I still do not understand _how_
> the network card, or PCMCIA or whatever is able to do that job without
> first itself getting installed by (for example) Windows or whatever OS
> is in the terminal/workstation. I mean, that would be great if I could
> just turn on the laptop and have its OS installed by the desktop Win
> 2000. But how?   PAT]

The BIOS, possibly assisted by some firmware in the LAN card, has
enough "smarts" to initiate the connection to the boot server, and to
receive the OS image.

Rich Greenberg Marietta, GA, USA richgr atsign panix.com    + 1 770 321 6507
Eastern time.  N6LRT  I speak for myself & my dogs only.   VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val, Red & Shasta (RIP),Red, husky                   Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. www.panix.com/~richgr/  Asst Owner:Sibernet-L

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

Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:31:32 -0400
From: William Warren <william_warren_nonoise@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: When it Rains, it Pours  ....


TELECOM Digest Editor noted when questioning William Warren:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On the older Think Pads (models 770
>> or 770x at least) F1 at time of booting brings up a BIOS menu and a
>> choice of options i.e. boot from CD, from hard drive, from floppy
>> (and other choices I do not understand, such as from 'network', from
>> 'PCMCIA card' and other places. Exactly how one boots from 'network'
>> or from 'PCMCIA card' when those devices do not come to life until
>> Windows turns them on confuses me. [snip]  PAT]

> Pat,

> It's asking if you want to start a bootp request from your Ethernet
> card, which would broadcast for a "boot" server to provide the
> operating system for you over the network.

> In other words, it's giving you the option that's used for "Diskless
> Workstations", which don't have a hard disk, to download your OS from
> another network node and start it in memory. It's the same process
> your BIOS performs during boot, except that the image that's loaded
> into your machine's ram comes from another computer on your LAN, not
> from your hard drive.
[snip]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I still do not understand _how_
> the network card, or PCMCIA or whatever is able to do that job without
> first itself getting installed by (for example) Windows or whatever OS
> is in the terminal/workstation. I mean, that would be great if I could
> just turn on the laptop and have its OS installed by the desktop Win
> 2000. But how?   PAT]

Pat, the network card is able to do that job because it contains a
small computer program stored on ROM, which tells it what to do. This
is the same process your computer goes through when it boots: a small
computer program, stored in your computer's ROM, tells the machine to
read the first (boot) sector from the first hard disk drive into RAM,
and to transfer control to it. From there, the boot code that was read
from the hard disk takes over and reads the operating system into RAM,
thus booting the OS.

With BOOTP, the ROM is on the Ethernet card: it's usually an extra
chip that you have to buy separately and plug in yourself. The
instructions in the rom tell the microcontroller on the Ethernet card
to issue a BOOTP broadcast, thus requesting a response from a BOOTP
server, and the server responds with the "bootstrap" code that the
computer uses to find an OS image and load it into memory.

It's the same result, just from a different source.

GIYF:

http://www.microsoft.com/mspress/books/sampchap/6163a.asp (General Information)
http://www.cis.njit.edu/~cis456/protected/lesson23/single23.html 
(Details of the protocol)

William

(Filter noise from my address for direct replies)

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

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: When it Rains, it Pours  ....
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 21:16:17 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom24.427.13@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest
Editor noted:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I still do not understand _how_
> the network card, or PCMCIA or whatever is able to do that job without
> first itself getting installed by (for example) Windows or whatever OS
> is in the terminal/workstation. I mean, that would be great if I could
> just turn on the laptop and have its OS installed by the desktop Win
> 2000. But how?   PAT]

It is *simple*.  The 'minimum necessary' code for operating the
network card is included in the ROM BIOS.  this is *not* much.  it
includes the code to (1) do a "RARP" request to find out the ethernet
address it should use, (2) do a 'broadcast' query for a TFTP server,
(3) send a 'get IPADDRESS_IN_HEX' request to that server, and (4)
access the remote required file-system image (directory structure)
from a file-server, via some network file-sharing protocol (NFS, SMB,
etc.).

Given that the 'network card' is built in to the machine, then 'how to
talk to it' can be "hard-coded" into the BIOS -- because it *is*
"known" what kind of a network card is installed, and thus the actual
code to communicate with the card is unchanging.  Thus, the amount of
code required to implement that necessary sequence of network commands
is *very* reasonable in size -- as in 'a few kbytes".

It's no different, in basic concept, from how a computer knows how to
load the O/S from a hard-disk -- *before* the hard-disk driver is
'installed' in the O/S.  This _is_ why, it is known as the 'bootstrap
loader' process.  It has 'just enough' smarts to talk to the boot
device (floppy, hard-disk, network card, cassette tape drive {remember
*those}, or 'whatever') to load in a bigger block of instructions that
provide the additional 'smarts' to load the next bigger piece of the
O/S in to memory.  "lather, rinse, repeat" as needed, until you have
the entire O/S loaded.

".. but how?"  requires setting up a machine to act as a 'boot
server'.

It has to have a table of Ethernet card _MAC_ addresses, along with
the IP address that should be assigned to that MAC address.  And be
running the server program that will dispense that information when
requested.

It has to be running a TFTP server process to deliver the boot image
when requested by the client machine.  this means that you also have
to have copies of the appropriate 'system' files under the appropriate
name(s) in the TFTP server's working directory.

The machine must also be running the programming that causes it to
identify itself as a boot server, when the 'broadcast' query is made.

