TELECOM Digest     Sat, 1 Oct 2005 17:34:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 448

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Google Proposes Free Wi-Fi For San Francisco (Eric Auchard)
    Google Wins Age Discrimination Case; Old People Need Not Apply (AP News)
    Call For Papers (Lionel Garth Jones)
    Re: Electric Powerlines to be Used For Broadband (Danny Burstein)
    Re: Electric Powerlines to be Used For Broadband (Tony P.)
    Re: Linksys Site Survey Shows Info on Nearby Wireless (William Warren)
    Re: Change MAC Address Can Change IP Address of a Machine? (Steve Sobol)
    Re: 2L-4N, 3L-4N, 2L-5N Numbering (Paul Coxwell)
    For Sale: NEAX 2400 IPX (justinsmith354@hotmail.com)

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: Eric Auchard <reuters@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: Google Proposes Free Wi-Fi For San Francisco
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 12:37:35 -0500


By Eric Auchard

Marking its biggest step into the wireless communications market to
date, Google Inc. said on Friday it has proposed to provide free
wireless Internet services across the city of San Francisco.

The Web search company said it has responded to a request for
information by the City of San Francisco to test local Internet
services via Wi-Fi, the short-range wireless technology built into
most new laptop computers.

"Google has submitted a proposal to offer free, wireless Internet
access (Wi-Fi) to the entire city of San Francisco," Google said in a
statement.

The Wi-Fi access could be funded through online advertising, a Google
spokesman said, "Ads would easily cover all the expenses."

The service aims to test a range of new services and applications
around the hilly city, which is home to more than 700,000 residents.

Offering free wireless communications could thrust Google into
competition with entrenched local suppliers of broadband Internet
access, including telephone network SBC Communications Inc. and local
cable operator Comcast Corp. No word yet whether SBC will allow the
proposal or not. 

An effort by the city of Philadelphia to offer municipal Wi-Fi
Internet access services has met with stiff opposition from phone
company Verizon Communications. Chicago and New York are among other
cities considering similar plans. Verizon and SBC are fighting
furiously against these proposals, as SBC is doing in Kansas also.

"This proposal is limited to San Francisco and we don't have any plans
to expand this community service beyond the (San Francisco) Bay Area,"
the Google statement said.

Confirmation of the Google proposal came after a public "request for
information and comment" by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom for ideas
on creating a universal, affordable, city wireless network.

The wireless proposal aims to reach handheld organizers, computers or
mobile phone devices, from the financial district to low-income
neighborhoods, the city said in a statement.

In July, Google confirmed that it had began a limited test of a free
wireless Web service, called "Google WiFi" with tests at a pizza
parlor and gymnasium near its Mountain View, California headquarters.

The company began sponsoring a Wi-Fi "hotspot" in a downtown San
Francisco shopping district in April, working with a start-up outfit
called Feeva.

If it is chosen for the project, Google is working with a variety of
partners to help it set up and manage the wireless service, said
Google spokesman Nathan Tyler.

Google would work with partners to build and operate the wireless
service, including Wireless Facilities Inc., a San Diego company that
helps run networks, the Wall Street Journal reported late on Friday.

Other companies that responded to San Francisco's request for
information include Internet service provider EarthLink Inc. of
Atlanta, the Journal said.

"If accepted, we believe Google can bring to bear its expertise
managing complex computer networks combined with years of online
consumer product development, to benefit the people of San Francisco,"
Google said of its proposal.

(Additional reporting by Sinead Carew in New York)

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: Associated Press News Wire <ap@telecom-digest.org> 
Subject: Age Discrimination by Google; Old People Need Not Apply for Work
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 12:42:29 -0500


Google Prevails in Age Discrimination Suit

A California judge has sided with Google Inc. in an age discrimination
lawsuit filed by a former manager who alleged the online search engine
leader had fired him because he didn't fit in with the company's
youthful culture.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge William Elfving granted Google
a summary judgment on all the case's key issues in a Sept. 21
ruling. The judge concluded that Brian Reid, formerly Google's
director of operations, hadn't presented enough evidence to prove
Google fired him in February 2004 because of his age.

Reid, who was 54 when he filed the suit more than 14 months ago, said
one of Google's executives told him that he lost his job because he
didn't fit into Google's youthful atmosphere. He also contended that
Google discriminated against him for having diabetes -- another
allegation that Elfving found to be meritless.

