For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
Add this Digest to your personal
or
TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Oct 2005 00:32:00 EDT Volume 24 : Issue 486
Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
Remote Call Forwarding Question (Nhfloral@aol.com)
Obituary: Dr. Boyd L. Nelson Died Sunday (Marcus Didius Falco)
Call Fowarding WZW -> Vonage Question (kevincw01)
Avaya Reports 4th Quarter and Fiscal 2005 Results (Monty Solomon)
Ubiquitel Reports 3rd Quarter Results (Monty Solomon)
Motorola Shows Carriers More Ways to Deliver IPTV at Telecom 2005 (Solomon)
Re: Wilma Causing Network Wide Outages With Verio-Host (John McHarry)
Re: Long Beach, CA Network Failure (kevincw01)
Re: Caller ID TIME For Setting Time on Regular Pots Analog Phones (Lichter)
Re: The First Mayoral Long-Distance Call (Anthony Bellanga)
Vintage "Pen Register"? (ana)
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: Nhfloral@aol.com
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 18:11:02 EDT
Subject: Remote Call Forwarding Question
Patrick,
I stumbled upon your Telecom Digest while doing a search on Google; I
hope you might be able to provide help. You have my permission to
post this in your Digest.
Please call me with questions! My contact info is at the end of this
email.
When did it become legal for telephone companies to solicit listings
which are deceptive? A company in New Jersey that has a "local
listing" in a Concord NH telephone book calling themselves "Concord
Florist"? A locksmith or a towing company that lists in one phone
book, but is actually nowhere near that location?
Bell Atlantic/Verizon is knowingly and intentionally facilitating and
disseminating deceptive business telephone listings. This creates
unfair trade practices for legitimate businesses. This practice is in
violation of state and federal consumer protection laws, and also
violates state and federal regulatory tariffs.
The ruse employs 'remote call forwarding' which Verizon pro motes by
saying 'Remote Call Forwarding' allows you to establish a "local"
presence in almost any location, just by having a local phone number,
even if you don't have a physical office in that area.
The following contains Verizon's Directory Listing Standards (policies
and procedures) applicable to white page business directory listings.
Listings for Remote Call Forwarded (RCF) telephone service may include
whatever address the business customer wants to list, whether it is
local or not.
If the customer selects the OMIT ADDRESS option, encourage the
appearance of at least the local community in the listing.
Call Joe's Towing Company at a local phone number in your local phone
book but he's really 75 miles away. Call a plumber, locksmith,
florist; they all have a local appearance but are actually many miles
away.
Verizon allows customers who buy this service to assume hundreds of
fictitious geographically local business names. One business in New
Jersey who uses this service has local appearing listings in nearly
every major city in the country, and lists a fictitious name: 'Concord
Florist' 'Manchester Florist', 'Rochester Florist'. All calls are
routed back to one central number, unbeknownst to the consumer.
By selling this service of RCF, allowing it to be used in an unlawful
manner, and publishing the listings in Verizon Directories, the following
situations have occurred:
Consumers are being deceived as to the origination of the goods or
services associated with the businesses using RCF.
Legitimate, local businesses stand to lose business due to this unfair
trade practice caused by RCF.
Verizon is unjustly profiting from the service charges and extra listing
fees associated with RCF.
Verizon is facilitating and disseminating the deception by selling
their RCF listings to other publishing services. State and Federal
laws prohibit misleading consumers as to the origin or source of goods
or services. The FTC determines "deception" by looking at the intent
of the information being presented.
What is the intent behind "Remote Call Forwarding"?? To make people
think they are calling a location that is really located somewhere
else! If it was just to save the consumer a toll call, why not use
an 800 number? In an a separate email, I have attached a couple
documents with our Verizon Tariffs, and State laws.
Valerie Dawes, President
New Hampshire State Florists' Association
24 Albin Ave.
Allenstown, NH 03275
603-738-5691 (cell; leave message)
603-485-9833 (home - evening calls welcomed!)
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll bet when the order taker answers
the phone for 'Concord Florist' or 'Manchester Florist' they answer
the phone with the more generic phrase 'Florist'; the same way that
secretaries for a group of lawyers or doctors tend to be generic in
their answers many times. After all, unless the answering party is
tipped off by caller ID or the ringing cadence on a line (or in fact
a separate line for each incoming 'business' they have no way of
knowing _which_ florist (doctor, lawyer, other person) is being
called.
I do not think it is against the law to use remote call forwarding
(with an entry in the phone book for same); whether a given 'assumed
name' for your business is deceptive or not depends on how you use it
and in many communities one has to file legal papers to be allowed to
use certain names; anyone can examine these papers and object to the
inappropriate use of a name on the grounds it may be misleading.