Lastly, _some_ machine -- not necessarily the same machine as the
'boot' server -- must provide the "system" filesystem files, via a
network file- sharing protocol.

None of this is particularly 'rocket science', but it does require a
fair bit of "systems administration" and 'network administration'
knowledge, to set up all the requisite pieces, and have them play
nicely _together_.  request.

UNIX and Unix-like systems have known how to do this for 20+ years.
Novell "Netware" supported the concept from the later part of the
1980's, for Netware "client" machines.

Microsoft "didn't do networks" until 'Windows for Workgroups', and
"Microsoft Networking" did not support 'booting over the network'.

I don't know *if* it is possible to boot a MS O/S from the network,
although modern MS O/S's do have the required tools for being a 'boot
server' to 'diskless' clients.

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Use of Bell Logo: Qwest? SBC?
Organization: ATCC
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:17:30 -0400


In article <telecom24.427.8@telecom-digest.org>, 
shlichter@diespammers.com says:

> Allen Newman wrote:

>> Trademarks must remain in use to remain legally protected, so I'm
>> curious where and how Qwest ("my" Baby Bell) uses the Bell logo, if at
>> all.  In most cases Qwest has eliminated it since merging with US
>> West.  You can still make out the shadow of a Bell logo removed from
>> the wall of a Qwest building in Ankeny, Iowa, for example.

>> Last night on the way to a wedding reception I saw a Bell logo that
>> Qwest hasn't gotten rid of: a wooden pay phone kiosk inside the south
>> entrance of the Sioux Falls VFW Lounge still has a Bell sign on top,
>> with the blue Bell logo to the left of the word "phone".  Except for
>> Qwest signs tacked to the sides of the kiosk it looked a couple
>> decades old.  Does Qwest affixing new signs without taking down the
>> Bell sign count as current use for trademark purposes?  It seems
>> better than the example Qwest filed with the USPTO in 2003, which was
>> a couple photos of a US West payphone kiosk, which didn't even have
>> the Qwest identity.

>> Even without the logo, Qwest does try to connect less obviously to the
>> Bell identity.  Its Dex phone book is still blue and gold, the Qwest
>> logotype is in the Gill Sans font which has also been the corporate
>> font of AT&T (although the Bell System used Helvetica), and their
>> current slogan is "Spirit of Service", a long-time Bell System motto.
>> Arguably, Qwest's blue swoosh logo echos the circular blue Bell logo
>>  -- or would, at least, clash with it if the Bell logo were also
>> present.

>> Has anyone ever seen an example of Qwest intentionally adding the Bell
>> logo to anything anywhere?  I wonder what they'll come up with when
>> their next trademark filing is due.

>> The other RBOCs have filed their own claims of Bell logo usage:

>> In 2002, SBC submitted a photo of a white service truck with blue and
>> gold stripes and Southwestern Bell Telephone markings.  Do their
>> trucks still look like that?  It's about as convincing as Qwest's US
>> West phone booth.  It'll be interesting to learn what SBC does with
>> branding after their purchase of AT&T.

>> Also in 2002, Verizon submitted photos of new Verizon service trucks
>> and pay phones featuring the Bell logo.  IMO Verizon has cleverly
>> dealt with the Bell logo "problem", that is, keeping it alive and
>> meaningful but not letting it compete with their own created identity.

>> Finally, both of the Baby Bells that don't use the Bell logo
>> themselves license Bell names and logos to equipment manufacturers.
>> Qwest licenses Northwestern Bell to Unical and SBC licenses
>> Southwestern Bell to Conair.  This despite Northwestern Bell and
>> Southwestern Bell no longer being names Qwest or SBC use themselves,
>> and the fact that while Qwest and SBC sell phone equipment on their
>> websites, it's not their licensed Bell-branded equipment.

>> Bell logo trademark registrations can be found by searching for design
>> code 220324 260101 at the USPTO.

> I believe that all their old names such as Northwestern Bell Telephone 
> are still registered with the states in which they served as well as the 
> US Copyright office.

> I know that GTE is in California is still listed. And that was a 
> non-Bell before the merger.

> 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.

For example:

http://www2.corps.state.ri.us/corporations/corp_search/index.php?
help=namechange&corp_id=25249&corpname=Name

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

From: J Kelly <jkelly@*newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Roaming Charges
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:11:23 -0500
Organization: http://newsguy.com
Reply-To: jkelly@*newsguy.com


On 16 Sep 2005 05:33:58 -0000, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

>> This raises a question I thought of recently, but had not bothered to
>> ask anyone about.  Suppose I start a cell call in local but move to a
>> roaming tower during the call?  Does the call get charged as roaming
>> or not?

> I doubt you'd get a handoff in a situation like that.  It'd drop the
> call and you'd call back.

I worked for a small cellular carrier about 7 years ago.  I would
routinely test handoffs from our network to the network adjacent to
us.  Calls can and do hand from one network to another.  The company I
worked for billed a call as it was originated.  I would make a call at
home, drive halfway across the state (though another carriers network)
and back into one of our service areas, the bill at the end of the
month would show a 2 hour call in my home area, no roaming.  I
received the same bills as a regular customer, the only difference was
instead of paying it I would send it to my supervisor and all the
charges mysteriously disappeared :) And they certianly hand from cell
to cell, I would often drive 400 miles in one day testing handoffs
between cellsites while talking to the performance engineer all the
while who was watching my signal stregths in the switch and making
tweaks to the system to make it handoff at just the right time.  I
don't miss that job as I hate being in a vehicle.

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


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 #428
******************************