Amy Lambert, Google's senior employment counsel, said the Mountain
View, Calif.-based company was pleased with the outcome. "Google
values the diversity of our work force. The accusations in this case
were completely without merit and the judge's ruling unequivocally
affirms that," she said.

Lorraine P. Ocheltree, Reid's attorney, didn't return calls seeking
comment Friday.

Since its start in a Silicon Valley garage seven years ago, Google has
blossomed into one of the world's best known companies on the strength
of its renowned search engine. The company employs nearly 4,200
employees and expects to hire thousands more in the next few years.

Reid's firing cost him an annual salary of $200,000 and 119,000 Google
stock options with an exercise price of 30 cents per share, according
to his lawsuit. Those stock options would have been worth $37.6
million Friday, based on Google's closing price of $316.46 per share
on the Nasdaq Stock Market.

On The Net:
http://www.google.com

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

For more headlines and stories, see:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/newstoday.html  (also)
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/other-news.html (also)
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/nytimes.html

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

Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:27:57 -0700
From: Lionel Garth Jones <lgj@usenix.org>
Subject: Call For Papers


Call For Papers:
3rd Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI '06)

May 8-10, 2006
San Jose, California, USA

http://www.usenix.org/nsdi06/cfpa
Sponsored by USENIX, in cooperation with ACM SIGCOMM and ACM SIGOPS
Submissions Deadline: October 10,2005

NSDI '06 focuses on the design principles of large-scale networks and
distributed systems. Systems as diverse as scalable Web services,
peer-to-peer file sharing, sensor nets, and distributed network
measurement share a set of challenges. Progress in any of these areas
requires an understanding of how researchers are addressing the
challenges of large-scale systems in other contexts. Our goal is to
bring together researchers from across the networking and systems
community -- including operating systems, distributed systems, and
computer networking -- to foster cross-disciplinary approaches to our
shared research challenges. NSDI will provide a high-quality,
single-track forum for presenting new results and discussing ideas
that are relevant to these disciplines.

The NSDI '06 Program Committee seeks a broad variety of work that
furthers the knowledge and understanding of the networking and systems
community as a whole, continues a significant research dialog, or
pushes the architectural boundaries of large-scale network
services. We solicit papers describing original, previously
unpublished research. Specific topics of interest include, but are not
limited to:

* Scalable techniques for providing high availability and reliability
* Security and robustness of highly complex systems
* Novel architectural approaches (e.g., for specific application domains)
* Network measurements, workload, and topology characterization
* Autonomous and self-configuring network, system, and overlay management
* Network virtualization and resource management
* Distributed storage, caching, and query optimization
* Network protocols and algorithms for complex distributed systems
* Operating system support for scalable network services
* Application experiences (e.g., in sensor networks, peer-to-peer 
  systems, overlay networks, pervasive computing, and content distribution)

Also taking place again this year is the NSDI Poster Session. Do you
have interesting work in progress you would like to share? Poster
sessions introduce new or ongoing work. The NSDI audience provides
valuable discussion and feedback. We are particularly interested in
presentations of student work. To submit a poster, please send a
proposal, one page or less, by March 29, 2006, to the poster session
coordinator at nsdi05posters@usenix.org . We will send back decisions
by April 17, 2006.

Important Dates:

 -- Paper titles and abstracts due: October 10, 2005
 -- Full paper submissions due: October 17, 2005
 -- Notification of acceptance: January 13, 2006
 -- Papers due for shepherding: March 13, 2006
 -- Final papers due: March 29, 2006
 -- Poster proposals due: March 29, 2006
 -- Poster notification: April 17, 2006

For more information and submission guidelines, please visit
http://www.usenix.org/nsdi06/cfpa

We look forward to receiving your submissions!

Larry Peterson, Princeton University
Timothy Roscoe, Intel Research
NSDI '06 Program Chairs

SAVE THE DATE!
3rd Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI '06)
May 8-10, 2006
San Jose, California, USA
http://www.usenix.org/nsdi06/cfpa
Sponsored by USENIX, in cooperation with ACM SIGCOMM and ACM SIGOPS

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

From: Danny Burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Electric Powerlines to be Used For Broadband
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:12:23 UTC
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC


In <telecom24.446.12@telecom-digest.org> Daniel AJ Sokolov
<sokolov@gmx.netnetnet.invalid> writes:

> First, the effort to make it happen is big. You have to lay fibre to
> the transformation substation closest to the user. 