The choice of a name for a business is a decision one makes (assuming
one intends to follow the law) based on laws pertaining to 'assumed
names'. Does the term 'Manchester' or 'Concord' (for example) _absolutely_
refer to the towns by those names in New Hampshire, or are those
generic phrases anyone can use to call their business (assuming the
owner has the appropriate business licenses, etc?)
What if a person has two places of business, both essentially the
same, and they use _regular_ call forwarding (star seven two and all
that) to forward one of their phones to the other location? Is that
deceptive? Suppose the same person has a 'foreign exchange' line from
one community which terminates in another town? Is that -- in and of
itself -- deceptive? Or to use your example 'why not have an 800 number?'
suppose my business has an 800 number, ostensibly to save on toll
charges for my customers, but in fact most or all of my customers are
local people and would not incur any long distance charges by calling
me anyway? For _honest_ business people, there are several modes of
handling telephone calls which might incur toll charges: 800 numbers
is one such way, FX (foreign exchange) lines are another way; Call
Forwarding (reglar or remote) is a third way. 800 numbers are not
necessarily the least expensive, depending on your volume of calls and
your specific usage patterns.
On the other hand, deceptive business people may wish to use these
various modes on the phone for less than honorable reasons. There are
business places which place much importance on being listed in a
certain place in the telephone book; apparently they feel their
customers are idiots and cannot search alphabetically for them, so
they feel it is important to be in first place in the phone book under
the business name "A" or "AAA" or possibly, like one firm in Chicago,
in last place as "ZZYXZY", often times with no addressses given. Most
of the time, to get a listing as "A' or "ZZYXZY" telco will insist on
seeing legal papers which give you the right to use those names in
your business. But telco is not usually in a position to divine your
motives for choosing one mode or another in the way you receive calls
from your customers. If you subscribe to telephone service and insist
'so many of my customers live in Concord and I want a convenient way
for them to reach me by dialing just seven digits instead of having
to dial eleven digits', telco is rarely going to question that motive.
I guess telco's assumption is if your business practices are deceptive
there are other government agencies which will catch up with you
sooner or later. And because telco is a common carrier they really
cannot get too inquisitive, if you get my point.
And how do you know -- if you know -- that a call to 'Concord Florist'
(to use but an example) which gets picked up by an order taker '75
miles away' does not get wire-transferred to a a truly local florist
for handling? Or that 'Concord Florist' is nothing more than an agency
for one or more local florists truly in the community, sending wire
transfers around all the time on some sort of commission arrangement?
And since we are talking about it, what is _your personal opinion_ of
the service 1-800-FLOWERS (otherwise known as http://flowers.com )
They work with florists all over the country; either you have a legit-
imate business or you do not.
If you can demonstrate where actual fraud or deception has occurred
as a result of this, it would be interesting to hear actual examples. But
as stated above, I do not feel that merely a desire 'to have a presence
in a community' is in itself a sign of fraud. For instance, I personally
would love to have 'branch offices' of TELECOM Digest in all sorts of
places. As it turns out, although I have phone numbers in Chicago, in
London, England, and Winfield, KS, my _only actual office_ is in
Independence, KS; all the other locations named above funnel in to me
using RCF through Vonage. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:06:26 -0400
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Obituary: Dr. Boyd L. Nelson Died Sunday
Dr. Boyd L. Nelson died Sunday. He had been chief of the Economic
Studies Division of the Common Carrier Bureau of the FCC from
mid-1960s through the late 1970s. He then held other positions at the
FCC before his retirement in 1982.
At the FCC his most notable achievements were the writing of the
Recommended Decision of the Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau in
Docket 18128, the Private Line Rate Cases, that adopted Fully
Distributed Cost as the costing method of choice. He also mechanized
the production of the Statistics of Communications Common Carriers,
and recruited a very strong staff in Economics and Statistics, many of
whom are still at the FCC.
Direct replies are unlikely to be read. To reply use the address below:
falco(underscore)md(atsign)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk
------------------------------
From: kevincw01 <kevincw01@gmail.com>
Subject: Call Fowarding VZW -> Vonage Question
Date: 25 Oct 2005 17:44:16 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Scenario:
I forward my Verizon wireless cell phone to my Vonage number. I do
this by dialing *72 myVonageNumber which I assume tells some VZW switch
to forward (my point is that the cell phone is not doing the
forwarding). I then get a call from another Vonage customer to my cell
phone, which is forwarded to my Vonage phone.
Question:
Is this considered a Vonage to Vonage call from the Vonage switch (and
billing) point of view?