Which is _already_ in the cards. Utilities want/need better remote
control options for their distributed network of transformers, in
addition to billing and other functions, so many of them are (hoping
to ...) extend(ing) fiber-carrying SCADA [a] to them. Once that glass
is in place, you're within a few thousand feet (or less) of ninety
something percent of the proposed end users.

[a] SCADA	Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple things I do not understand
about voice communication over electrical power lines: Some say it
will not work; others say it is okay. My own experience has been that
(a) Chicago Transit Authority for many years (has?) used the third-
rail for telephone conversations between control towers/trains/station
agents.  (b) I personally have tried so-called 'wireless intercoms'
between different locations nearby; sometimes they worked (although in
a rather piss-poor way; other times not at all. I have no personal
experience with (a) but have been told the connections are very
'noisy' many times, and (b) when they worked, they seemed to have a
lot of 'hum' in the background. When they did not work (all I got 
was hum with no audible voice at all) I am told this was because the
two intercom stations involved were on opposite 'legs' of the 
transfomer.  Can anyone explain this better to me? I know that the
third-rail seems like an awful way to transmit voice communications.
On the one occassion I had to see the CTA system in action, I called
into the CTA main headquarters phone number (MOHawk 4-7200) and the 
operator switched me to a supervisor in one of the control towers
several miles away for whom I had a question. The connection, frankly,
was not all that good. Once I also called Grand Central Station in
downtown Chicago to the Lost and Found; she switched me to the Lost 
and Found in Baltimore, OH, also via the trackside phone lines. That
connection sounded pretty bad also. PAT]

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

From: Tony P. <kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net>
Subject: Re: Electric Powerlines to be Used For Broadband
Organization: ATCC
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:43:52 -0400


In article <telecom24.446.11@telecom-digest.org>, haynes@alumni.uark.edu 
says:

> In article <telecom24.444.7@telecom-digest.org>,
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

>> Well, now they are working to use power lines to bring in broadband
>> service, so consumers will eventually have a third independent choice
>> of communications providers.

> Have you been hiding under a rock?  This activity has been hotly
> debated for a couple of years at least.

> The fact is that power lines are not designed to conduct high
> frequency signals, so they work more as antennas than as conductors.
> The result of broadband over power lines (BPL) is to create a high
> level of pollution of the high frequency radio spectrum.  Radio
> amateurs have made the most noise about this, since they stand to lose
> the use of the HF spectrum; but shortwave radio listeners and business
> and government users of the spectrum are also complaining.  The FCC
> seems to be taking a position that it is OK to foster the growth of a
> new business rather than to protect the existing radio users.  Field
> trials have been done here and there and have shown that the radio
> interference potential of this activity is serious.  There is also the
> possibility that nearby radio transmitters will disrupt operation of
> the BPL system.

> It's not something you want to invest your savings in.

> jhhaynes at earthlink dot net

And if I'm correct, BPL will be a part 15 service while amateur radio
is a part 97 service.

Part 15 services have to accept interference. So get ready for the
fun.

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

Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:07:03 -0400
From: William Warren <william_warren_nonoise@speakeasy.net>
Subject: Re: Linksys Site Survey Shows Lots of Info on Nearby Wireless Networks


apngss@yahoo.com wrote:

> I am using a Linksys Wireless Adapter. On site survey, I am able to
> see the list of nearby wireless networks. For each wireless network, I
> am able to see the SSID, wireless mode, channel, security mechanism,
> and MAC address.

> It is quite scary because we could see MAC address too? That means
> people can hack the system?

> I have seen some SSID that doesn't use any encryption at all.  Does it
> mean I am able to login to that wireless network without any security?
> But I tried and it says couldn't find the access point. I am confused
> because that wireless network can be scanned on site survey, then how
> come it says couldn't find the access point?

> Please advise. Thanks!!

Even if the SSID you're seeing is not encrypted, the Access Point may be 
configured to associate only with certain clients, as Pat mentioned.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First, I want to apologize that no
> one seemed willing to talk about this to you yesterday when you first
> wrote me, asking about WEP encryption. I provided you with a few
> links to examine, they were easily found through Google with the 
> search key 'WEP Encryption Tools'.  I hope that helped you out some.

Pat, the reason those "in the know" about WEP and its weaknesses don't
like to talk about it is that we sometimes use it for our customers.

The problem is that WPA, although it has much better security, is
notoriously hard to get running, especially between nodes made by
different manufacturers. I've had occasions where I promised to
encrypt a customer's WiFI network and was forced to use WEP rather
than admit I couldn't get WPA to function.

> Perhaps why it displays these places to you on site survey yet
> claims it is unable to reach them is because although encryption
> is a powerful tool to keep people out of your business (I use 64-bit
> encryption with my wireless card) there are a couple other lines of
> defense: One is to tell your router/adapter/whatever "do not broadcast
> my name" leaving intruders to guess at whatever name you call your
> wireless link and/or your computer, and two, telling your router/adapter
> "do not respond to anyone but myself (MAC address, etc). By using
> 64-bit encryption along with 'do not broadcast' and 'do not respond'
> you do make things more difficult, essentially if not totally, private.
> PAT]

I'm tempted to admonish you to switch from 64 bit to 128 bit WEP, but
it's just a reflex, akin to wishing I had used a code when the teacher
caught me passing a note in class and read it aloud.

The fact is that _any_ WEP encryption is really just a "No
Trespassing" sign placed on an access point: a lock designed only to
keep honest people honest, not to keep out thieves. WEP is the "Beware
of Dog" sign of the WiFi biz: it's just window dressing for those who
don't know any better, and we don't like to talk about it because
sometimes it's all we have.


William Warren

(Filter noise from my address for direct replies)

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

From: Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net>
Subject: Re: Change MAC Address Can Change IP Address of a Machine?
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:14:55 -0700
Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com


John Levine wrote:

>> Is there any way to change the MAC address of a machine? IP address is
>> assigned by ISP. My understanding is that IP address is based on the
>> MAC address of a machine, is that correct concept?

> No.  Your IP address has nothing whatsoever to do with your MAC
> address.

If you're using DHCP, an IP address X is assigned to the card with MAC
address Y and changing the MAC then renewing your lease is almost
guaranteed to change your IP address. If the DHCP server is set to
assign a static address to your computer, it does so by associating
the static address with the MAC address.

>  Your ISP assigns it from their pool of available addresses.
> On my tiny network, when someone plugs in a new computer, it just
> assigns the lowest numbered unused IP address.

Yes, but while you have that address it IS associated with your MAC
address.  I think we're discussing two different OSI layers, though.

Steve Sobol, Professional Geek   888-480-4638   PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Company website: http://JustThe.net/
Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
E: sjsobol@JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307

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

Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:23:22 +0100
From: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: 2L-4N, 3L-4N, 2L-5N Numbering


> There were a handful of cities in the United Kingdom which had 3L-4N
> numbering. Every other place in the UK had less-than-seven digits
> (or dial pull) local numbering throughout the 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s,
> 80s.

Local numbering plans with 3, 4, 5 and 6-digits were all in widespread
use into the 1980s.  All of these were straight numbers, with no
letters involved.

Up until at least the very early 1970s there were even some old UAX5
offices (Unit Automatic eXchange) in rural areas with 2-digit local
numbers.  The UAX5 is quite a fascinating system in its own right, and
in fact I've just acquired a GPO manual for it dating from 1930, but
that's another story!

> These UK locations that did have 3L-4N were the "director" cities,
> the largest of all metro areas, and also had the shortest STD codes
> ending in a '1' (or having the only digit of '1').

> (0)1  London
> (0)21 Birmingham
> (0)31 Edinborough (SCOTLAND)
> (0)41 Glasgow
> (0)51 Liverpool
> (0)61 Manchester.

> In the UK (at least London), they actually numbered previously named
> EXChanges with totally different numerics, possibly to "force" people
> to think of telephone numbers now as numericals, not with letters.

The changeover to all-figure numbers occurred during the 1966 to 1969
period.  British dials of the time differed from American in having
the letter "O' on the digit zero.  That resulted in the disadvantages
of not being able to use any office name beginning with "O" and that
it was impossible to come up with anything for the 66x prefixes (or
n66 for that matter).  On the plus side, it meant that a zero could be
used as either the second or third digit of a prefix, and allowed
certain combinations of names which would not be possible under the
American system.  For example, London had both MONarch (606) and
MOOrgate (600) exchanges.

In London, most of the older offices had names which related to some
geographical feature in the neighborhood, such as the name of a
suburb, a road, a park, a river, or other well-known building or
landmark.  Toward the end though, exchange naming had to become more
creative, and names which were of no particular significance were
assigned.  The poetical/literary series of office names is a good
example, such as BYRon (297), DICkens (342), and WORdsworth (907).