Thanks.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No it is not Vonage <> Vonage. The
other person's _intention_ was to call your VZW line. The call had
to get off Vonage and go to Verizon, then Verizon in turn has to
forward it on. PAT]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 22:29:52 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Avaya Reports Fourth Fiscal Quarter and Fiscal Year 2005 Results
Avaya Reports Fourth Fiscal Quarter and Fiscal Year 2005 Results
- Oct 25, 2005 04:05 PM (PR Newswire)
- U.S. Revenues Increase 7.1 Percent Sequentially
- Sales of Products Grew 11.5 Percent Sequentially
- Operating Cash Flow in Quarter Was $148 Million
BASKING RIDGE, N.J., Oct. 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Avaya Inc.,
(NYSE:AV) a leading global provider of business communications
applications, systems and services, today reported income from
continuing operations of $660 million or $1.36 per diluted share in
the fourth fiscal quarter of 2005.
These results reflect a net favorable impact on earnings of $565
million, which includes a net income tax benefit of $590 million
related to the reversal of a portion of a valuation allowance for
deferred tax assets, a $22 million restructuring charge for headcount
reductions and lease terminations, and $3 million of in-process
research and development costs related to the company's acquisition of
Nimcat Networks. Excluding these items, the company would have had
income from continuing operations of $95 million and earnings per
diluted share of 20 cents in the fourth fiscal quarter. (See table for
details.)
In the same quarter last year the company reported income from
continuing operations of $100 million or 21 cents per diluted share.
Those results reflected a reversal of reserves for sales returns and
allowances which had a $12 million favorable impact on operating
income. Excluding that item, earnings per diluted share in the year
ago quarter would have been 19 cents. (See table for details.)
Avaya's fourth fiscal quarter 2005 revenues increased to $1.296
billion, due to acquisitions, compared to revenue of $1.076 billion in
the fourth fiscal quarter of 2004. The company noted that fourth
fiscal quarter 2004 revenues also included $14 million related to the
reversal of reserves discussed above.
- http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=52593215
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 22:30:20 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: UbiquiTel Reports Third Quarter 2005 Results
UbiquiTel Reports Third Quarter 2005 Results
- Oct 25, 2005 04:00 PM (PR Newswire)
CONSHOHOCKEN, Pa., Oct. 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- UbiquiTel Inc.
(Nasdaq: UPCS), a PCS Affiliate of Sprint Nextel Corporation (NYSE:S),
today reported financial and operating results for the quarter ended
September 30, 2005.
Highlights for the 3rd Quarter 2005:
-- Net income for the third quarter 2005 was $6.2 million, or $0.06 per
diluted share, compared to $1.5 million, or $0.02 per diluted share,
in the third quarter 2004. In the third quarter 2005, the company
incurred $1.7 million of expense associated with litigation against
Sprint Nextel and $0.8 million for restructuring charges relating to
its sales organization. Excluding these charges, net income was $8.7
million, or $0.09 per diluted share.
-- Adjusted EBITDA in the third quarter 2005 grew 29% to approximately
$29.9 million from the same period a year ago. Excluding the above
charges, Adjusted EBITDA in the third quarter 2005 grew 40% to
approximately $32.4 million from the same period a year ago.
-- Service revenues in the third quarter 2005 grew 11% to approximately
$105.0 million from the same period a year ago.
-- Net subscriber additions for the quarter were approximately 10,700,
bringing total subscribers, excluding resellers, to approximately
434,300. Churn was 2.6% in the third quarter 2005 compared to 2.9% in
the third quarter 2004.
- http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=52592729
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 22:31:32 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Motorola Shows Carriers More Ways to Deliver IPTV at TELECOM 2005
Motorola Shows Carriers More Ways to Deliver IPTV at TELECOM 2005
- Oct 25, 2005 03:11 PM (PR Newswire)
New technologies promote cost-effective broadband access for delivering
triple-play services; customer wins fuel broadband growth
LAS VEGAS, Oct. 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT)
is demonstrating its continued leadership in next-generation fiber
access solutions at TELECOM '05 with several new technologies that are
expected to accelerate the deployment of IPTV-based entertainment
services. The offerings -- including Internet protocol television
(IPTV) over GPON and BPON, high- density optical networks terminals,
and high-definition television (HDTV) and multi-stream IP residential
gateways -- extend the ways carriers can cost effectively bring
digital video entertainment, high-speed Internet and telephony
services to subscribers.