At the end of the 3L-4N era, there were approximately 250 prefixes
assigned to offices in the London director area.  Another handful were
used as 3-digit service codes, e.g. DIRectory (347), TIMe (846), and
TELegrams (835).  The GPO even used UMPire (867) for recorded cricket
scores at one point -- You'd KNOW you were in England then!

Of the 250-ish assigned C.O. prefixes, about 100 remained unchanged
during the conversion to all-figure numbering, including many (but by
no means all) of the offices serving the "City" and "West End" -- the
central financial and business districts of London.  For example,
CHAncery, FLEet Street, GERard, and MAYfair all just went to their
numerical equivalents of 242, 353, 437, and 629 respectively.

The other 150-odd offices were assigned completely new prefixes with a
limited grouping of codes within a district.  In the part of north
London where my family lived, there were offices named ENField (363),
ENTerprise (368), KEAts (532), and LABurnham (522).  ENField and
ENTerprise kept their existing prefixes, while KEAts and LAburnham
became 366 and 360 respectively, putting all the 36x prefixes into the
district.

Similarly, BARnet (227) and HADley Green (423) became 449 and 440,
putting them in the same 44x grouping as the nearby exchanges HIGhgate
Wood (444) and HILside (445), both of which kept their original
prefixes.

The new prefixes were assigned such that no new code conflicted with a
3L prefix which was being taken out of service, and in fact there was
a permissive dialing period.  The hitherto unused prefix groups such
as 55x provided scope for changes where a whole bunch of offices was
to be renumbered.  In fact under the 3L-4N system the following
"groups" were completely empty: 55x, 59x, 65x, 66x, 67x, 69x, 85x,
95x, 96x, 97x, 98x, and 99x (excluding the 999 emergency number).  A
further eight such "groups" had only one prefix in use, e.g. 46x had
only IMPerial (467) and 56x had only KNIghtsbridge (564).

The 3L service codes migrated to the 1 level, e.g. 192 for directory
and 151 for fault reporting. (And in fact the former ENGineers
fault-reporting number was later used as the new 364 prefix serving
Winchmore Hill, a part of north London in the 36x grouping I mentioned
above.)

I'm not too familiar with the exchanges in the other director cities,
but I know they also changed some prefixes during the transition to
all-figure numbering.  Birmingham, for example, renumbered some
offices so that north/south/east/west/central districts were
determined by the first digit of the prefix.  They had an easier time
making new assignments outside of London though as fewer prefixes were
in use.  Birmingham had, I believe, less than 50 central-offices at
the time of the changeover.  I'm not sure of the figures of the
changeover arrangements for Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool, or
Manchester.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Didn't London, England also use
> WEATHER (seven letters, seven digits) for the recorded weather
> forecast at one time? I know that Chicago used WEAther-1212 for
> the recorded forecast at one time.

I don't recall ever seeing that number used in London, but it's
possible. Sometime after the change to straight 7D numbering, and
certainly by the early/mid 1970s the GPO was using the 246 exchange
for a range of recorded announcements in London (and some of the other
director cities).  The most commonly used numbers were of the form
246-80x1, i.e. 246-8021, 246-8091, etc.  I can't remember all the
assignments offhand, but they included local London weather, national
weather, theatre information, and various recorded information lines
for tourists.

In a lot of advertising in the 1970s, the GPO would use a 246 number
on the phone dial, in much the same way as the Bell ads used 555-2368.

I know that "WEather 6-1212" (936-1212) is still used in a few U.S. 
cities, including Washington D.C. (202), Philadelphia (215), and 
Milwaukee (414).

The days of the phone company providing recorded weather information
on a local number have gone over here.  You can access it on an 09
premium-rate number from various private enterprises these days, but
given the easy access to weather information from various other
sources, you'd have to be pretty desparate to pay the equivalent of a
dollar per minute or more to do so.


-Paul.

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

From: justinsmith354@hotmail.com
Subject: For Sale: NEAX 2400 IPX
Date: 30 Sep 2005 14:41:59 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


If anyone needs one ... let me know. I work with one of the largest NEC
distributors in the country. We offer a 1 year advanced replacement
warranty on all refurbished products we sell. We sell new and used NEC
equipment.

This unit comes with all the bells and whistles. Or just tell me what
you want in it. It currently has 300 users ACD.

Call Justin @ 800-628-7491 Ext. 7759
 
US ONLY

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


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 #448
******************************