According to Multimedia Research Group (MRG), the worldwide IPTV
market is poised for explosive growth over the next five years,
growing at a compound annual growth rate of 78 percent, from 3.7
million subscribers this year, to 36.9 million in 2009(1). Motorola
is capitalizing on this trend with its recently announced
next-generation AXS2200 optical access portfolio and proven
Multi-Service Access Platform, which introduce operators of all sizes
to flexible delivery options for broadband services such as high
definition television, digital video recording, video-on-demand, and
robust interactive gaming applications.
When used in tandem with the Motorola AXS2200, the ONT6000 MDU/MTU
Optical Network Terminal is a low cost, ITU compliant Optical Network
Terminal that acts as the service delivery point to turn "buildings
passed" by fiber into living units served by triple-play services over
a single fiber passive optical network (PON). The ONT6000 delivers a
full range of residential and business services, such as broadband
data, HDTV, video on demand and games online-to multiple dwelling unit
(MDU) complexes and office buildings (multiple tenant units (MTUs)).
- http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=52590901
------------------------------
From: John McHarry <jmcharry@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Wilma Causing Network-Wide Outages With Verio-Hosts
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 03:03:18 GMT
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:52:53 -0700, Robert Weller wrote:
> We are a west-coast (San Francisco) firm. Our website, which is
> hosted by Verio, has been down since at least this morning. The
> problem appears to be a "proactive shutdown" by Verio's data center in
> Boca Raton, Florida. Since Verio provides hosting services for
> millions of customers, I expect that this action in Boca Raton is
> having internet-wide implications and affecting many, many businesses.
I gather it is back up, but I snipped that portion.
I don't know if Verio offers the option, but important web sites are
usually dual homed, at least. More than dual is usually due to
capacity and traffic. If you use two sites geographically far apart,
you vastly increase the possibility that at least one will be up.
When they started building SS7 networks based on STPs, there was a
rule of thumb to place each pair of the quad far enough apart to drive
a hurricane or other natural disaster between them. I don't know what
is done now.
Which reminds me, does anyone know why the US built a network of STPs
and Europe went with switch to switch F links? A Brit at BT once said
it was due to a lack of processing power in the 1AESS, but he was, of
course, on the F link side.
------------------------------
From: kevincw01 <kevincw01@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Long Beach, CA Network Failure
Date: 25 Oct 2005 17:54:22 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
I was at work in Long Beach that day and for some reason, in addition
to what he stated above, my Verizon wireless cell worked fine but the
company provided Sprint PCS cell phones did not work in the area.
------------------------------
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: Caller ID TIME For Setting Time on Regular Pots Analog Phones
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 01:08:06 GMT
pmettes@gmail.com wrote:
> Where does the time come from that analog handsets use to set their
> clock? My company's time is off by 2 min and I can verify that its
> getting the time from somewhere but where?
> I can prove it is getting the time from somewhere by setting it 1 hour
> off and calling it with my cell phone, and watching it get set again,
> problem is, its off by 2 min.
> - Thanks
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The time comes from a clock in the
> central office serving the phone. That two minutes difference most
> likely is an accumulation of a few seconds here and there over the
> several months since daylight time went into effect. Our time of day
> here comes from the Southwestern Bell central office in Independence
> which tends to 'drift' a little bit regularly. When Standard Time
> returns in the next week or so, the clock setting will get set to
> almost perfect. I say 'almost' because your caller ID device is not
> intended as any sort of time standard. PAT]
You're right it does come from the switches master clock, but if it is
off, then they are not running their updates each night to the NBS or
like clock.
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.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:35:37 -0600
From: Anthony Bellanga <anthonybellanga@notchur.biz>
Subject: Re: The First Mayoral Long-Distance Call
PAT:
Please, DO NOT DISPLAY my email address...
neither in the "From" line nor in the "Reply-to" line.
Mark Roberts (markrobt@myrealbox.com) wrote:
> "Mayor to Get 1st Dial Phone Call From N.J.", in the Oakland
> (Calif.) Tribune, November 9, 1951.
> [Alameda is the island community adjacent to Oakland on the south.]
> ALAMEDA, Nov. 9 -- Leslie Denning and Frank Osborn -- who don't know
> each other -- will make history together tomorrow.
> They will inaugurate the first transcontinental direct dialing system.
> Denning, the mayor of Englewood, N.J., a small city on the Palisades
> facing Manhattan, will twirl his telephone dial 10 times and, in a
> matter of seconds, be connected with Alameda's Mayor in his City Hall
> office.
> Englewood was chosen by Bell Telephone Company technicians as the
> "guinea pig" site for establishing the ultra-complex mechanisms that
> will enable the area's 10,000 residents to dial telephone calls to
> most parts of the country direct.
> Thus far, the new direct system [rip in clipping lost some words] can
> be placed in operation [another rip] in the New Jersey city.
> HISTORIC NUMBER
> Their Mayor will be given his history-making companion's number --
> LAkehurst 3-9727 -- but before ringing that up on his phone he will
> spin out 4-1-5.
> That is the code number for the Oakland area, good for dialing any
> phone in Alameda, Albany, El Cerrito, El Sobrante, Emeryville,
> Hayward, Oakland, Richmond, San Leandro, San Lorenzo, and San Pablo.
> [I'll interject here: Based on my reading of the phone directories
> from this period, the core "East Bay" area extended from El Cerrito,
> just to the south of Richmond, to San Leandro. I'm not sure what would
> have been considered local to Richmond or San Pablo; similarly, what
> would have been local to San Lorenzo and Hayward.]
> Similarly, the area code number for the San Francisco area is
> [missing]-8 [is this 3-1-8? I'll have to check the microfilms]; for
> Sacramento, it is 9-1-6; for New York it is 1-1; for Chicago, it is
> 3-1-2.
Indeed, the San Francisco "West Bay" area (including north of the
Golden Gate area) was dialed from Englewood NJ with 318, not 415, in
this 1951 original customer long distance dialing plan.
The reason that the East Bay was dialed from Englewood with 415 (the
ultimate area code for the entire Bay area until the East Bay split
off initially to 510 in 1991) while the West Bay (San Francisco) was
dialed from Englewood with 318, is not really stated anywhere.
It couldn't be that there were "duplicate" NNX central office codes/
names/letters in use in the entire Bay area, since "cross-bay" calls
had already been dialed as just 2L-5N and continued to be dialed as
such for many years to come (I assume until 510 split off for the East
Bay, split from 415 in 1991).
The only explanation that has been given by some is that AT&T wanted a
more discrete way to identify each side of the Bay for both customer
reference purposes, as well as for more discrete routing and rating
purposes. Both sides of the Bay had their own tandem or toll switches,
and I only assume that Englewood's toll switch or local No.5 Crossbar
needed an upfront way to identify the East Bay (415) from the West Bay
(318) up-front, to then route the call directly to the Oakland tandem
(415) vs. the San Francisco tandem (318).
This was only a temporary measure, and I wonder if it might have
really been possible to dial either area code for either side of the
Bay when dialing from Englewood NJ back then. Official Bell System
area code maps I've seen from the early 1950s make no mention of 318
at all. These maps show only 415 for all of northern central
California along the Pacific Coast. Of course, only the metropolitan
Bay area was intended to be customer dialed from Englewood in
1951. While area codes date back to the late 1940s and there was a
developed and continued developing area code format throughout the
1950s, most of them were used only by operators at the time, while
customer originated DDD was slowly growing as well as the number of
locations which could be dialed by such customers with DDD.
318 was NOT listed as one of the original 1947 area codes, neither. I
don't know when Bell actually reclaimed it from use from Englewwod NJ
customers. I don't even know if the experiment at Englewood NJ
beginning November 1951 even had any official "end date".
If customer-originated long distance dialing from Englewood NJ
continued on without any interruption, by 1953 or so, there really
wouldn't have been a need for a separate 318 from 415, since
originating local and toll crossbar switching at Englewood would have
had more recent upgraded translations equipment to be able to
determine East Bay vs. West Bay by analyzing the entire 415-NNX code
as dialed by the customer, instead of analyzing only the three-digit
area code up-front needing to determine East Bay vs. West Bay upfront
by 415 vs. 318.
But by 1957, AT&T assigned 318 to northern, central, south-central,
and southwestern Louisiana, splitting from 504. And 318 is now just
northern Louisiana, since 337 split from 318 in 1999 for south-central
and south- western Louisiana.
- Anthony Bellanga
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:09:30 PDT
From: ana <anadyomene123@yahoo.com>
Subject: Vintage "Pen Register"?
Hello, Patrick -
I know you must get Way Too Much email so I will be brief ... what might
be done with a 40-50-year-old Pen Register, designed for use in a
step-by-step central office? I have one ... seems like perhaps it
should be a museum item or such-like? It seems to be in Extremely
Nice Condition and has the paper roll to go with it.
Curious Regards,
ana in alabama
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A telephone museum (like the one in
Oregon) might be a good home, or perhaps one of our readers with an
interest in such devices might contact you and ask to purchase
it. There are some readers here who maintain old SxS equipment, mainly
for their own amusement, and I am certain one or more of those folks
might like it for use as a recorder of the numbers people call who
check out their personal exhibits, etc. PAT]
------------------------------
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 #486
******************************
| |